Collective bargaining presents a successful mode which workers have at their disposal for use in the pursuit of their interests. Collective bargaining helps attain better wages, better working conditions, and acceptable working hours. The essence of success rests on the bargaining approach as a team which such groups employ. Equally important, collective bargaining extends an opportunity to employers to table their cases for consideration. Though there are chances of adversarial and negative aspects arising from collective bargaining, the possibility of making deals stand out as the most positive attribute of such bargaining.
The Washington state has had its share of collective bargaining activities . This is captured by a case brought to the state of Washington regarding education matters serves to augment this view. A number of Washington employees in the education department brought a case before the Washington education association questioning the credibility of their union in using non-union member ‘shop fees’ in financing political issues. They claimed that this was in violation of the Wash. Rev. Code § 42. 17. 760’s that the body receives affirmative approval from nonmembers prior to using funds for collective purposes.
This indicates that though unions are set up to foster member interests, at times it may not be the case, a scenario which leads to conflicts as indicated by the Washington case. Commonality Both the state and the federal labor laws appear intended to offer protection to workers against discrimination emanating from employers and employment demands. In most instances, the two bodies’ mandate overlap; to cite an example, the federal labor law extends the powers to enact statutes barring discrimination to be set or established by the different states depending on the conditions on the ground.
Discrimination at the work place is viewed with reference to gender, age, nationality, religion, age, etc. the state law remains valid or acceptable in as far as the provision made does not offer lesser protection as envisaged by the federal law. Most state statutes can be pre-emptied by the federal law provision if such reneges on the sought after status for example pension requirements. Conclusion As realized in this paper, Washington public labor law aids labor relations in the state of Washington.
The state legislation is heavily shaped by the federal legal provisions meaning that a host of issues are handled in similar ways. The private federal labor law is supreme to the state laws and in events of overlap, the federal law takes precedence. Given the federal law offers a broad guideline on every issue, the state of Washington is left to make its own specifications regarding a number of issues as captured in the paper. Employers and workers have goals to achieve. While pursuing these goals, some aspects run counter to others.
It is especially held so in reference to the realization that the employer seeks to maximize on the objective of profit making while minimizing on the costs incurred. At the same time, the employees pursue self actualization goals. Towards attaining them, the employers expect to be given reasonably good working conditions, and be compensated commensurately on services rendered. The funds to satisfy the two goals; the employer’s and employees’ are generated from business proceeds. In this sense there is need for a trade off between the two goals.
due to the leveraging position occupied by employers owing to the fact that they are the owners of the production means, employees find it wise to form collective organizations to pursue their goals as realized in this paper. The union membership among the salaried workers stands at about sixty percent of what it was 20 years back. Education represents some of the most unionized industries in the United States. The Washington Employment Association is a representation of an exclusive bargaining organization in the state of Washington.
The association represents around seventy thousand employees. Membership to this organization primarily remains voluntary. Despite this realization, ninety five percent of the educational employees in the state are members of the organization. As indicated by the Wash. Rev. Code § 42. 17. 760, non-members are obliged to pay a fee equal to membership fees. The shop fees and membership fees are deducted via the payroll. A portion of these contributions is then spent on the collective actives pursued by the body. Additional funds of the body are spent on political activities pursued by the body.
Between the year 1996 and the year 2000, the rebates fell in the range of forty four to seventy six dollars in reference to each objecting nonmember BIBLIOGRAPHY Andy, Cook. “King County’s oppression could show up in Kitsap”. Port Orchard Independent, 2008. Byars, Lloyd L. & Rue, Leslie W. Human Resource Management (7th ed. ). New York: McGraw- Hill, 2004. Berkeley, Miller and William, Canak. “From “Porkchoppers” to “Lambchoppers”: The Passage of Florida’s Public Employee Relations Act,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 44, No. 2; pp. 349–366, 1991. Christopher, Enright. Federal administrative law. Federation Press, 2001.