The Finnish way of union organisation is worth using as a comparison. Somehow, the locals seem to have got most of the benefits of a union system while avoiding most of the drawbacks.
Strikes do happen here, but they are unusual and tend to be justified on some level. It is generally when a particular employer is being exceptionally authoritarian, and appears to be acting contrary to the employees' economic needs. There was a recent case where a major corporation wanted to close down a papermill, in a rural area where the mill was the major employer, but refused to allow the mill to be sold as a going concern.
Instead, the major unions sit down with the major employers on a regular basis and work out a document called a Collective Bargaining Agreement. This CBA then applies industry-wide, and covers things like minimum pay rises on particular dates, general pay structures, and general standards of working conditions. It also details rules for termination procedures.
Employers are of course free to exceed these minimum requirements, and to adjust them for individual employees and unusual circumstances, but the general rules must apply to the workforce as a whole. The CBA is, I imagine, a legally binding contract - on the one hand, the employers promise to abide by these rules, and on the other hand, the employees promise not to go on strike. Thus breaches of the CBA on either side can be handled by fairly conventional laws.
Disputes are commonly handled by arbitration, whereby the employer and the union try to find common ground and avoid disruption. Also in relatively common use is the "work to rule" principle, which is usually enacted when a dispute is in progress but arbitration has not yet failed.
One thing I haven't heard of being used here is the notorious principle of "demarcation". This is where every little task is assigned to a very specific job title, and usually means that an unreasonably large number of employees is required to complete any routine procedure. Unregulated unions have been known to use this as a means of propping up employment rates of their members, at the expense of employers' means to improve efficiency.
As a result, "union" is not a dirty word here.
Strikes do happen here, but they are unusual and tend to be justified on some level. It is generally when a particular employer is being exceptionally authoritarian, and appears to be acting contrary to the employees' economic needs. There was a recent case where a major corporation wanted to close down a papermill, in a rural area where the mill was the major employer, but refused to allow the mill to be sold as a going concern.
Instead, the major unions sit down with the major employers on a regular basis and work out a document called a Collective Bargaining Agreement. This CBA then applies industry-wide, and covers things like minimum pay rises on particular dates, general pay structures, and general standards of working conditions. It also details rules for termination procedures.
Employers are of course free to exceed these minimum requirements, and to adjust them for individual employees and unusual circumstances, but the general rules must apply to the workforce as a whole. The CBA is, I imagine, a legally binding contract - on the one hand, the employers promise to abide by these rules, and on the other hand, the employees promise not to go on strike. Thus breaches of the CBA on either side can be handled by fairly conventional laws.
Disputes are commonly handled by arbitration, whereby the employer and the union try to find common ground and avoid disruption. Also in relatively common use is the "work to rule" principle, which is usually enacted when a dispute is in progress but arbitration has not yet failed.
One thing I haven't heard of being used here is the notorious principle of "demarcation". This is where every little task is assigned to a very specific job title, and usually means that an unreasonably large number of employees is required to complete any routine procedure. Unregulated unions have been known to use this as a means of propping up employment rates of their members, at the expense of employers' means to improve efficiency.
As a result, "union" is not a dirty word here.
Comment