On Labour Representativeness: The Hidden Components of the Human Right to Freely Associate in Trade Unions

IF 0.8 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
G. Mundlak
{"title":"On Labour Representativeness: The Hidden Components of the Human Right to Freely Associate in Trade Unions","authors":"G. Mundlak","doi":"10.54648/ijcl2020023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The freedom of association in trade unions is accorded a special status in the international covenants on human rights, in ILO Conventions and in national constitutions. Moreover, trade unions are usually the sole subjects of special privileges for negotiating collective agreements, consultation and permissible industrial action. Human rights and constitutional litigation usually focus on removing obstacles from individuals’ choice to associate and on the scope of the positive right to freely associate. However, there are other fundamental aspects of the right that are more covert, which are designated as its ‘hidden components’. These include the rules regarding representative status, which crudely prescribe the relationship between trade unions and their membership. Despite the prevalence of requirements for representativeness in all national industrial relations systems, the variations are immense. This article probes into the nature of representativeness, displaying its significant effect on the ability of workers to negotiate, on the capacity of trade unions to achieve collective agreements, and on the distributive effects of such agreements. The article concludes that the constitutional dimension of representativeness must be considered, demonstrating rare instances of robust constitutional challenges and directing attention to the seemingly more mundane forms of response, legal or extra-legal, that actually shape the course of their incremental legal development.\nLabour Law, Trade Unions, Representation, ILO, Comparative","PeriodicalId":44213,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2020023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The freedom of association in trade unions is accorded a special status in the international covenants on human rights, in ILO Conventions and in national constitutions. Moreover, trade unions are usually the sole subjects of special privileges for negotiating collective agreements, consultation and permissible industrial action. Human rights and constitutional litigation usually focus on removing obstacles from individuals’ choice to associate and on the scope of the positive right to freely associate. However, there are other fundamental aspects of the right that are more covert, which are designated as its ‘hidden components’. These include the rules regarding representative status, which crudely prescribe the relationship between trade unions and their membership. Despite the prevalence of requirements for representativeness in all national industrial relations systems, the variations are immense. This article probes into the nature of representativeness, displaying its significant effect on the ability of workers to negotiate, on the capacity of trade unions to achieve collective agreements, and on the distributive effects of such agreements. The article concludes that the constitutional dimension of representativeness must be considered, demonstrating rare instances of robust constitutional challenges and directing attention to the seemingly more mundane forms of response, legal or extra-legal, that actually shape the course of their incremental legal development. Labour Law, Trade Unions, Representation, ILO, Comparative
论劳工代表性:工会结社自由人权的隐性成分
在国际人权盟约、劳工组织各项公约和国家宪法中,工会结社自由享有特殊地位。此外,工会通常是在谈判集体协议、协商和允许的工业行动方面享有特权的唯一主体。人权和宪法诉讼通常侧重于消除个人选择结社的障碍和自由结社的积极权利的范围。然而,这项权利还有其他更为隐蔽的基本方面,它们被称为“隐藏成分”。其中包括关于代表地位的规则,这些规则粗略地规定了工会与其会员之间的关系。尽管在所有国家的劳资关系制度中普遍要求具有代表性,但差异很大。本文探讨了代表性的本质,揭示了代表性对工人谈判能力、工会达成集体协议的能力以及集体协议的分配效应的显著影响。这篇文章的结论是,必须考虑代表性的宪法层面,展示强有力的宪法挑战的罕见实例,并将注意力引向看似更世俗的回应形式,法律或法外的,实际上塑造了他们渐进的法律发展的过程。劳动法,工会,代表性,国际劳工组织,比较
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Published four times a year, the International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations is an essential source of information and analysis for labour lawyers, academics, judges, policymakers and others. The Journal publishes original articles in the domains of labour law (broadly understood) and industrial relations. Articles cover comparative and international (or regional) analysis of topical issues, major developments and innovative practices, as well as discussions of theoretical and methodological approaches. The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review process. A distinguished editorial team, with the support of an International Advisory Board of eminent scholars from around the world, ensures a continuing high standard of scientific research dealing with a range of important issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信