Michel Abhervé Blog Archive Employer Representation: a coup monte in a report to try to preserve the essential face the obvious need for change
To move forward, the question of the employer representative, the Minister, under his Responsability (see Representation chikki machine employer: the government takes over) asked Jean-Denis Combrexelle, Director of Labor Relations report. It behaves as it should be an inventory and proposals
On the findings, not much to say if this is of interest to see formalized a number of points which can not astonish those who have never watched a little more closely this sector chikki machine and which we reproduce some paragraphs
"It there is virtually nothing in the Labour Code, nor in any other code, for the employer representative. It borrows through the case law, rules of union representation. Organized employer representative is, in these conditions, very few framed and defined. "
"Today, the preferred chikki machine mode of establishment and accepted the representativeness of employers' organizations based on the principle of mutual recognition. According to this principle ... organizations that are legitimate to negotiate are those who agree to mutually recognize as interlocutor. Representativeness then follows from this recognition of social partners between them " chikki machine
"The difference in status between employers' organizations reinforces the impression of diversity as two-thirds of them have the status of a trade union within the meaning of the Act of 21 March 1884 and a third (the MEDEF and CGPME) a status of association under the law of 1st July 1901. "
Proposals on this report is a remarkable prudence, even if they give arguments chikki machine to break the symmetry yet mentioned as desirable between union representation chikki machine and employer representation chikki machine on a key point, namely recognition based on membership rather election
But it is on the question of national representation that the proposals in this report are questionable to say the least, even if consensus can easily be done on the principle proposed a "bottom representativeness" determined first in the branches before being consolidated at the national level.
For this report proposes to establish a national representativeness criterion is not linked to the representation of a number of professional sectors, but the presence chikki machine in four business sectors: Industry, trade and services building. What underlies these four areas? Nothing justified if it is not practical for another time. But those established by the "common position" of the three organizations established, MEDEF, CGPME and UPA to allow the UPA to include and to exclude other potential candidates for national representativeness, representing yet more employees that UPA.
But what is even more amazing is that on this point also the proposals in the report departs from the principle that the merits has repeatedly affirmed symmetry between union and management side. In effte, discrèteemnt in a footnote page we learn "For an organization to be recognized employee representative at national and industry level, the High Council of the social dialogue has defined a business rule from article L.2122 -9 of the Labour Code of requiring the representativeness of trade union organization in at least two national branches of each of the four sectors (industry, construction, trade, services). "
Skip discreetly two branches for four employees to employers, it is more akin to a game of monte rigorous legal analysis that one might expect from a high-fonstionnaire chikki machine regulating social dialogue in our country
For organizations continuing, by the operation chikki machine leading to spend two to four branches with nothing justifies it, to be excluded from a national perspective of representativeness' world of agriculture, the professions and social economy), the report imagines , to change the current situation, obviously indefensible too, a form of "second circle" multi professional organizations could be consulted prior to negotiations, without addition of another constraint that recommendation, but would not be provided related.
To move forward, the question of the employer representative, the Minister, under his Responsability (see Representation chikki machine employer: the government takes over) asked Jean-Denis Combrexelle, Director of Labor Relations report. It behaves as it should be an inventory and proposals
On the findings, not much to say if this is of interest to see formalized a number of points which can not astonish those who have never watched a little more closely this sector chikki machine and which we reproduce some paragraphs
"It there is virtually nothing in the Labour Code, nor in any other code, for the employer representative. It borrows through the case law, rules of union representation. Organized employer representative is, in these conditions, very few framed and defined. "
"Today, the preferred chikki machine mode of establishment and accepted the representativeness of employers' organizations based on the principle of mutual recognition. According to this principle ... organizations that are legitimate to negotiate are those who agree to mutually recognize as interlocutor. Representativeness then follows from this recognition of social partners between them " chikki machine
"The difference in status between employers' organizations reinforces the impression of diversity as two-thirds of them have the status of a trade union within the meaning of the Act of 21 March 1884 and a third (the MEDEF and CGPME) a status of association under the law of 1st July 1901. "
Proposals on this report is a remarkable prudence, even if they give arguments chikki machine to break the symmetry yet mentioned as desirable between union representation chikki machine and employer representation chikki machine on a key point, namely recognition based on membership rather election
But it is on the question of national representation that the proposals in this report are questionable to say the least, even if consensus can easily be done on the principle proposed a "bottom representativeness" determined first in the branches before being consolidated at the national level.
For this report proposes to establish a national representativeness criterion is not linked to the representation of a number of professional sectors, but the presence chikki machine in four business sectors: Industry, trade and services building. What underlies these four areas? Nothing justified if it is not practical for another time. But those established by the "common position" of the three organizations established, MEDEF, CGPME and UPA to allow the UPA to include and to exclude other potential candidates for national representativeness, representing yet more employees that UPA.
But what is even more amazing is that on this point also the proposals in the report departs from the principle that the merits has repeatedly affirmed symmetry between union and management side. In effte, discrèteemnt in a footnote page we learn "For an organization to be recognized employee representative at national and industry level, the High Council of the social dialogue has defined a business rule from article L.2122 -9 of the Labour Code of requiring the representativeness of trade union organization in at least two national branches of each of the four sectors (industry, construction, trade, services). "
Skip discreetly two branches for four employees to employers, it is more akin to a game of monte rigorous legal analysis that one might expect from a high-fonstionnaire chikki machine regulating social dialogue in our country
For organizations continuing, by the operation chikki machine leading to spend two to four branches with nothing justifies it, to be excluded from a national perspective of representativeness' world of agriculture, the professions and social economy), the report imagines , to change the current situation, obviously indefensible too, a form of "second circle" multi professional organizations could be consulted prior to negotiations, without addition of another constraint that recommendation, but would not be provided related.
No comments:
Post a Comment