Kollektiivlepingu roll ja regulatsioon nüüdisaegsetes töösuhetes
Kuupäev
2015-02-27
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Abstrakt
Uurimus keskendub kollektiivlepingu rolli väljaselgitamisele Eestis ja mujal Euroopa riikides. Samuti sellele, kas ja milliseid täiendusi on vaja teha Eesti seadustes, et suurendada töösuhete turvalisust, tagades samaaegselt regulatsiooni paindlikkuse. Uurimisülesande lahendamisel lähtus autor ka kollektiivlepingute edendamise vajaduse aspektist, kuna kollektiivlepingutega on kaetud Eestis üksnes 32,7% töötajatest. Analüüs näitas, et Eesti kollektiivlepingu roll on erinev osade töös võrreldud uute EL liikmesriikide ja riikide omast, kus sotsiaaldialoog on rohkem arenenud. Nimelt on Eesti kollektiivlepingu rolliks seaduslike tööalaste tagatiste täiendamine, paindlikkuse võimaldamine kollektiivlepingute abil ei ole Eesti kollektiivlepingutele üldiselt omane. Väitekirjas asub autor seisukohale, et kollektiivlepingu roll nüüdisaegsetes töösuhetes peab lisaks turvalisuse suurendamisele olema ka töösuhete paindlikkuse tagamine. See avaldub eeskätt kollektiivlepingu ja seaduse muutunud vahekorras: seaduse üldiselt sõnastatud põhimõtete täpsustamises ja defineerimises vastavalt konkreetsele volitusnormile, töötingimuste reguleerimises võrreldes seadusega teisiti, sh ka töötajate kahjuks( derogatsioonid). Samuti avaldub see kollektiivlepingus kokkulepitud teemades, sh ka seni juhtkonna pädevuses olevate majandust ja tööhõivet puudutavate küsimuste kokkuleppimises. Mittetüüpilistel töötegijatel peab olema võimalik kollektiivlepinguid sõlmida. Lepingu õiguslik regulatsioon peab nimetatud kollektiivlepingu rolli realiseerumist võimaldama ja toetama.
Autor on seisukohal, et suurendada töösuhete turvalisust, tagades samaaegselt regulatsiooni paindlikkuse on vajalik julgemini kasutada seaduse ja kollektiivlepingute kombinatsiooni. Andes eeskätt keerulisemates küsimustes kindlapiirilisemalt kaalutlusõiguse üksikult töötajalt töötajate tasandile. Samuti tuleb nüüdisajastada nii lepingu mõiste, kohaldamise kui kollektiivlepingu kehtivuse regulatsioon. Lahendada tuleb poolte esinduslikkuse küsimus, täpsustada töötajate esindajate õigusi derogatiivsete kokkulepete tegemisel ning sätestada majanduslikult sõltuvate töötegijate õigused kollektiivlepingute sõlmimiseks. Samuti tuleb avardada laiendatavate teemade ringi. Oluline on Eesti detsentraliseeritud kollektiivlepingute süsteemis harutasandi rolli suurendamine. Riikidel, kes on võtnud samuti suuna detsentraliseerimisele, on eeskätt töös väljatoodud detsentraliseerituse erinevaid aspekte võimalik uute regulatsioonide loomisel arvesse võtta.
The study focuses on determining the role of collective agreements (hereinafter: CAs) in Estonia and other EU countries. It also takes a look at whether and what kinds of additions need to be made to Estonian legislation in order to increase the security of employment relations, while ensuring the flexibility of regulation. To find an answer to the issue studied, the author concentrated on the need to develop CAs, since only 32.7% of employees are covered by CAs in Estonia. The analysis showed that the role of Estonian CAs differs from role that they play in some of the new EU countries, used as a comparison in this paper, and in countries that have a more advanced social dialogue. Namely, the role of Estonian CAs is to establish of additional social guarantees for employees that complement the law. Ensuring flexibility with CAs is generally uncommon in Estonia. The author’s view is that the role of the collective agreement in modern employment relationships has to include, in addition to increasing security, ensuring the flexibility of employment relationships. This is expressed particularly by the changed relationship between the collective agreement and the legislation: spelling out and defining the broadly formulated principles in the legislation in accordance with the specific enabling provision, or regulating working conditions differently from the legislation, also to the disadvantage of employees. Furthermore, this comes through in issues agreed under a collective agreement, also in the agreement of issues related to the economy and employment previously within the jurisdiction of the management. Atypical workers should be able to conclude collective agreements. The legal regulation of an agreement should allow and support the realisation of the above role of the collective agreement. The author finds that in order to increase the security of employment relations, while ensuring the flexibility of regulation, we would need to more boldly utilise a combination of CAs and the law. By directing discretion in a more defined manner from a single employee to the level of employees, especially in more complex issues, a better balance could be achieved between security and flexibility. The regulation of the concept of an agreement, application, and validity should also be modernised. The issue of representativeness of parties needs solving, important is to clarify representativeness criteria for the conclusion and application of those agreements applied to all the employees at a company that include derogations. It would be essential to increase the sectoral level role in the Estonian decentralised system of CAs. Countries, that have directed their course on decentralisation, can consider the different aspects of decentralisation that have been analysed in the study when amending their CA regulations.
The study focuses on determining the role of collective agreements (hereinafter: CAs) in Estonia and other EU countries. It also takes a look at whether and what kinds of additions need to be made to Estonian legislation in order to increase the security of employment relations, while ensuring the flexibility of regulation. To find an answer to the issue studied, the author concentrated on the need to develop CAs, since only 32.7% of employees are covered by CAs in Estonia. The analysis showed that the role of Estonian CAs differs from role that they play in some of the new EU countries, used as a comparison in this paper, and in countries that have a more advanced social dialogue. Namely, the role of Estonian CAs is to establish of additional social guarantees for employees that complement the law. Ensuring flexibility with CAs is generally uncommon in Estonia. The author’s view is that the role of the collective agreement in modern employment relationships has to include, in addition to increasing security, ensuring the flexibility of employment relationships. This is expressed particularly by the changed relationship between the collective agreement and the legislation: spelling out and defining the broadly formulated principles in the legislation in accordance with the specific enabling provision, or regulating working conditions differently from the legislation, also to the disadvantage of employees. Furthermore, this comes through in issues agreed under a collective agreement, also in the agreement of issues related to the economy and employment previously within the jurisdiction of the management. Atypical workers should be able to conclude collective agreements. The legal regulation of an agreement should allow and support the realisation of the above role of the collective agreement. The author finds that in order to increase the security of employment relations, while ensuring the flexibility of regulation, we would need to more boldly utilise a combination of CAs and the law. By directing discretion in a more defined manner from a single employee to the level of employees, especially in more complex issues, a better balance could be achieved between security and flexibility. The regulation of the concept of an agreement, application, and validity should also be modernised. The issue of representativeness of parties needs solving, important is to clarify representativeness criteria for the conclusion and application of those agreements applied to all the employees at a company that include derogations. It would be essential to increase the sectoral level role in the Estonian decentralised system of CAs. Countries, that have directed their course on decentralisation, can consider the different aspects of decentralisation that have been analysed in the study when amending their CA regulations.