However, the existence of freedom of association does not necessarily mean that trade unions are automatically recognised for bargaining purposes. Especially in systems where there are a large number of trade unions, the labour relations system requires predefined objective criteria for determining when and how a union should be recognized for collective bargaining. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, the following new company agreements can be concluded: the FWC will apply a strict means test called „Better Off Overall Test“ against a company agreement, in order to ensure that the agreement has not penalised the employee. 16 Note that the law does not provide for an increase in wages for work on Sundays. Such an increase may, however, be provided for in collective agreements or company contracts. 3 The answer to those questions is the `principle of proportionality`, which governs the relationship between the different levels of rule-making and standard-setting (Article L. 2254-1 of the Labour Code). This ranges from the most general law to the most specific employment contract – and includes collective agreements, i.e. sectoral agreements, and company agreements. Under this principle, a lower level of rule or standard can only change a higher one if it improves it, and in the event of a dispute, judges choose the standard that is most favourable to the worker.
This „hierarchy of rules and norms“ theoretically assumes that company agreements are at least as favourable as sectoral agreements. HR Legal`s approach to labour relations and corporate negotiation is not prescriptive or formal. On the contrary, the advice and support we offer is tailored to your business needs. We have extensive experience in different sectors, including with highly unionized workers, in the areas of labour relations, corporate agreement strategy, communication, negotiations and implementation. Depending on your business requirements, we can work with you to provide you with advice and support, including: 30As a single timetable for wage negotiations at industry level has been established since 1999 as part of the congress collective of 13 August 1999 entitled „Service Providers in the Service Sector“, which is the reference collective for the four cases studied. A priori, collective agreements or amendments are signed each year. They are not systematically extended (extended) 14 – this is particularly the case with the November 2009 and January 2011 agreements – although the implementation of an agreement is often determined by its extension (Salmon, Krynen, 1993). In the best case, the extension will take effect after two months, as with the September 2007 and September 2011 agreements. In most cases, it will enter into force between five and eleven months from the signing of the agreement or amendment, which can help postpone future wage negotiations. It is therefore likely that the fact that no agreements were concluded in 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2010 are the result of a lengthy negotiation process, followed by the extension of the agreements. The terms of a company agreement, transitional instruments (on procurement or agreements) and modern public procurement cannot exclude the NES and those that do have no effect. Under Australian labour law, the 2005-2006 industrial reform, known as „WorkChoices“ (with the corresponding amendments to the Workplace Relations Act (1996), changed the name of these contractual documents to „Collective Agreement“.
National labour legislation may also impose collective agreements, but the adoption of the workchoices reform will reduce the likelihood that such agreements will be concluded. . . .