collective bargaining in labour law assignment

National Labor Relations Board

Collective bargaining rights.

The National Labor Relations Act gives you the right to bargain collectively with your employer through a representative that you and your coworkers choose. What does that mean?

Your union and employer must bargain in good faith about wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment until they agree on a labor contract or reach a stand-off or “impasse.” If negotiations reach an impasse, an employer can impose terms and conditions so long as it offered them to the union before impasse was reached. Once a contract is in place, neither party may deviate from its terms without the other party’s consent, absent extraordinary circumstances. If a contract expires before the next contract is in place, almost all the terms of the expired contract continue while the parties bargain (the exceptions being union security, management rights, no-strike/no-lockout, and arbitration provisions).

• collective bargaining

Primary tabs

Collective bargaining is the negotiation process between an  employer  and a union comprised of workers to create an agreement that will govern the terms and conditions of the workers' employment.

The result of collective bargaining procedures is a collective agreement .  Collective bargaining is governed by federal and state statutory laws, administrative agency regulations , and judicial decisions. 

National Labor Relations  

The main body of law governing collective bargaining is the N ational Labor Relations Act (NLRA) . It is also referred to as the Wagner Act, and explicitly grants employees the right to collectively bargain and join trade unions. The NLRA was originally enacted by Congress in 1935 under its power to regulate  interstate commerce  under the  Commerce Clause  in  Article I ,  Section 8  of the  U.S. Constitution . It applies to most private non-agricultural employees and employers engaged in some aspect of interstate commerce . Decisions and regulations of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) , which was established by the NLRA, greatly supplement and define the provisions of the act.

The NLRA establishes procedures for the selection of a labor organization to represent a unit of employees in collective bargaining. The act prohibits employers from interfering with this selection. The NLRA requires the employer to bargain with the appointed representative of its employees. It does not require either side to agree to a proposal or make concessions but does establish procedural guidelines on good faith bargaining. Proposals which would violate the NLRA or other laws may not be subject to collective bargaining. The NLRA also establishes regulations on what tactics (e.g. strikes, lock-outs, picketing) each side may employ to further their bargaining objectives.

State laws further regulate collective bargaining and make collective agreements enforceable under state law. They may also provide guidelines for those employers and employees not covered by the NLRA, such as agricultural laborers.

Arbitration

Arbitration  is a method of dispute resolution used as an  alternative  to  litigation . It is commonly designated in collective agreements between employers and employees as the way to resolve disputes. The parties select a neutral third party ( an arbiter ) to hold a formal or informal hearing on the disagreement. The arbiter then issues a decision binding on the parties. Both federal and state law governs the practice of arbitration. While the Federal Arbitration Act , by its own terms, is not applicable to employment contracts, federal courts are increasingly applying the law in labor disputes.  35 jurisdictions  have adopted the Uniform Arbitration Act (2000) as state law and 14 additional jurisdictions have enacted statutes similar to the UAA. Thus, the arbitration agreement and decision of the arbiter may be enforceable under state and federal law.

Sample of Relevant Supreme Court Cases (in chronological order)

Jones & laughlin (1937).

In  NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937) , the Supreme Court upheld the NLRA as constitutional. 

Abood (1977)

In  Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Educ., 431 U.S. 209 (1977) , Michigan authorized an  agency shop  arrangement. In this arrangement, if an employee is represented by a union, the employee must pay union dues, even if the employee is not a member of the union. Teachers in Detroit public schools claimed that this requirement deprived them of the freedom of association, which was derived from the  First Amendment   and  Fourteenth Amendment  and was created by  NAACP v. Patterson, 357 U.S. 449 (1958) .

The Court held that if the fees are used by the union for "for collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment purposes, the agency shop clause is valid."

The Court also clarified that the freedom of association means that an individual has the right to develop his own beliefs, rather than have them coerced by the State. So, the unions are prohibited from using the non-members' money to further an ideological cause unrelated to the union's duties as a collective bargaining representative. 

Harris (2014) 

In  Harris v. Quinn, 573 U.S. __ (2014) , personal care assistants who provide in-home care to disabled participants (in a program created by the state) decided to unionize. The collective bargaining agreement between the union and the state included a "fair share" provision. Similar to an agency shop provision, this  "required all personal assistants who are not union members to pay a proportionate share of the costs of the collective bargaining process and contract administration."  Those workers who opted out sued, claiming that the provision violated their  freedom of speech  and freedom of association.

The Court held that the  "First Amendment prohibits the collection of an agency fee [from the workers] who do not want to join or support the union."  In holding this, the Court also drew a sharp contrast with  Abood . While  Abood  focused on public employees, the facts from the present case involve personal assistants, who answer to private customers, rather than to the government. Accordingly, personal assistants "do not enjoy most of the rights and benefits that inure to state employees and are not indemnified by the State for claims against them arising from actions taken during the course of their employment."

The key takeaway from  Harris  is that  Abood  does not apply, primarily because the employees in this case are private sector employees, while the employees in  Abood  are public sector employees. Therefore,  Abood  does not extend to  Harris . 

Lewis (2018)

In  Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 584 U.S. __ (2018) , the Supreme Court upheld arbitration agreements which barred employees from pursuing work-related claims on a collective or class basis. The Court held that this is clear under the Arbitration Act (9 U. S. C. §§2, 3, 4) , which  "requires courts to enforce agreements to arbitrate, including the terms of arbitration the parties select."

Janus (2018)

In  Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees 585 U.S. __ (2018) , the Supreme Court overruled  Abood v. Detroit Board of Education . Therefore, the  Janus Court held agency shops to be unconstitutional. 

Further Reading

For more on collective bargaining, see this  Nova Southeastern University Law Review article and this more recent California Law Review article . 

Federal Material

U.s. constitution and federal statutes.

• 29 U.S.C. - Labor
• 29 U.S.C., Chapter 7 - Labor Management Relations Act
• 29 U.S.C., Chapter 7, Subchapter II - National Labor Relations Act
• 9 U.S.C. - Federal Arbitration Act
• CRS Annotated Constitution

Federal Agency Regulations

• Code of Federal Regulations:  29 C.F.R.  - Dept. of Labor

Federal Judicial Decisions

• Recent Decisions on Collective Bargaining

State Material

State statutes.

• Uniform Arbitration Act - as enacted in various states
• New York Labor Relations Act -  New York Labor Code, Article 20
• New York Labor and Management Improper Practices Act -  New York Labor Code, Article 20-A
• California Labor Code 

State Judicial Decisions

• Decisions on Collective Bargaining
• Decisions on Arbitration
• Appellate Decisions from Other States

International Material

Conventions and treaties.

• Convention Concerning the Application of the Principles of the Right to Organize and to Bargain Collectively (1949)

Other Resources

• U.S. Department of Labor
• American Arbitration Association
• Cornell University's Certificate in Advanced Collective Bargaining
• Employment Law and HR
• Federal Labor Relations Authority
• Bureau of Labor Statistics Collective Bargaining Agreement Program

[Last updated in April of 2023 by the Wex Definitions Team ]

• commercial activities
• business law
• LIFE EVENTS
• employee benefits
• commercial transactions
• employment law
• legal education and practice
• wex articles
• collective bargaining agreement
• COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS
• labor and employment law
• LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAWS
• LABOR UNION
• labor unions

• Browse Topics
• Executive Committee
• Affiliated Faculty
• Harvard Negotiation Project
• Great Negotiator
• American Secretaries of State Project
• Awards, Grants, and Fellowships
• Negotiation Programs
• Mediation Programs
• One-Day Programs
• In-House Training and Custom Programs
• In-Person Programs
• Online Programs
• Advanced Materials Search
• Contact Information
• The Teaching Negotiation Resource Center Policies
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Negotiation Journal
• Harvard Negotiation Law Review
• Working Conference on AI, Technology, and Negotiation
• 40th Anniversary Symposium
• Free Reports and Program Guides

Free Videos

• Upcoming Events
• Past Events
• Event Series
• Our Mission
• Keyword Index

PON – Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School - https://www.pon.harvard.edu

Team-Building Strategies: Building a Winning Team for Your Organization

Discover how to build a winning team and boost your business negotiation results in this free special report, Team Building Strategies for Your Organization, from Harvard Law School.

Labor Relations: Negotiating Collective Bargaining Agreements

By Lara SanPietro — on August 30th, 2022 / Teaching Negotiation

Contract bargaining in labor relations is one of the most complex areas of negotiation and dispute resolution. There are rarely clear cut or mutually agreed upon notions of what a fair salary and benefits package would be, so employers and workers, either individually or collectively, often find themselves at odds. Furthermore, contract bargaining in a unionized setting is rarely limited to questions of compensation. Working conditions, safety concerns or questions about worker rights, regularly surface and must be resolved. Appropriate negotiation and dispute resolution techniques can help all parties engaged in labor and workplace-related negotiations achieve mutually advantageous outcomes.

The Teaching Negotiation Resource Center (TNRC) offers a variety of role-play exercises to help parties engaged in negotiations and labor-related dispute resolution hone their skills and prepare for upcoming contract negotiations. The Brachton Collective Bargaining Exercise focuses a traditional contract negotiation in which groups representing a municipal school committee and a teachers union must reach agreement internally on a range of contentious issues, and then negotiate with each other. In Costless Warehouse , an individual recently fired following accusations of embezzlement and his advocate face off against a large company, claim that the real reason for the firing was racial prejudice. In the MAPO Administration Negotiation , a police union and municipal representatives negotiate over salaries and benefits for police officers. Finally, in Collective Bargaining at Central Division union and management representatives in the telecommunications industry have an opportunity to move away from the traditional hard-bargaining that has characterized their relationship towards a more problem-solving approach to contract bargaining. PON faculty have used several of these role play simulations to help parties worried about upcoming negotiations to explore options for previous adversarial battles that led to strikes.

Brachton Collective Bargaining Exercise

This four hour, two-team, multi-issue employment contract negotiation involves three teachers’ union representatives and three school committee representatives. It requires internal team meetings prior to external negotiations. The Brachton Teacher’s Union has been negotiating with the city’s School Committee over teacher contracts which will y expire shortly. Brachton public schools and teachers, funded largely through local property taxes, have come under fire from some segments of the community. Both teachers and school administrators fear that community support for the Brachton schools is diminishing. There is pressure on the school committee, headed by the mayor, to impose a moratorium on all city salaries, including teachers. The issues that need to be bargained have been identified. All that is left is for the two sides to hammer out an agreement. Major lessons that can be taught using this exercise include:

• Failure to resolve internal conflicts prior to external negotiations can create problems when it comes time to ratify carefully crafted agreements.
• To maximize joint gains, it is necessary to listen closely to the interests of the other side prior to staking out an opening position.

Download a free Brachton Collective Bargaining Teacher’s Package to learn more about the exercise.

Costless Warehouse

This two hour, five-person negotiation focuses on an employee’s claim of discriminatory firing and the employer’s claim of illegal conduct. Andy Appros is a well-qualified and efficient employee of Costless, a consumer outlet chain, who quickly advanced within the company hierarchy. After three years at Costless, Appros was fired following allegations of embezzlement. Appros claims that his firing was based solely on his supervisor’s racial prejudice. He is now suing the company for discrimination. Both sides wish to avoid a trial and the accompanying publicity, so they have each hired someone to negotiate on their behalf to settle the dispute. Each side possesses undisclosed information which may bear on the outcome of the settlement, and it is up to the clients to determine how much of this information to divulge to their respective negotiators. Major lessons that can be taught using this exercise include:

• How does internal conflict manifest itself in verbal and nonverbal behavior?
• What differential effects do alternative negotiation and dispute settlement techniques have on the level of conflict? Are partisan perceptions strengthened by some approaches to negotiation while greater understanding promoted by others?
• This case provides an excellent opportunity to plan, practice, and test skills in “separating the people from the problem,” and dealing with disputes on their merits.

Download a free Costless Warehouse Teacher’s Package to learn more about the exercise.

MAPO Administration Negotiation

This three hour, two-team, multi-issue collective bargaining negotiation involves three police union representatives and three municipal representatives. The focus is on police salaries, benefits, and working conditions. Negotiations between the Metropolitan Association of Police Officers (MAPO) and the Administration of Mayor Holmes of Metropolis are about to begin. Discontent police are demanding an increase in the police budget, which is essential in their view if the police are to provide adequate protection for the community. Rising crime rates now rank Metropolis as the 10th most dangerous city in the nation. The MAPO leader has threatened “some kind of protest activity” if the budget is not increased substantially. Proposition 6, which will limit municipal budget increases for any department to a maximum of 6% over the previous year’s allocation, is on the ballot in two months. The mayor’s budget can be enacted before then. The Mayor (who is seeking another term) is anxious to have the police budget settled before the election and has arranged a meeting between his representatives and MAPO. In addition to overall budget increases, specific issues likely to be addressed include: starting salaries, maximum salaries, vacation days, sick leave, holidays, life insurance, pension benefits, health insurance, weapons upgrading, and drug testing. Major lessons from this exercise include:

• Using objective criteria; Standards can be developed from careful analysis of the data provided in the exercise as well as from other data collected through outside research.
• Finding Pareto-efficient solutions.
• Preserving a good working relationship while pressing hard for what might be seen as substantive concessions. This tension is exacerbated by the temptation on both sides to try to use the media to enhance their bargaining power.
• Deciding how authority agents should have, whether they can really speak for their principals.
• Meeting design: how should teams be organized?

Download a free MAPO Teacher’s Package to learn more about the exercise.

Collective Bargaining at Central Division

This three hour, two-team, multi-issue contract negotiation involves three union representatives and three management representatives in a telephone company. The union and management bargaining teams for American Phone Company are preparing for upcoming negotiations. The last round of negotiations in 1986 was disastrous; there was a strike and relationships were damaged. The leadership on both sides would like things to go better this time around and has indicated that they want to work toward a more cooperative relationship. Trust between the two groups has eroded over the years. Any attempt to propose a mutual gains approach to contract bargaining is likely to be opposed by factions on both sides. They have got to address wages, employment security and medical benefits. Major lessons of this exercise include:

• There are often legitimate differences within bargaining teams. These internal conflicts must be worked out before serious contact bargaining can begin.
• The significance of relationships and trust-building can be studied in the context of collective bargaining. The impact of impact of past and future relationships on implementation of negotiated agreements can be explored.
• Issues of representation can be examined, since each of the players represents a group or institutional constituency. Each representative has a mandate which aids or constrains his or her ability to negotiate.

Download a free Collective Bargaining Teacher’s Package to learn more about the exercise.

Take your training to the next level with the TNRC

The  Teaching Negotiation Resource Center  offers a wide range of effective teaching materials, including

• Over 250 negotiation exercises and role-play simulations
• Critical case studies
• Enlightening periodicals
• More than 30 videos
• 100-plus books

TNRC negotiation exercises and teaching materials are designed for educational purposes. They are used in college classroom settings or corporate training settings; used by mediators and facilitators seeking to introduce their clients to a process or issue; and used by individuals who want to enhance their negotiation skills and knowledge.

Negotiation exercises and role-play simulations introduce participants to new negotiation and dispute resolution tools, techniques and strategies.  Our videos, books, case studies, and periodicals are also a helpful way of introducing students to key concepts while addressing the theory and practice of negotiation and conflict management.

Which negotiation exercises have helped you? Let us know in the comments.

Check out all that the TNRC has in store >>

Related Posts

• Check Out the All-In-One Curriculum Packages!
• Teaching the Fundamentals: The Best Introductory Negotiation Role Play Simulations
• Check Out Videos from the PON 40th Anniversary Symposium on Negotiation Pedagogy, Practice, & Research
• Teach Your Students to Negotiate a Management Crisis
• Check Out the International Investor-State Arbitration Video Course

Click here to cancel reply.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Negotiation and Leadership

• Learn More about Negotiation and Leadership

NEGOTIATION MASTER CLASS

• Learn More about Harvard Negotiation Master Class

Negotiation Essentials Online

• Learn More about Negotiation Essentials Online

Beyond the Back Table: Working with People and Organizations to Get to Yes

• Learn More about Beyond the Back Table

Select Your Free Special Report

• Beyond the Back Table September 2024 and February 2025 Program Guide
• Negotiation and Leadership Fall 2024 Program Guide
• Negotiation Essentials Online (NEO) Spring 2024 Program Guide
• Negotiation Master Class May 2024 Program Guide
• Negotiation and Leadership Spring 2024 Program Guide
• Make the Most of Online Negotiations
• Managing Multiparty Negotiations
• Getting the Deal Done
• Salary Negotiation: How to Negotiate Salary: Learn the Best Techniques to Help You Manage the Most Difficult Salary Negotiations and What You Need to Know When Asking for a Raise
• Overcoming Cultural Barriers in Negotiation: Cross Cultural Communication Techniques and Negotiation Skills From International Business and Diplomacy

Teaching Negotiation Resource Center

• Teaching Materials and Publications

Stay Connected to PON

Preparing for negotiation.

Understanding how to arrange the meeting space is a key aspect of preparing for negotiation. In this video, Professor Guhan Subramanian discusses a real world example of how seating arrangements can influence a negotiator’s success. This discussion was held at the 3 day executive education workshop for senior executives at the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.

Guhan Subramanian is the Professor of Law and Business at the Harvard Law School and Professor of Business Law at the Harvard Business School.

Articles & Insights

• BATNA Examples—and What You Can Learn from Them
• What is BATNA? How to Find Your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement
• For Sellers, The Anchoring Effects of a Hidden Price Can Offer Advantages
• Negotiation Examples: How Crisis Negotiators Use Text Messaging
• Taylor Swift: Negotiation Mastermind?
• Individual Differences in Negotiation—and How They Affect Results
• Winner’s Curse: Negotiation Mistakes to Avoid
• Solutions for Avoiding Intercultural Barriers at the Negotiation Table
• Top Negotiation Case Studies in Business: Apple and Dispute Resolution in the Courts
• Sales Negotiation Techniques
• The Pitfalls of Negotiations Over Email
• 3 Types of Conflict and How to Address Them
• Negotiation with Your Children: How to Resolve Family Conflicts
• What is Conflict Resolution, and How Does It Work?
• Conflict Styles and Bargaining Styles
• Crisis Negotiation Skills: The Hostage Negotiator’s Drill
• Police Negotiation Techniques from the NYPD Crisis Negotiations Team
• Famous Negotiations Cases – NBA and the Power of Deadlines at the Bargaining Table
• Negotiating Change During the Covid-19 Pandemic
• AI Negotiation in the News
• When Dealing with Difficult People, Look Inward
• Ethics in Negotiations: How to Deal with Deception at the Bargaining Table
• How to Manage Difficult Staff: Gen Z Edition
• Bargaining in Bad Faith: Dealing with “False Negotiators”
• Managing Difficult Employees, and Those Who Just Seem Difficult
• MESO Negotiation: The Benefits of Making Multiple Equivalent Simultaneous Offers in Business Negotiations
• 7 Tips for Closing the Deal in Negotiations
• How Does Mediation Work in a Lawsuit?
• Dealmaking Secrets from Henry Kissinger
• Writing the Negotiated Agreement
• The Importance of Power in Negotiations: Taylor Swift Shakes it Off
• Settling Out of Court: Negotiating in the Shadow of the Law
• How to Negotiate with Friends and Family
• What is Dispute System Design?
• What are the Three Basic Types of Dispute Resolution? What to Know About Mediation, Arbitration, and Litigation
• The Importance of Relationship Building in China
• A Top International Negotiation Case Study in Business: The Microsoft-Nokia Deal
• India’s Direct Approach to Conflict Resolution
• International Negotiations and Agenda Setting: Controlling the Flow of the Negotiation Process
• Overcoming Cultural Barriers in Negotiations and the Importance of Communication in International Business Deals
• Leadership and Decision-Making: Empowering Better Decisions
• The Contingency Theory of Leadership: A Focus on Fit
• Directive Leadership: When It Does—and Doesn’t—Work
• How an Authoritarian Leadership Style Blocks Effective Negotiation
• Paternalistic Leadership: Beyond Authoritarianism
• Using E-Mediation and Online Mediation Techniques for Conflict Resolution
• Undecided on Your Dispute Resolution Process? Combine Mediation and Arbitration, Known as Med-Arb
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Training: Mediation Curriculum
• What Makes a Good Mediator?
• Why is Negotiation Important: Mediation in Transactional Negotiations
• Communication in Negotiation: How Hard Should You Push?
• A Negotiation Preparation Checklist
• Negotiation Team Strategy
• Top 10 Negotiation Skills You Must Learn to Succeed
• Deceptive Tactics in Negotiation: How to Ward Them Off
• The Importance of a Relationship in Negotiation
• Collaborative Negotiation Examples: Tenants and Landlords
• Ethics and Negotiation: 5 Principles of Negotiation to Boost Your Bargaining Skills in Business Situations
• Negotiation Journal celebrates 40th anniversary, new publisher, and diamond open access in 2024
• 10 Negotiation Training Skills Every Organization Needs
• Setting Standards in Negotiations
• Negotiating a Salary When Compensation Is Public
• How to Negotiate a Higher Salary after a Job Offer
• How to Negotiate Pay in an Interview
• How to Negotiate a Higher Salary
• What is a Win-Win Negotiation?
• Win-Win Negotiation: Managing Your Counterpart’s Satisfaction
• Win-Lose Negotiation Examples
• How to Negotiate Mutually Beneficial Noncompete Agreements
• How to Win at Win-Win Negotiation

PON Publications

• Negotiation Data Repository (NDR)
• New Frontiers, New Roleplays: Next Generation Teaching and Training
• Negotiating Transboundary Water Agreements
• Learning from Practice to Teach for Practice—Reflections From a Novel Training Series for International Climate Negotiators
• Insights From PON’s Great Negotiators and the American Secretaries of State Program
• Gender and Privilege in Negotiation

Remember Me This setting should only be used on your home or work computer.

Lost your password? Create a new password of your choice.

Copyright © 2024 Negotiation Daily. All rights reserved.

The Role of Collective Bargaining in Labour Law Regimes: A Global Approach

• Conference paper
• First Online: 18 December 2020
• Cite this conference paper

• Ulla Liukkunen 15   na1  

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GRIA,volume 50))

652 Accesses

Collective bargaining is a profound channel of collective participation and industrial democracy. The idea of labour protection as a collective phenomenon has been legitimizing the autonomy of collective bargaining and social partners in their relation to the state, which has shaped the strong status of collective agreements in many labour law systems. From the collective labour rights standpoint, recent adjustments to bargaining frameworks that have occurred in many systems under scrutiny place great importance on economic factors and have strikingly narrowed the space of labour rights-oriented argumentation and values.

The collective bargaining regimes in Europe and Asia as well as North and South America under scrutiny face challenges posed by globalization and transformations of work and working life. Responses to ongoing changes reflect the diversity of bargaining regimes but they also highlight the need for a contextual understanding of developments. Although in some countries well-functioning social dialogue involves developing new strategies to improve labour protection, the transformation of work is so profound that it adds pressure to adopt new and more effective bargaining strategies and agendas. One of the evident consequences of decentralization occurring in many bargaining systems is that the power balance in bargaining tables is changing throughout different bargaining levels. The increase of local bargaining calls for developing institutional settings and procedural safeguards to enable local negotiations based on a more equal footing between the parties.

In the domestic systems under comparison, notable differences exist in the status and protection of the right to collective bargaining. Collective bargaining regimes also differ when assessed from local, sectoral and national or regional and global perspectives. Histories shape regulatory approaches and explain the poor development and inefficiency of some bargaining systems. Complex transformations are noticeable in the changing degree of cooperation in industrial relations. There is a need for renewed theoretical approaches to and interpretations of collective bargaining regimes deriving from labour law-originated  concepts and values. From the labour law perspective the present discussion on the need to develop bargaining regimes has been carried out loosely. Ongoing changes in collective labour law regimes are so fundamental that they should affect the way we do labour law. They can be argued as calling for a more precise identification of core concepts and their relation to values and capabilities of a certain historical and enabling character which is visible in established collective labour protection mechanisms in many labour law regimes. Collective bargaining produces frameworks for negotiated flexibility and adjustments required for ensuring employability as well as business competitiveness and efficiency. As a result, decollectivization of industrial relations is taking place as, at the local level, new patterns and methods of setting terms of employment are evolving in a way which highlights employer discretion and bargaining as an individualized process between employer and employee. Beyond domestic regimes, the evolution of transnational agreements is an important development adding a new layer to industrial relations systems. On a theoretical level, transnational agreements connect with the broader economic, social, political and cultural framework of cross-border industrial relations within multinational companies as national industrial relations from different legal contexts amalgamate in companies’ bargaining activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

This article, which is based on my general report made for the IACL Fukuoka World Conference of 2018, has greatly benefited from national reports from Europe, North and South America, and Asia as well as discussions during the session of the Conference where the general report was presented.

Malmberg ( 2002 ).

The Nordic countries discussed include Denmark, Finland and Sweden but not Norway and Iceland.

See also Edström ( 2016 ).

Denmark, Finland and Sweden are members of the European Union whereas Iceland and Norway are members of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA).

Liukkunen and Chen ( 2016 ), p. 5.

See Weiss ( 2004 ), pp. 229–230.

See also Liukkunen ( 2007 ), pp. 152–155.

See also Tuori ( 2002 ).

Collective labour law can be defined as a sub-category of labour law encompassing collective labour rights; both employee participation and collective bargaining, and their regulation.

See Zimmermann ( 1996 ), p. 602.

See also Zumbansen ( 2012 ).

See Legrand ( 2004 ), pp. 251–253.

See the report of Mazuyer ( 2019 ) about France, p. 269.

See the report of Senčur Peček ( 2019 ) about Slovenia, pp. 502–503.

See the report of Smokvina and Laleta ( 2019 ) about Croatia, p. 195.

See the report of Pichrt and Štefko ( 2019 ) about the Czech Republic, pp. 207–210 and 222–223.

See the report of Pisarczyk and Skupień ( 2019 ) about Poland, p. 432.

See Bernaciak ( 2015 ), p. 375.

See the report of Gerasimova ( 2019 ) about Russia, p. 473.

Convention No 98 concerning the Application of the Principles of the Right to Organise and to Bargain Collectively, as modified by the Final Articles Revision Convention, 1961.

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, adopted by the International Labour Conference at its Eighty-Sixth Session, Geneva, 18 June 1998 (Annex revised 15 June 2010).

Convention No 154 concerning the Promotion of Collective Bargaining.

Recommendation No 91 concerning Collective Agreements (Collective Agreements Recommendation).

Several other conventions are also relevant to international protection of the right to collective bargaining, such as Convention No 151 concerning Protection of the Right to Organise and Procedures for Determining Conditions of Employment in the Public Service.

Liukkunen and Chen ( 2016 ), pp. 11–13.

See Case C-341/05 Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet, Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundets avdelning 1, Byggettan, Svenska Elektrikerförbundet .

Article 28 of the Charter.

See ECtHR, Demir and Baykara v Turkey, 12 November 2008 as well as Enerji Yapi-Yol Sen v Turkey, 21 April 2009. See also Liukkunen ( 2016 ), p. 139.

For an extensive comparative account of the right to strike, see Waas ( 2014 ).

See Liukkunen ( 2016 ), p. 134.

See Case C-438/05 International Transport Workers’ Federation and Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti and Case C-341/05 Laval .

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, p. 289 and the decision of the Federal Labour Court of 5 October 2010 referred to therein.

See the report of McEvoy ( 2019 ) about Canada, p. 138.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, pp. 96–100.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, pp. 100–102.

See the report of Pisarczyk and Skupień ( 2019 ) about Poland, pp. 418 and 432.

See for example Sigeman ( 2003 ), p. 498.

See the report of Videbæk Munkholm and Højer Schjøler ( 2019 ) about Denmark, pp. 225–228.

See the report of Magnani ( 2019 ) about Italy, pp. 359 and 362.

See the report of Ray ( 2019 ) about the United States, p. 600.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, p. 291.

See the report of Araki ( 2019 ) about Japan, pp. 379–381.

See the report of Mazuyer ( 2019 ) about France, pp. 257–258.

See the report of Magnani ( 2019 ) about Italy, pp. 361 and 367.

See the report of Kun ( 2019 ) about Hungary, pp. 336–347.

See the report of Chacartegui ( 2019 ) about Spain, p. 533.

See Koukiadaki and Kokkinou ( 2016 ), pp. 151–152.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, pp. 95–96 and p. 102.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, p. 97.

See the report of Mazuyer ( 2019 ) about France, pp. 262–263.

See the report of Smokvina and Laleta ( 2019 ) about Croatia, pp. 192–193.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, pp. 292 and 304.

See the report of Gerasimova ( 2019 ) about Russias, pp. 478–479.

See Seifert ( 2014 ) and Clauwaert and Schömann ( 2012 ).

See the report of Westregård ( 2019 ) about Sweden, pp. 564–565 and p. 574.

See the report of Videbæk Munkholm and Højer Schjøler ( 2019 ) about Denmark, p. 236.

See the report of Kéfer ( 2019 ) about Belgium, pp. 66–67.

See the report of Mazuyer ( 2019 ) about France, pp. 269–270.

See the report of Pisarczyk and Skupień ( 2019 ) about Poland, pp. 427–431.

See the report of Pisarczyk and Skupień ( 2019 ) about Poland, p. 422 and pp. 434–435.

See the report of Kun ( 2019 ) about Hungary, pp. 336–337 and p. 346.

See the report of Kun ( 2019 ) about Hungary, p. 345.

See the report of Chacartegui ( 2019 ) about Spain, pp. 531, 539 and 452.

See the report of Magnani ( 2019 ) about Italy, pp. 366–369.

See Bernaciak ( 2015 ), p. 374.

See the report of Senčur Peček ( 2019 ) about Sloveni, pp. 520–521.

See the report of Kun ( 2019 ) about Hungary, p. 347.

See the report of Smokvina and Laleta ( 2019 ) about Croatia, pp. 196–197.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, pp. 294 and 305.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, pp. 297–298.

See Fornasier ( 2016 ), p. 41 and the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, p. 300.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, p. 304.

See Fornasier ( 2016 ), p. 44.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, pp. 304–305.

See the report of Waas ( 2019 ) about Germany, p. 294.

See Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances.

Seifert ( 2014 ), p. 326.

See Seifert ( 2014 ).

See Schulten and Müller ( 2012 ).

Seifert ( 2014 ) as well as Schulten and Müller ( 2012 ), p. 184.

Schulten and Müller ( 2012 ), p. 185.

Schulten and Müller ( 2012 ), p. 181.

See also Seifert ( 2014 ), p. 329.

See also Fischer-Lescano ( 2014 ), p. 55.

Seifert ( 2014 ), p. 323.

See Schulten ( 2015 ), p. 4.

See the report of Papadimitriou ( 2019 ) about Greece, p. 327 and Schulten ( 2015 ), pp. 1–2.

See the report of Magnani ( 2019 ) about Italy, p. 369.

See the report of Westregård ( 2019 ) about Sweden, p. 564.

See the report of Araki ( 2019 ) about Japan, pp. 386–390.

See the report of Araki ( 2019 ) about Japan, p. 390.

See Chen ( 2016 ), p. 73.

See the report of Li et al. ( 2019 ) about China, p. 171.

See Brown ( 2015 ), pp. 135–154.

See Chen ( 2016 ), pp. 70–73.

Li ( 2016 ), p. 107.

See the report of Li et al. ( 2019 ) about China, p. 174.

Chen ( 2016 ), p. 76.

See the report of Li et al. ( 2019 ) about China, pp. 178–179.

See the report of Wei and Rafael ( 2019 ) about Macau, pp. 403–404.

See the report of Cheng ( 2019 ) about Taiwan, pp. 579–580 and p. 580.

That year, the public sector employed approximately 20 million people and the private sector more than 115 million people. See the report of Ray ( 2019 ) about the United States, p. 616, fn. 92.

See the report of Ray ( 2019 ) about the United States, pp. 596–599.

See the report of Ray ( 2019 ) about the United States, pp. 603–606.

See the report of Ray ( 2019 ) about the United States, p. 597.

The report of Ray ( 2019 ) about the United States, p. 617, fn. 95.

See the report of McEvoy ( 2019 ) about Canada, pp. 122–123 and 147–157.

See the report of McEvoy ( 2019 ) about Canada, pp. 124–127 and p. 163.

See the report of Fontaine ( 2019 ) about Quebec, pp. 449–450.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, pp. 114–115.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, pp. 113–114.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, p. 102 and pp. 108–112.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, pp. 110–113.

See the report of Gerasimova ( 2019 ) about Russia, pp. 471–473.

See the report of Gerasimova ( 2019 ) about Russia, p. 474.

See the report of Gerasimova ( 2019 ) about Russia, p. 471 and pp. 474–478.

See the report of Gerasimova ( 2019 ) about Russia, pp. 485–486 and p. 488.

See also Arthurs ( 1998 ).

See Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services.

See Liukkunen ( 2012 ). On the impact of the Laval judgment on Nordic collective bargaining models, see, for example, Malmberg and Sigeman ( 2008 ), the report of Videbæk Munkholm and Højer Schjøler ( 2019 ) about Denmark, pp. 242–244 and the report of Westregård ( 2019 ), pp. 568–570.

See the report of Westregård ( 2019 ) about Sweden, p. 570.

See the report of Westregård ( 2019 ) about Sweden, pp. 545–546.

See the report of Araki ( 2019 ) about Japan, pp. 395–396.

See also Sobczak ( 2003 ).

See Liukkunen ( 2014 ).

See for example Blanpain and Colucci ( 2004 ), p. 5.

See also Pataut ( 2016 ), pp. 95–97.

Liukkunen ( 2017 ). See also Liukkunen ( 2004 ), pp. 120–122.

On the development of the differentiation between different categories of transnational agreements, see, for example Schömann ( 2012 ), pp. 202–205.

See Database on transnational company agreements. http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=978&langId=en (last visited 26 April 2019).

See also Liukkunen ( 2007 ), p. 155.

Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (1977, amended in 2000, 2016 and 2017); OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (2011).

See also Compa ( 2006 ).

See also Schömann ( 2012 ), pp. 198–199.

See Council Directive 94/45/EC of 22 September 1994 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees and Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (recast) (Text with EEA relevance).

See also Carley ( 2009 ).

However, the EWC Directive has promoted institution building of EWCs beyond the formal institution for information and consultation. See Waddington ( 2011 ), p. 211.

See also the report of Mazuyer ( 2019 ) about France, pp. 277–278.

See the report of Kun ( 2019 ) about Hungary, pp. 352–354 as well as the report of Pisarczyk and Skupień ( 2019 ) about Poland, p. 438.

See the report of Pisarczyk and Skupień ( 2019 ) about Poland, p. 438.

See the report of Kun ( 2019 ) about Hungary, p. 353.

See Hernnstadt ( 2007 ), p. 207.

See Müller et al. ( 2008 ).

See in more detail Voss et al. ( 2008 ).

See the report of Mazuyer ( 2019 ) about France, p. 277.

See the report of Magnani ( 2019 ) about Italy, p. 371.

See the report of Chacartegui ( 2019 ) about Spain, p. 548.

See the report of Chacartegui ( 2019 ) about Spain, p. 547.

See the report of Campos Medina Maia ( 2019 ) about Brazil, p. 118.

See the report of Araki ( 2019 ) about Japan, pp. 393–395.

Liukkunen ( 2017 ).

See Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I).

See Communication from the European Commission on the Social Agenda, COM(2005) 33 final, 2005 .

See also European Commission Staff Working Document of 2008 entitled ‘The role of transnational company agreements in the context of increasing international integration’ (SEC(2008)2155).

See also generally European Commission Staff Working Document of 2008 entitled ‘The role of transnational company agreements in the context of increasing international integration’ (SEC(2008)2155).

See Schömann et al. ( 2007 ), p. 122; Sobczak ( 2007 ), p. 476.

See Sobczak ( 2007 ), p. 478.

See Sobczak ( 2007 ), pp. 471–472.

See also Rojot ( 2004 ), p. 523.

See Malmberg ( 2002 ), p. 10.

Treu ( 1987 ), p. 166.

Araki T (2019) Japan. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Google Scholar  

Arthurs HW (1998) The collective labour law of a global economy. In: Engels C, Weiss M (eds) Labour law and industrial relations at the turn of the century. Kluwer Law International, The Hague

Bernaciak M (2015) All roads lead to decentralization? Collective bargaining trends and prospects in Central and Eastern Europe. Transfer Eur Rev Labour Res 21(3):373–381

Article   Google Scholar  

Blanpain R, Colucci M (2004) The globalization of labour standards: the soft law track. Wolters Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn

Brown RC (2015) Collective bargaining in China: Guangdong regulation a harbinger of national model? China-EU Law J 4:135–154

Campos Medina Maia D (2019) Brazil. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Carley M (2009) Report of the French EU Presidency conference “Transnational company agreements”

Chacartegui C (2019) Spain. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Chen S (2016) The collective contract system in China. In: Basedow J, Chen S, Fornasier M, Liukkunen U (eds) Employee participation and collective bargaining in Europe and China. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Cheng C (2019) Taiwan. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Clauwaert S, Schömann I (2012) The crisis and national labour law reforms: a mapping exercise. Eur Labour Law J 3(1):54–69

Communication from the European Commission on the Social Agenda, COM(2005) 33 final, 2005

Compa L (2006) Trade liberalization and labour law. Cornell University ILR School, Ithaca. Access at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=conference

Database on transnational company agreements. Access at: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=978&langId=en (last visited 26 April 2019)

Edström Ö (2016) Collective labour law in the Nordic countries. In: Basedow J, Chen S, Fornasier M, Liukkunen U (eds) Employee participation and collective bargaining in Europe and China. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

European Commission Staff Working Document of 2008 entitled ‘The role of transnational company agreements in the context of increasing international integration’ (SEC(2008)2155)

Fischer-Lescano A (2014) Competencies of the Troika: legal limitations of the institutions of the European Union. In: Bruun N, Lörcher K, Schömann I (eds) The economic and financial crisis and collective labour law in Europe. Hart Publishing, Oxford

Fontaine LL (2019) Québeq. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Fornasier M (2016) Collective bargaining in Germany. In: Basedow J, Chen S, Fornasier M, Liukkunen U (eds) Employee participation and collective bargaining in Europe and China. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Gerasimova E (2019) Russia. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Hernnstadt OE (2007) Are international framework agreements a path to corporate social responsibility? Univ Pa J Bus Employ Law 10:187–224

Kéfer F (2019) Belgique. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Koukiadaki A, Kokkinou C (2016) The Greek system of collective bargaining in (the) crisis. In: Koukiadaki A, Távora I, Lucio MM (eds) Joint regulation and labour market policy in Europe during the crisis. European Trade Union Institute (ETUI), Brussels

Kun A (2019) Hungary. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Legrand P (2004) The same and the different. In: Van Hoecke M (ed) Epistemology and methodology of comparative law. Bloomsbury Publishing, London

Li J (2016) Collective contracts and trade unions in China. In: Basedow J, Chen S, Fornasier M, Liukkunen U (eds) Employee participation and collective bargaining in Europe and China. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Li W, Yan D, Chen Y (2019) China. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Liukkunen U (2004) The role of mandatory rules in labour law - a comparative study in the conflict of laws. Talentum, Helsinki

Liukkunen U (2007) The method of understanding and an internal viewpoint – on the interface between comparative law and private international law. ZVglRWiss 106:141–157

Liukkunen U (2012) Collision between the economic and the social: what has private international law got to do with it? In: Letto-Vanamo P, Smits J (eds) Coherence and fragmentation in European private law. Sellier European Law Publishers, München

Liukkunen U (2014) Transnational labour law and fundamental labour rights: making Chinese workers matter? In: Liukkunen U, Chen Y (eds) China and ILO fundamental principles and rights in work. Wolters Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn

Liukkunen U (2016) The right to strike in the international and European context – Viking, Laval and beyond. In: Basedow J, Chen S, Fornasier M, Liukkunen U (eds) Employee participation and collective bargaining in Europe and China. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Liukkunen U, Chen Y (2016) Developing fundamental labour rights in China: a new approach to implementation. In: Liukkunen U, Chen Y (eds) Fundamental labour rights in China – legal implementation and cultural logic. Springer, Berlin

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Liukkunen U (2017) Employment, collective bargaining. In: Basedow J, Rühl G, Ferrari F, de Miguel AP (eds) Encyclopedia of private international law. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

Magnani M (2019) Italy. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Malmberg J (2002) The collective agreement as an instrument for regulation of wages and employment conditions. In: Wahlgren P (ed) Stability and change in Nordic labour law: legal abbreviations. Scandinavian studies in law 43. Stockholm Institute for Scandinavian Law, Stockholm

Malmberg J, Sigeman T (2008) Industrial actions and EU economic freedoms: the autonomous collective bargaining model curtailed by the European Court of Justice. Common Market Law Rev 45(4):1115–1146

Mazuyer E (2019) France. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

McEvoy JP (2019) Canada. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Müller T, Platzer H, Rüb S (2008) International framework agreements – opportunities and limitations of a new tool of global trade union policy. Briefing Papers No 8/2008. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung International Trade Union Cooperation

Papadimitriou C (2019) Grèce. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Pataut E (2016) European social dialogue and contractual autonomy. In: Basedow J, Chen S, Fornasier M, Liukkunen U (eds) Employee participation and collective bargaining in Europe and China. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

Pichrt J, Štefko M (2019) Czech Republic. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Pisarczyk Ł, Skupień D (2019) Poland. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Ray DE (2019) The United States. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Rojot J (2004) The right to bargain collectively: an international perspective on its extent and relevance. Int J Comp Labour Law Ind Relat 20:513–532

Schömann I (2012) Transnational company agreements: towards an internationalisation of industrial relations. In: Schömann I, Jagodzinski R, Boni G, Clauwaert S, Glassner V, Jaspers T (eds) Transnational collective bargaining at company level a new component of European industrial relations? ETUI, Brussels

Schömann I, Sobzack A, Voss E, Wilke P (2007) International framework agreements: new paths to workers’ participation in multinationals’ governance? Transfer Eur Rev Labour Res 14:111–126

Schulten T (2015) Opportunities for a restoration? The future of Greek collective bargaining after the Third Memorandum. The Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Berlin

Schulten T, Müller T (2012) A new European interventionism? The impact of the new European economic governance on wages and collective bargaining. In: Natali D, Vanhercke B (eds) Social developments in the European Union 2012. ETUI, Brussels

Seifert A (2014) European Economic Governance and labor laws of the E.U. member states. Comp Labor Law Policy J 35:311–330

Senčur Peček D (2019) Slovenia. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Sigeman T (2003) Nordic labour law. A brief presentation from a comparative perspective. Juridisk tidskrift 2002(3):497–503

Smokvina V, Laleta S (2019) Croatia. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Sobczak A (2003) Codes of conduct in subcontracting networks: a labour law perspective. J Bus Ethics 44:225–226

Sobczak A (2007) Legal dimensions of international framework agreements in the field of corporate social responsibility. Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations 62:466–491

Treu T (1987) Centralization and decentralization in collective bargaining. Labour 1:147–174

Tuori K (2002) Critical legal positivism. Ashgate, Farnham

Videbæk Munkholm N, Højer Schjøler C (2019) Denmark. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Voss E, Wilke P, Sobczak A, Schömann I (2008) Codes of conduct and international framework agreements: new forms of governance at company level. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. Access at: http://www.academia.edu/678230/Codes_of_conduct_and_international_framework_agreements_New_forms_of_governance_at_company_level

Waas B (ed) (2014) The right to strike: a comparative view. Wolters Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn

Waas B (2019) Germany. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Waddington J (2011) European Works Councils. A transnational industrial relations institution in the making. Routledge, Abingdon

Wei D, Rafael AP (2019) Macau. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Weiss M (2004) The future of workers’ participation in the EU. In: Barnard C, Deakin S, Morris GS (eds) The future of labour law: Liber Amicorum Bob Hepple QC. Hart, Oxford

Westregård AJ (2019) Sweden. In: Liukkunen U (ed) Collective labour law in labour regimes - a global perspective. Springer, Berlin

Zimmermann R (1996) Savigny’s legacy: legal history, comparative law and the emergence of a European legal science. Law Q Rev 112:576–605

Zumbansen PC (2012) Comparative law’s coming of age? Twenty years after critical comparisons . In: Miller RA, Zumbansen PC (eds) Comparative law as transnational law. A decade of the German Law Journal. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Download references

Author information

This report was also published in Liukkunen (Ed), Collective Bargaining in Labour Law Regimes – A Global Perspective, Springer Nature Switzerland 2019, 1–64.

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

Ulla Liukkunen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulla Liukkunen .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

AcadÕmie internationale de droit comparÕ, International Academy of Comparative Law, Paris, France

Katharina Boele-Woelki

Académie internationale de droit comparé, International Academy of Comparative Law, Paris, France

Diego P. Fernández Arroyo

Alexandre Senegacnik

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Liukkunen, U. (2021). The Role of Collective Bargaining in Labour Law Regimes: A Global Approach. In: Boele-Woelki, K., Fernández Arroyo, D.P., Senegacnik, A. (eds) General Reports of the XXth General Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law - Rapports généraux du XXème Congrès général de l'Académie internationale de droit comparé. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law(), vol 50. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48675-4_14

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48675-4_14

Published : 18 December 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-48674-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-48675-4

eBook Packages : Law and Criminology Law and Criminology (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

The requested page is currently unavailable.

An error is preventing the page from loading. The issue is likely on our side and the page may be available if you try again later.

If this issue persists:

Please email us at [email protected] and include the following support ID, 12373773847706921955 , in the body of your email.