选定的东盟国家公共服务中的社会对话:印度尼西亚、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡和泰国的法律、制度和实践的比较概述

Benedicto Ernesto R. Bitonio Jr.
{"title":"选定的东盟国家公共服务中的社会对话:印度尼西亚、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡和泰国的法律、制度和实践的比较概述","authors":"Benedicto Ernesto R. Bitonio Jr.","doi":"10.54394/tdsw7881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study assesses the social dialogue, freedom of association and collective bargaining institutions and practices in the public service among five member-countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), namely Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Generally, “public service” and “public sector” as understood from the Constitutions of the five countries broadly subsume the various branches or agencies of the State performing governmental functions at central and local levels, including State enterprises. The Constitutions of the five countries generally recognize the freedom of association as a fundamental civil liberty, but national legislations typically regulate or restrict trade union rights in the public sector to maintain or protect public order, national security, general welfare or good morals. Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand have their respective institutions and mechanisms that could allow public sector employees, represented by their unions or associations, to engage in some form of social dialogue with their employers, including collective negotiation or bargaining. In public sector social dialogue mechanisms, high-level elected or appointed public administrators responsible for State functions represent the State as employer party. Their unions or organizations represent employees, who come from the civil service or the bureaucracy. Generally, regulation of public sector labour relations makes public sector social dialogue difficult and, in relation to Indonesia, inexistent. The author concludes that there is little evidence to show the meaningful existence of the enabling conditions for effective social dialogue,particularly the existence of strong, independent workers' and employers' organizations as envisioned in fundamental ILO conventions, and of political commitment to engage in social dialogue by all parties.","PeriodicalId":173224,"journal":{"name":"ILO Working Paper","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social dialogue in the public services in selected ASEAN countries : a comparative overview of the laws, institutions and practices in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand\",\"authors\":\"Benedicto Ernesto R. Bitonio Jr.\",\"doi\":\"10.54394/tdsw7881\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study assesses the social dialogue, freedom of association and collective bargaining institutions and practices in the public service among five member-countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), namely Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Generally, “public service” and “public sector” as understood from the Constitutions of the five countries broadly subsume the various branches or agencies of the State performing governmental functions at central and local levels, including State enterprises. The Constitutions of the five countries generally recognize the freedom of association as a fundamental civil liberty, but national legislations typically regulate or restrict trade union rights in the public sector to maintain or protect public order, national security, general welfare or good morals. Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand have their respective institutions and mechanisms that could allow public sector employees, represented by their unions or associations, to engage in some form of social dialogue with their employers, including collective negotiation or bargaining. In public sector social dialogue mechanisms, high-level elected or appointed public administrators responsible for State functions represent the State as employer party. Their unions or organizations represent employees, who come from the civil service or the bureaucracy. Generally, regulation of public sector labour relations makes public sector social dialogue difficult and, in relation to Indonesia, inexistent. The author concludes that there is little evidence to show the meaningful existence of the enabling conditions for effective social dialogue,particularly the existence of strong, independent workers' and employers' organizations as envisioned in fundamental ILO conventions, and of political commitment to engage in social dialogue by all parties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":173224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ILO Working Paper\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ILO Working Paper\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54394/tdsw7881\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ILO Working Paper","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54394/tdsw7881","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究评估了东南亚国家联盟(东盟)五个成员国(即印度尼西亚、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡和泰国)的社会对话、结社自由和集体谈判制度以及公共服务实践。一般来说,五国宪法所理解的“公共服务”和“公共部门”大致包括在中央和地方各级执行政府职能的国家各部门或机构,包括国有企业。这五个国家的宪法普遍承认结社自由是一项基本的公民自由,但国家立法通常会规范或限制工会在公共部门的权利,以维持或保护公共秩序、国家安全、一般福利或良好道德。马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡和泰国都有各自的机构和机制,允许公共部门雇员在其工会或协会的代表下与雇主进行某种形式的社会对话,包括集体谈判或讨价还价。在公共部门社会对话机制中,负责国家职能的民选或任命的高级别公共行政人员代表国家作为雇主一方。他们的工会或组织代表来自公务员或官僚机构的雇员。一般来说,对公共部门劳工关系的管制使公共部门的社会对话变得困难,就印度尼西亚而言,这是不存在的。作者的结论是,几乎没有证据表明切实存在有效社会对话的有利条件,特别是存在劳工组织各项基本公约所设想的强大、独立的工人和雇主组织,以及所有各方参与社会对话的政治承诺。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social dialogue in the public services in selected ASEAN countries : a comparative overview of the laws, institutions and practices in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand
The study assesses the social dialogue, freedom of association and collective bargaining institutions and practices in the public service among five member-countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), namely Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Generally, “public service” and “public sector” as understood from the Constitutions of the five countries broadly subsume the various branches or agencies of the State performing governmental functions at central and local levels, including State enterprises. The Constitutions of the five countries generally recognize the freedom of association as a fundamental civil liberty, but national legislations typically regulate or restrict trade union rights in the public sector to maintain or protect public order, national security, general welfare or good morals. Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand have their respective institutions and mechanisms that could allow public sector employees, represented by their unions or associations, to engage in some form of social dialogue with their employers, including collective negotiation or bargaining. In public sector social dialogue mechanisms, high-level elected or appointed public administrators responsible for State functions represent the State as employer party. Their unions or organizations represent employees, who come from the civil service or the bureaucracy. Generally, regulation of public sector labour relations makes public sector social dialogue difficult and, in relation to Indonesia, inexistent. The author concludes that there is little evidence to show the meaningful existence of the enabling conditions for effective social dialogue,particularly the existence of strong, independent workers' and employers' organizations as envisioned in fundamental ILO conventions, and of political commitment to engage in social dialogue by all parties.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信