scholarly journals Compulsory Arbitration and the Right to Strike: The Experience of Alberta’s University Faculty.

2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffery Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
University Faculty ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
The Past ◽  
Compulsory Arbitration ◽  
Contract Renewal ◽  
Faculty Association ◽  
The Right

University academic staff in Alberta operate under a collective bargaining regime in which compulsory arbitration replaces strike/lockout to resolve disputes over contract renewal. How did this come about? And what has the experience been under a regime of interest arbitration? This paper addresses these questions by investigating the origins of faculty association collective agreements in Alberta, tracing arbitral experience over the past thirty years, and looking more closely at a group of four arbitrations in 2001-2003. The paper concludes by asking whether it is time for academic staff associations to assert their fundamental right to strike, regardless of what is in their collective agreements or in the statute governing their collective bargaining.

The Power to Alter Personal Provisions in Collective Agreements

1978 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 326-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances Raday
Keyword(s):  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Tax Reform ◽  
The Other ◽  
Collective Agreement ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
The Past ◽  
Important Quality ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Individual

On two notable occasions in the past two years, it was found necessary to use legislation in order to buttress the potency of general collective agreements. The first of these occasions was when legislation was used to give overriding legal force to a general collective agreement between the Histadrut and the Government incorporating the tax reform recommendations of the Ben Shachar Committee. The second was a similar use of legislation with regard to the general collective agreement between the Histadrut and the Government incorporating the special increments recommendations of the Barkai Committee. The two collective agreements concerned shared one important quality: They both purported to derogate from rights previously enjoyed by employees under existing collective agreements. One of the reasons for legislative intervention to support these agreements was the existence of doubt as to the legal effectiveness of their attempt to derogate from the individual employees' rights.The source of the doubt as to the legal effectiveness of such agreements lies in the existence of two distinct levels at which a collective agreement functions: the collective and the individual levels. At the collective level, conditions are determined by the collective bargaining parties, the employer or employers' organisation on one hand and the employees' organisation on the other; at this level, the collective agreement is a consensual arrangement between the parties to it, the parties fix the terms and have a contractual right to demand their enforcement. The terms fixed at the collective level take effect, however, also at the individual level; the individual employees of an employer bound by the agreement are both bound by the agreement and entitled to enjoy the rights bestowed by the agreement. The Collective Agreements Law gives forceful expression to the effect of the collective agreement's personal provisions at the individual level, giving them immediate and mandatory effect as part of each individual employee's employment contract.

scholarly journals Stabilising Collective Agreements in Continental Europe: How Contract Law Principles Reinforce the Right to Collective Bargaining

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre de le Court
Keyword(s):  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
After Effects ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Holistic Vision ◽  
Legal Mechanism ◽  
Normative Value ◽  
Emergency Measures

Most continental European legal systems where normative value is conferred on collective bargaining agreements also include a legal mechanism, known as after-effects, whereby the content of such agreements survives after they expire. After-effects can be regulated by specific legislative provisions. Where such provisions are absent, jurisprudential constructions based on the application of general principles of contract law have been applied instead. This comparative study reveals an important convergence between these models, in terms of both the legal techniques adopted and in the objectives pursued. The study also reveals that states share common concerns around maintaining a certain balance between negotiating parties, whether through consolidating the respective models of collective bargaining or via correcting dysfunctions introduced by emergency measures. Those solutions can be embedded in the international definition of the right to collective bargaining, revealing the importance of a holistic vision on regulations underpinning the European collective bargaining model. La mayor parte de los ordenamientos jurídicos de Europa que confieren valor normativo a los convenios colectivos incluyen un sistema de supervivencia del contenido de éstos cuando expiran (ultraactividad). En algunos casos, está regulado por disposiciones legislativas específicas; en otros, por construcciones jurisprudenciales. El estudio comparativo muestra una convergencia importante entre los modelos, revelando preocupaciones comunes en el mantenimiento de un cierto equilibrio entre los interlocutores de la negociación colectiva, sea mediante la consolidación de los modelos existentes o mediante la corrección de disfunciones provocadas por medidas de emergencia. Estas soluciones se integran en la definición internacional del derecho a la negociación colectiva, lo que revela la importancia de una visión holística de la regulación que sustenta el modelo de negociación colectiva europea.

scholarly journals Limiting Organisational Rights of Minority Unions: POPCRU v Ledwaba 2013 11 BLLR 1137 (LC)

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 2227
Author(s):  
Tamara Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Collective Agreement ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
Labour Relations ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
Legislative Model ◽  
The Right

The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 unequivocally promotes the policy choice of majoritarianism, in furtherance of orderly collective bargaining and the democratisation of the workplace. The majoritarian model aims to minimise the proliferation of trade unions in a single workplace and to encourage the system of a representative trade union.Section 18(1) of the Labour Relations Act enables majority unions to enter into collective agreements setting thresholds of representivity for the granting of access, stop-order and trade-union leave rights to minority unions. In furtherance of the majoritarian framework, collective agreements concluded between majority unions and employers can be extended to non-parties to the agreement in terms of section 23(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act provided specified requirements are satisfied. In Police & Prisons Civil Rights Union v Ledwaba 2013 11 BLLR 1137 (LC) (POPCRU) the Labour Court was required to consider if the collective agreements concluded between the employer and the majority union could be relied upon to prohibit the minority union from securing organisational rights. In so doing, the Labour Court had to reconcile the fundamental principle of freedom of association and the right to fair labour practices (to organise and engage in unfettered collective bargaining) within the context of the majoritarian framework. The Labour Court in POPCRU held that the collective agreement concluded with the majority union must have preference over the organisational rights of minority unions, in keeping with the principle of collective bargaining hierarchy and the legislative framework. This case note argues that, while the finding of the labour court in POPCRU is correct on the facts and is in keeping with the principle of majoritarianism, the legislative model may no longer be suitable within the context of the current socio-economic and political landscape. Strike violence, loss of confidence in existing bargaining structures, and the alienation of vulnerable employees from majority unions has resulted in minority unions taking up the cudgels of frustrated and disempowered employees, as witnessed in the Marikana experience. The note suggests that in the light of the changing dynamics of the collective bargaining environment, it may be time to revisit the majoritarian model.

Trade union representation for new forms of employment

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-239
Author(s):  
Monika Schlachter
Keyword(s):  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Trade Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
System A ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Bargaining Position ◽  
The Social ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right

Defining the personal scope of application of the right to be represented by a trade union for collective bargaining purposes starts by defining the notion of employee/worker on whose behalf the conclusion of collective agreements is not disputed. In the German legal system, a sub-category of self-employed persons, known as ‘employee-like’ persons, is also included in the scope of the statute on collective agreements. For all other self-employed persons, however, no such statutory inclusion exists. They are, rather, prevented from collective price setting by (national und EU) competition law. Upon a closer look at the social purpose of exempting collective agreements from the restrictions of competition law, it is necessary to differentiate according to the existence of a structural power imbalance to the detriment of one contracting party much rather than according to the type of contract concluded. Some self-employed persons, specifically those categorised as workers under a new form of employment, do need collective bargaining as much as employees do, as they find themselves in a comparably weak individual bargaining position.

scholarly journals Settlement Rates and Settlement Stages in Compulsory Interest Arbitration

2005 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph B. Rose ◽  
Michael Piczak
Keyword(s):  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Collective Agreements ◽  
Compulsory Arbitration ◽  
Settlement Behaviour

One of the prevailing concerns about compulsory interest arbitration is its possible effect on genuine collective bargaining. Numerous studies report overall settlement rates (i.e., the proportion of settlements achieved prior to the final impasse procedure) are lower in arbitration systems than in strike-based systems. This study attempts to provide a broader assessment of the effect of compulsory arbitration by calculating settlement rates for different settlement stages. Based on over 28,000 collective agreements negotiated in Ontario between 1982 and 1990, our results show that settlement rates were generally lower under arbitration. At the same time, settlement behaviour varied considerably across arbitration Systems. These differences are associated with specific institutional and organizational aspects in bargaining.

COMMONWEALTH Forum: The Politics of Science or the Science of Politics

Commonwealth ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
John Arway
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Factual Information ◽  
The Past ◽  
Difference Of Opinion ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Scientific Facts ◽  
Environmental Agency ◽  
Laws And Regulations

The challenges of including factual information in public policy and political discussions are many. The difficulties of including scientific facts in these debates can often be frustrating for scientists, politicians and policymakers alike. At times it seems that discussions involve different languages or dialects such that it becomes a challenge to even understand one another’s position. Oftentimes difference of opinion leads to laws and regulations that are tilted to the left or the right. The collaborative balancing to insure public and natural resource interests are protected ends up being accomplished through extensive litigation in the courts. In this article, the author discusses the history of environmental balancing during the past three decades from the perspective of a field biologist who has used the strength of our policies, laws and regulations to fight for the protection of our Commonwealth’s aquatic resources. For the past 7 years, the author has taken over the reins of “the most powerful environmental agency in Pennsylvania” and charted a course using science to properly represent natural resource interests in public policy and political deliberations.

Accelerating Agricultural Growth—Is Irrigation Institutional Reform Necessary? (Distinguishedl Lecture)

1996 ◽  
Vol 35 (4I) ◽  
pp. 399-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Mellor
Keyword(s):  
Growth Rates ◽  
Irrigation System ◽  
Institutional Reform ◽  
Residual Effect ◽  
Agricultural Growth ◽  
The Past ◽  
Major Reform ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Economic Growth Rates

The right to the flow of income from water is vigorously pursued, protected, and fought over in any arid part of the world. Pakistan is of course no exception. Reform of irrigation institutions necessarily changes the rights to water, whether it be those of farmers, government, or government functionaries. Those perceived rights may be explicit and broadly accepted, or simply takings that are not even considered legitimate. Nevertheless they will be fought over. Pakistan has a long history of proposals for irrigation reform, little or none being implemented, except as isolated pilot projects. Thus, to propose major changes in irrigation institutions must be clearly shown to have major benefits to justify the hard battles that must be fought and the goodwill of those who might win those battles for reform. Proponents of irrigation institution reform have always argued the necessity of the reforms and the large gains to be achieved. Perhaps, however, those arguments have not been convincing. This paper will briefly outline the failed attempts at irrigation reform to provide an element of reality to the discussion. It will then proceed to make the case of the urgency of reform in a somewhat different manner to the past. Finally, current major reform proposals will be presented. This paper approaches justification of irrigation reform by focusing on the agricultural growth rate. It does so because that is the critical variable influencing poverty rates and is a significant determinant of over-all economic growth rates. The paper decomposes growth rates and suggests a residual effect of deterioration of the irrigation system that is large and calls for policy and institutional reform. The data are notional, suggesting the usefulness of the approach and paves the way for more detailed empirical analysis and enquiry for the future.

LEGAL RESEARCH AT AHMAD IBRAHIM KULLIYYAH OF LAWS, INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA: TRENDS AND POLICIES

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hunud Abia Kadouf ◽  
Umar Aimhanosi Oseini ◽  
Ainul Jaria Maidin
Keyword(s):  
Research Output ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Research Progress ◽  
Institutions Of Higher Education ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Past ◽  
Research Institution ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
The Status

The primary function of Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah (Faculty) of Laws, at the very beginning of its inception, was that of teaching civil law and Sharî’ah subjects. As it matured, its vision has been varied from teaching to that of research with the aim of attaining the status of a full research institution that provides both quality research and best legal education in the region. Similar to other institutions of higher education in Malaysia, the responsibility of research is a shared function of both graduate students and the academic staff. The research output, on the part of the students is mostly composed of either Master Dissertations or PhD Theses. The academic members of the Faculty, however, are involved either in direct research, individually or jointly, supervision, and publications of their findings. By investigating and analyzing factors influencing research activities at AIKOL in the past twenty years, the researchers will be able to identify the general trends and development of research as it unfolded over years. The researchers hope that the policymakers, at both Faculty and University levels, will use the findings to improve research quality by boldly addressing the problems hampering research progress at AIKOL.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document