要旨
As an important labor market institution, collective bargaining plays an important role in resolving labor conflicts, regulating parties’ interests and adjusting working conditions. But current Labor Law only provide limited regulations on how to resolve the dispute during bargaining, namely, there are merely two paths of mutual consultation and coordination with the Government. The limitation of current resolution regulation lies mainly in three aspects: invalidation of construction between party autonomy and national compulsory intervention, no regulation of the relationship among government coordination, arbitration, and litigation, no explicit provisions of the relationship between collective bargaining and industrial conflict. Germany stresses three principles of autonomy of collective-agreement, national neutrality, and last resort in dealing with collective bargaining disputes, which is enlightening reference on China’s collective bargaining dispute settlement resolution.
作为一项重要的劳动力市场制度,中国的集体协商制度在化解劳资冲突、规范和调整劳动条件方面发挥了重要作用。但是法律对于如何处理集体协商争议规定较为概括,主要设计了两条路径进行处理,即双方协商和政府协调。这一处理制度在现实中存在着较大的局限性,主要体现在三个方面,即未有效的构建争议处理中当事人自主约定和国家强制干预的关系,未规定政府协调和仲裁、诉讼的关系,未明确集体协商争议和集体争议行为的关系。德国在处理集体谈判争议时强调集体合同自治原则、国家中立原则、最后手段原则,这些原则对完善我国集体协商争议处理制度有较大的借鉴作用
