最后报价仲裁和国家部门法

A. Geare
{"title":"最后报价仲裁和国家部门法","authors":"A. Geare","doi":"10.26686/NZJIR.V13I1.3632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The first version of the State Sector Bill (State Sector Bill {l)) specified that the Labour Relations Act 1987 would apply in the State Services with respect to dispute settlement Under the Labour Relations Act 1987, the procedure of conciliation may be used only in situations involving two or more employers (s.l34(4)). Hence, to be consistent, conciliation was not available as an option in the state services. Furthennore, arbitration under the Labour Relations Act only operates when both parties agree to its use, and thus compulsory arbitration is no longer available. Thus, the State Sector Bill (I) presented the state unions with the scenario of losing their right to annual general adjusunents and with the possibility of arbitration no longer being available (should the State Services Commission (SSC) or the corresponding \"employer\" refuse to agree to arbitration). In addition to these very real problems, there were also fears among some groups that they would/could lose other rights (such as parental leave) not written into detern1inations or otherwise provided for in legislation. Some state unions deplored the fact that State Sector Bill (1) encouraged strike action - and went out on strike in protest. After protests and strike action, and further submissions, a second version of the State Sector Bill appeared dated 16 March 1988. This, State Sector Bill (2), provides the basis for the following discussions. It is assumed the State Sector Act, due to take effect from April 1, will not be significantly altered from this.","PeriodicalId":365392,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand journal of industrial relations","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Final Offer Arbitration and the State Sector Act\",\"authors\":\"A. Geare\",\"doi\":\"10.26686/NZJIR.V13I1.3632\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The first version of the State Sector Bill (State Sector Bill {l)) specified that the Labour Relations Act 1987 would apply in the State Services with respect to dispute settlement Under the Labour Relations Act 1987, the procedure of conciliation may be used only in situations involving two or more employers (s.l34(4)). Hence, to be consistent, conciliation was not available as an option in the state services. Furthennore, arbitration under the Labour Relations Act only operates when both parties agree to its use, and thus compulsory arbitration is no longer available. Thus, the State Sector Bill (I) presented the state unions with the scenario of losing their right to annual general adjusunents and with the possibility of arbitration no longer being available (should the State Services Commission (SSC) or the corresponding \\\"employer\\\" refuse to agree to arbitration). In addition to these very real problems, there were also fears among some groups that they would/could lose other rights (such as parental leave) not written into detern1inations or otherwise provided for in legislation. Some state unions deplored the fact that State Sector Bill (1) encouraged strike action - and went out on strike in protest. After protests and strike action, and further submissions, a second version of the State Sector Bill appeared dated 16 March 1988. This, State Sector Bill (2), provides the basis for the following discussions. It is assumed the State Sector Act, due to take effect from April 1, will not be significantly altered from this.\",\"PeriodicalId\":365392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Zealand journal of industrial relations\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Zealand journal of industrial relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26686/NZJIR.V13I1.3632\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand journal of industrial relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26686/NZJIR.V13I1.3632","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

《国家部门法案》第一版(《国家部门法案》{1)规定,《1987年劳工关系法》将适用于国家服务部门的争端解决。根据《1987年劳工关系法》,只有在涉及两个或两个以上雇主的情况下才能使用调解程序(第l34(4)条)。因此,为了保持一致,调解在国家事务中不是一种选择。此外,根据《劳动关系法》进行的仲裁只有在双方同意使用时才有效,因此不再有强制仲裁。因此,《国家部门法案(一)》向各州工会提出了一种情况,即失去年度一般调整的权利,并且不再有可能进行仲裁(如果国家服务委员会或相应的“雇主”拒绝同意仲裁)。除了这些非常现实的问题之外,一些群体还担心他们会/可能会失去其他没有写入决定或立法中另有规定的权利(例如育儿假)。一些州工会对《国有部门法案(1)》鼓励罢工表示遗憾,并举行罢工以示抗议。在抗议和罢工行动以及进一步的提交之后,1988年3月16日出现了《国家部门法案》的第二版。这项《国家部门法案(2)》为下列讨论提供了基础。预计将于4月1日生效的《国有部门法》(State Sector Act)不会在此基础上发生重大变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Final Offer Arbitration and the State Sector Act
The first version of the State Sector Bill (State Sector Bill {l)) specified that the Labour Relations Act 1987 would apply in the State Services with respect to dispute settlement Under the Labour Relations Act 1987, the procedure of conciliation may be used only in situations involving two or more employers (s.l34(4)). Hence, to be consistent, conciliation was not available as an option in the state services. Furthennore, arbitration under the Labour Relations Act only operates when both parties agree to its use, and thus compulsory arbitration is no longer available. Thus, the State Sector Bill (I) presented the state unions with the scenario of losing their right to annual general adjusunents and with the possibility of arbitration no longer being available (should the State Services Commission (SSC) or the corresponding "employer" refuse to agree to arbitration). In addition to these very real problems, there were also fears among some groups that they would/could lose other rights (such as parental leave) not written into detern1inations or otherwise provided for in legislation. Some state unions deplored the fact that State Sector Bill (1) encouraged strike action - and went out on strike in protest. After protests and strike action, and further submissions, a second version of the State Sector Bill appeared dated 16 March 1988. This, State Sector Bill (2), provides the basis for the following discussions. It is assumed the State Sector Act, due to take effect from April 1, will not be significantly altered from this.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信