Advantages Of Collective Bargaining

Employers within the private sector organizations in these provinces do not want First Contract Arbitration imposed on them, as this takes away their management rights and power. They have capitalistic mentalities and employees are a cog in the wheel of monetary gain. ()

The union will need to engage in intra-organizational bargaining in order to reach a greater consensus as to what is essential to our workers. By going through this process away from the bargaining table, we can come to the table with a firm and unified stance. We indent to do this in a number of ways. First, we can educate workers about how in actuality, their interests are aligned because a victory for the union is a victory for all members. For example, an improved pension plan does not only benefit older workers, but also younger workers because of the precedent that this proposed pension plan will set for their future pension plans. The same is true for job security. We will ensure the workers that we as their union are their agents in their desire to improve their wages and working conditions. This emphasis on unity will increase our relative power and aid us when it comes time for zero-sum bargaining.

Collective Bargaining- Collective bargaining is the

Collective agreements are negotiated between an employer and a trade union over matters such as:

The shift in organized labor in the United States (U.S.) from the private sector to the public sector has been a dramatic one. Union growth in the American public sector is part of a 60-year trend fueled by the decline of labor power in the private sector (Norcross, 2011). In 2009, union membership in the public sector passed that in the private sector for the first time in U.S. history

Generally, there is a very small difference between a union in public and private sectors. First of all, human rights are the same regardless of the type of institution. However, there are a number of policies that differ from public to the private sectors. Public sectors are regulated by the government. Private sectors are regulated by the interests of the boss. None the less, these policies must be in a way that favors the employees too.

Traditionally public sector employees have not been subject to at-will employment. Laws and regulations enacted to try to insulate public employees from political whim. At one time, it was commonplace to see public employees fired to make room for a newly elected politician’s supporter. Civil Service commissions were set up to control the political nature of public jobs, these laws made it hard to fire a public employee without cause.

The two hardest components in any collective bargaining negotiations is wages and health care. Finding a balance between both is even harder and for a company to stay competitive in the long run. The best strategy in negotiations is for the union to know and weigh the pros and cons of both sides and understanding the legislation affecting the issue to properly negotiate. This paper will first look at the pros and cons of the union fighting for health care or an increase in wages, the impact of legislation, and provide the best argument for the union against GMFC.

Collective bargaining is a process of negotiations between employers and a group of employees aimed at reaching agreements that regulate working conditions. The interests of the employees are commonly

Bigger unions have more (bigger) resources. They also have specialists who work for them. For eg: they have economists watching the economy and specialists that only negotiate the collective agreement.

Today, the Department of Labor, California State law and a host other regulations exist to protect public employees; therefore, unions are no longer necessary for public employees in California. Legislation has gone as far as to provide additional regulations for protection for employees that are not in a collective bargaining agreement. Increased protections, rights to sick leave and health care, overtime compensation and property rights to employment are mandatory without union membership. This eliminates the unnecessary burdens of union dues, delays in compensation increases and divides in the working environment.

Being part of a union gives members the benefit of negotiating with their employer collectively, as part of a group; giving them more power than if they were to negotiate as individuals (Silverman, n.d.). Overall, unions demand fairness which can lead to the unions influencing and changing ‘managerial decision-making at the workplace level’ for decisions in which employees are affected (Verma 2005). Unions are also beneficial to have present in the workplace because their bargaining of better condition will often benefit non-members as the conditions negotiated with management are implemented across the organization with no regard to membership status. Management is also able to avoid union disagreement by benchmarking conditions to that of an already unionized workplace.

In many ways the idea of collective bargaining is a democratic process. Collective bargaining, a process of negotiation where employment conditions are decided between the union and education officials, is a major tool teachers unions have use to shape how schools are run. Union members pool their collective resources and democratic voice to influence and improve their workplace conditions. These negotiations allow teachers unions to obtain benefits that are written into labor contracts which can have very serious implications for how schools are run. For example, labor contracts may include restrictions on how many hours teachers are allowed to work. If teachers were not allowed to bargain collectively, they would lose most of their bargaining power and would be unable to shield themselves from political budget cuts and austerity measures that often plague the teaching profession. Teachers are constantly under pressure to produce high achievement

Though, unions are declining, the role of union have evolved over time. Now, it is more common to view unions’ primary role as collective bargaining, which is the product of the economic decision and making process with unionism of the private sector. A long time ago, Union was seen as the shield that protects American workers against some of the abusive employers. Many public sector employees have unionized. However, the National Labor Relations Act was designed for the private sector. Despite that, union has become a model for most public sector collective bargaining right. Regardless of the success that Unions have with collective bargaining in the private sector, there are still a few who are opposed collective bargaining in the public sector. Of course, there are some differences between the public and private sectors.

First of all the power in government is diffused. The distribution of power was intentional so that the authority could be divided between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. This tactic makes it more difficult for public-sector unions to negotiate and collectively bargain because the employee's authority is limited(Gomez-Mejia et al., 2012). Also, many government employees are strongly restricted from striking or supporting strikes. These setbacks have forced public sector unions to develop creative ways of negotiating by mandated arbitrations and mediations.