DOCSLIB.ORG

Social Partnership in the European Union

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Social Partnership in the European Union Social Partnership in the European Union Edited by Hugh Compston and Justin Greenwood compston/94985/crc 4/4/01 8:46 am Page 1 Social Partnership in the European Union compston/94985/crc 4/4/01 8:46 am Page 2 Also by Hugh Compston THE NEW POLITICS OF UNEMPLOYMENT: Radical Policy Initiatives in Western Europe (editor) Also by Justin Greenwood COLLECTIVE ACTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: Interests and the New Politics of Associability (editor with Mark Aspinwall) EUROPEAN CASEBOOK ON BUSINESS ALLIANCES (editor) ORGANISED INTERESTS AND THE NEW GLOBAL ORDER (editor with Henry Jacek) ORGANISED INTERESTS AND THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY (editor with Jurgen Grote and Karsten Ronit) REPRESENTING INTERESTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION compston/94985/crc 4/4/01 8:46 am Page 3 Social Partnership in the European Union Edited by Hugh Compston Lecturer in European Politics Cardiff University and Justin Greenwood Jean Monnet Professor of European Public Policy Robert Gordon University Aberdeen compston/94985/crc 4/4/01 8:46 am Page 4 Selection, editorial matter and Chapter 6 © Hugh Compston and Justin Greenwood 2001 Introduction and Chapter 4 © Hugh Compston 2001 Chapter 3 © Ann Branch and Justin Greenwood 2001 Remaining chapters © Palgrave Publishers Ltd 2001 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 0LP. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2001 by PALGRAVE Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS and 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. 10010 Companies and representatives throughout the world PALGRAVE is the new global academic imprint of St. Martin’s Press LLC Scholarly and Reference Division and Palgrave Publishers Ltd (formerly Macmillan Press Ltd). ISBN 0–333–77520–1 This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully managed and sustained forest sources. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Social partnership in the European Union / edited by Hugh Compston, Justin Greenwood. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0–333–77520–1 1. European Union. 2. Corporate state. 3. Functional representation. 4. Economic and Monetary Union. I. Compston, Hugh, 1955– II. Greenwood, Justin. JN30 .S63 2000 306'.094—dc21 00–066553 10987654321 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 Printed in Great Britain by Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham, Wiltshire Contents List of Tables vi Acknowledgements vii Notes on the Contributors viii Introduction 1 Hugh Compston 1 ETUC and European Social Partnership: a Third 11 Turning-Point? Jon Erik Dølvik and Jelle Visser 2 European Employers: Social Partners? 41 Ann Branch and Justin Greenwood 3 The Impact of the Social Dialogue Procedure on the 71 Powers of European Union Institutions Daniela Obradovic 4 The Intergovernmental Dimension of EU Social 98 Partnership Hugh Compston 5 The European Sectoral Social Dialogue 129 Tina Weber 6 Social Partnership in the European Union 154 Hugh Compston and Justin Greenwood Appendix 1: the Legal Basis of the Social Partnership 170 Procedure in the Treaty of Amsterdam Appendix 2: the 1996 Parental Leave Directive 172 Appendix 3: the 1997 Part-time Work Directive 179 Appendix 4: the 1999 Fixed-Term Work Directive 187 Notes 195 References 201 Index 214 v List of Tables 1.1 ETUC Definitions of Social Partnership 35 1.2 ETUC Rationales for European Social Partnership 38 2.1 Employer Use of Terms Relating to Social Partnership 47 2.2 Employer Arguments in Relation to Social Partnership 49 5.1 European Sectoral Social Dialogue: Sectors with Joint Committees 133 5.2 European Sectoral Social Dialogue: Sectors with Informal Working Groups 136 5.3 Key Terms in the European Sectoral Dialogue 142 5.4 European Sectoral Social Dialogue: Nature of Employer Group Participation 143 5.5 Arguments For and Against European Sectoral Social Partnership and Social Dialogue 145 vi Acknowledgements We would like to express our appreciation of the funding from the European Commission DG Employment and Social Affairs and Cardiff University that enabled us to carry out this research. We would like in particular to thank Daniel Vaughan-Whitehead of Directorate D for his advice and assistance. We would also like to thank the administrative staff at Cardiff University whose assistance was vital, especially Bridget Bradley, Graham Edwards, Laura James, Mike Joynson and Helen Muir. The opportunity to discuss the dynamics of social partnership with Gerda Falkner was also valuable. Thanks are also due to those who made time to be interviewed for this project. Most of all, however, we would like to thank the contribu- tors to this study who worked with us throughout and produced their contributions on time. HUGH COMPSTON JUSTIN GREENWOOD vii Notes on the Contributors Ann Branch is writing a DPhil thesis on European integration theory and the European social dialogue at Nuffield College, Oxford. Pub- lications include ‘Trapped in the Supranational–Intergovernmental Dichotomy: a Response to Stone, Sweet and Sandholtz’ (with Jakob C. Ohrgaard), Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 6/1 (1999); ‘The Impact of the EU on National Trade Unions’, in R. Balme, D. Chabanet and V. Wright (eds), Collective Action in Europe (forthcoming); and ‘The European Union and National Trade Unions: Living Up to Expectations or Better than Nothing?’, La lettre de la Maison française d’Oxford, Action collective, représentation des intérêts et espace public en Europe (forthcoming). Hugh Compston teaches politics in the School of European Studies, Cardiff University, and researches in the area of comparative public policy and political economy. Among recent publications are The New Politics of Unemployment: Radical Policy Initiatives in Western Europe (editor, 1996); ‘Union Power, Policy-Making and Un- employment in Western Europe, 1972–1993’, Comparative Political Studies (December 1997); and ‘The End of Policy Concertation? Western Europe since the Single European Act’, Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 5/4 (1998). Jon Erik Dølvik is a researcher at the Institute for Applied Social Science (Fafo), which is affiliated to the University of Oslo. His current area of research is comparative labour relations and em- ployment policies in the context of globalisation and regionalisation. Recent publications include ‘Redrawing Boundaries of Solidarity? ETUC, Social Dialogue and the Europeanisation of Trade Unionism in the 1990s’, doctoral dissertation (1997), ARENA-report 5/97/Fafo- report 238; Making Solidarity Work? The Norwegian Labour Market Model in Transition (ed. with A.H. Steen, 1997); An Emerging Island? ETUC, Social Dialogue and the Europeanisation of Trade Unions in the 1990s (1999); and ‘EMU: Re-nationalization and Europeaniza- tion of Industrial Relations – Two Sides of the Same Coin?’, in A. Martin and G. Ross (eds), EMU and the European Model of Society (forthcoming). viii Notes on the Contributors ix Justin Greenwood is Jean Monnet Professor of European Public Policy at the Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen. His career re- search specialism is ‘interest representation in the European Union’. Books include Representing Interests in the European Union (1997), Organised Interests and the New Global Order (ed. with Henry Jacek, 1999), Collective Action in the European Union: Interests and the New Politics of Associability (ed. with Mark Aspinwall, 1997), European Casebook on Business Alliances (ed., 1995); and Organised Interests and the European Community (ed. with Jurgen Grote and Karsten Ronit, 1992). He has also published articles in journals such as Political Studies, Parliamentary Affairs, the Journal of Common Market Studies, West European Politics, the International Journal of Public Administra- tion, and the European Journal of Political Research, and is the editor of Current Politics and Economics of Europe, the only EU studies jour- nal to be published in the United States. His work has been funded, inter alia, by the European Community/Union, the British Acad- emy, the Carnegie Foundation, and firms and business associations, and he currently leads the International Political Science Associ- ation (IPSA) Research Committee on Politics and Business, and the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) Standing Group on European Level Interest Representation. Daniela Obradovic teaches in the Faculties of International Law and Political Science at the University of Amsterdam. Her main publications deal with European institutional law and the role of interest groups in the formation, implementation and enforcement of European Union policies. Jelle Visser is professor of empirical sociology and chair of sociol- ogy of labour and organisation at the University of Amsterdam, where he directs the Centre for Research on European Societies and Industrial Relations (CESAR). He is also associated with the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, Germany,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Extraterritoriality” -- Useful Guidepost Or Convenient Buzzword Used to Avoid Meaningful Analysis?
    Cv039 Determining What Rules Apply When the Union-Employer Relationship Extends Beyond the United States: “Extraterritoriality” -- Useful Guidepost or Convenient Buzzword Used to Avoid Meaningful Analysis? by Stephen B. Moldof (Cohen, Weiss & Simon LLP, New York, New York) Globalization necessarily impacts the employer-employee relationship. As U.S. and foreign companies forge or deepen their relationships, and as they redistribute their services and work across borders, it no longer is sufficient to look to a single nation’s domestic laws, practices and cultures to determine the rules that will attach to the employment relationship or to the relative rights and obligations of employers and unions. Instead, a host of complex issues are presented in deciding which laws and rules will govern, how disagreements regarding coverage will be resolved, and, more broadly, how interested parties will be able to enforce their alleged rights. In the airline industry, expanded globalization is reflected in, among other things, the following: The forging of relationships or “alliances,” including more deep-routed “joint ventures,” through which U.S.-certificated carriers and foreign carriers have coordinated frequent flyer programs; airport lounges; marketing of flights; pricing; scheduling; revenues and/or maintenance. Code-sharing of international flights that permit a single flight to be marketed as if it was the flight of several different carriers of different nations. Acquisition by carriers of ownership interests in carriers headquartered in other nations.1 As a result of these and other globalization developments, it is increasingly difficult to classify flight operations or activities as “belonging” to individual nations. This blurring of the significance of national boundaries predictably injects a whole host of complex issues that one does not encounter in dealing with domestic disputes.
    [Show full text]
  • Agreement Between Air Canada and the Air Canada Pilots Association As Follows
    AGREEMENT BETWEEN AIR CANADA AND THE AIR CANADA PILOTS ASSOCIATION Effective September 30, 2017 – September 29, 2020 13230 (06) Amendments Amendment Date Articles Amended ORIGINAL July 30, 2012 - 1 December 5, 2012 Article 20, LOU 74 & LOU 75 2 September 30, 2014 Articles 1-3, 5, 7, 10-14, 16- 21 & 23-32 LOUs 72, 74, 75 & 78-83 LOCs 56, 61-64 Appendix B 3 September 30, 2016 Articles 3, 12 & LOU 74 4 September 30, 2017 Articles 1-3, 5, 7 & 10-33 LOUs 74, 84 and 85 LOCs 60, 65 – 72 Appendix G Amendments i Page intentionally left blank. Amendments ii Table of Contents ARTICLE 1 – Recognition & Scope .................................................................................... 1 1.01 Recognition ......................................................................................................... 1 1.02 Scope .................................................................................................................. 1 1.03 Definitions ........................................................................................................... 1 1.04 Employment Security ........................................................................................... 3 1.05 Merger or Change of Control ............................................................................... 4 1.06 Divestiture and Successorship ............................................................................. 5 1.07 Single Employer Obligations / Separate Entities .................................................. 5 1.08 Codesharing .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace Industry Characterization Report
    Aerospace Industry Characterization September 30, 2018 Submitted by: ICF Submitted to: Contract #: (EP-C-16-020) Work Assignment: # (1-02) Aerospace Industry Characterization Table of Contents I. Preface .............................................................................................................................................. 4 II. Report Analysis Methodology ....................................................................................................... 5 1. Data Sources ................................................................................................................................ 5 1.1.3 Benchmark databases, industry conferences, and latest industry news & announcements .......................................................................................................................... 6 2. Benchmarks to Comparable Report ............................................................................................. 6 III. Introduction to Aerospace Production Market ............................................................................ 8 1.1 Commercial Air Transport ................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Business and General Aviation ........................................................................................... 8 1.3 Military ................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Civil Rotary Wing ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Eastern Provincial Airways-Canadian Airline Pilots
    PROCEEDINGS llventy-fifth Annual Meeting Theme: "Beyond Deregulation: Let Freedom Ring!" October 22-24, 1984 Parker House Boston, MA Volume XXV • Number 1 1984 T R F TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH FORUM in conjunction with CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION 4 RESEARCH FORUM 403 The Eastern Provincial Airways— Canadian Airline Pilots Association Industrial Dispute, 1982-84 by Robert A. Ellison* INTRODUCTION leading to significant efficiencies; considerable im- provements in labor productivity; and substantial On May 10, 1984, the Canadian Minister of stimulation of new demand.' In the past five years Transport, the Hon. Lloyd Axworthy, announced airlines operating in the deregulated U.S. environ- a"New Canadian Air Policy'! This new Canadian ment flew 20.907o more revenue passenger miles while air policy represents the first phase of a long term overall Canadian air traffic declined by 2.7070.9 One plan to liberalize economic regulation of the airline specific objective of the new policy is to counter the industry. The announcement came six years after seepage of passenger traffic via U.S. gateways just the Airline Deregulation Act of 19782 in the United across the border. States. During the past three years various agencies The central thrust of the new policy is to invigorate and groups, mainly governmental, had called for the industry and provide a stimulus to growth the deregulation of the Canadian airline industry through encouraging innovation and improving the Including the Economic Council of Canada,' the airline industry's efficiency and productivity. Airline Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs,4 the managements, no longer hampered to the same ex- House of Commons Standing Committee on tent by regulatory constraints, would be freer to Transport,' and the Director of Investigation and manage.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT to the PRESIDENT by EMERGENCY BOARD NO
    REPORT to THE PRESIDENT by EMERGENCY BOARD NO. 242 SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER DATED DECEMBER 1, 2007 ESTABLISHING AN EMERGENCY BOARD TO INVESTIGATE A DISPUTE BETWEEN NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK) AND BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES; INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS; INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS & AEROSPACE WORKERS; BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD SIGNALMEN; JOINT COUNCIL OF CARMEN, COMPRISED OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL UNION/BROTHERHOOD RAILWAY CARMEN DIVISION AND THE TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA; AMERICAN TRAIN DISPATCHERS ASSOCIATION; NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF FIREMEN & OILERS/SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION; AND TRANSPORTATION COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL UNION – AMERICAN RAILWAY & AIRWAY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION AND SECTION 10 OF THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT, AS AMENDED _____ (National Mediation Board Case Nos. A-13080, A-13098, A-13125, A-13185, A-13330, A-13340, A-13370, A-13395, A-13435) _____ WASHINGTON, D.C. December 30, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. CREATION OF THE EMERGENCY BOARD.............................................5 II. PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE ........................................................................5 A. Amtrak ................................................................................................5 B. The Labor Organizations ....................................................................6 III. HISTORY OF THE DISPUTE .......................................................................7 IV. ACTIVITIES OF THE
    [Show full text]
  • Is a Crisis Coming in Regional Aviation? by Matthew Bennett
    Is a Crisis Coming in Regional Aviation? By Matthew Bennett One of the most successful sectors of the aviation industry over the past decade has been regional jet services. In North America, regional airlines such as SkyWest and Mesa Air, which serve low-density markets, have been embraced by market analysts and shareholders for their high margins and stable earnings. Their market strength has been driven by the versatility of regional jets, cost discipline, and the advent of creative risk-sharing partnerships with major airlines. The economics of these businesses, however, are poised to shift dramatically with the introduction of larger regional jets. Major airlines and their regional affiliates who do not consider the implications now may later face the consequences of inaction. A Great Takeoff Regional jets have proven to be ideal for flying on routes that are too “thin” to support traditional narrowbody aircraft (e.g., B737) service and, as a result, regional aviation capacity has expanded rapidly. In 1997, there were fewer than 150 regional jets in North America. By 2002, the number of regional jets had grown to over 1,000, and more than 2,000 are expected to be in the air by 2006 (Exhibit 1). Exhibit 1 US Regional Jet Population Growth (Number of planes) 2,500 2,000 19% CAGR 11% 16% 1,500 22% 28% 1,000 33% 48% CAGR 33% 500 43% 57% 79% 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005E 2006E Source: BACK Aviation, UBS report August 2003. What sets regional carriers apart, however, has been their consistent profitability.
    [Show full text]
  • Collective Agreement
    COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT • Cl ® READY FOR THE WORKDAY BETWEEN: TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION 847 (hereinafter referred to as the Union) And: CINTAS CANADA LIMnED (hereinafter referred to as the Company) January 1, 2018 - December 31, 2020 1 INDEX ARTICLE DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 PURPOSE.......................... .. ...... ................................................. 2 2 UNION RECOGNmON & SCOPE.............................. .. ............... 2 3 UNION SECURITY....... .. .......... ... .............................. ......... ..... .. ... 3 4 MANAGEMENT RIGHTS........... .............................................. 4 5 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE... ....... ................. ..... ............ ... .... .. ...... 5 6 ARBITRATION.................. .. ................................................ .. .. ..... 7 7 REPRESENTATION ............. ............................................. .. ........ 8 8 NO STRIKES/NO LOCKOUTS .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9 9 STATUTORY HOLIDAYS..... ................................. ........ ...... ......... 9 10 SALARIES .. ... .... ..... .. .... .... .. .... ............ .. ...... .. ... .................. ... .. .. ... 10 11 VACATIONS WITH PAY........ .. .. ...... .. ................ ....... .. .. ....... ....... 11 12 SENIORITY ... .. .. .. .... ...... ... .... .. .. .. ... ... .. .... ..... ... ... .. .. ... .... .. 13 13 HOURS OF WORK & OVERTIME .. .. ......... ..... ... ........ .. .. .... .... ....... 16 14 LEAVES OF ABSENCE... ............. ... .. .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Airline Mergers, Acquisitions and Bankruptcies: Will the Collective Bargaining Agreement Survive Jonni Walls
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 56 | Issue 3 Article 7 1991 Airline Mergers, Acquisitions and Bankruptcies: Will the Collective Bargaining Agreement Survive Jonni Walls Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Jonni Walls, Airline Mergers, Acquisitions and Bankruptcies: Will the Collective Bargaining Agreement Survive, 56 J. Air L. & Com. 847 (1991) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol56/iss3/7 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. AIRLINE MERGERS, ACQUISITIONS AND BANKRUPTCIES: WILL THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT SURVIVE? JONNI WALLS I. INTRODUCTION AIRLINE DEREGULATION has produced a record number of mergers and bankruptcies in the airline in- dustry, turning the industry into a "national oligopoly."' Since deregulation, over 200 scheduled carriers have gone out of business, mainly because of mergers, acquisi- tions and bankruptcies. 2 As a result, the top eight carri- ers control over 90 percent of the market. Since 1978 more than 120 airlines have filed various types of bank- ruptcy proceedings.' The flurry of merger activity that began almost immediately upon enactment of deregula- tion 5 continues to be extremely vigorous. Between 1985 and 1987 over twenty-five mergers took place, and 1986 1 P. DEMPSEY, THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF DEREGULATION 81 (1989); Dempsey, Airline Deregulation and Laissez Faire Mythology: Economic Theory in Turbulence, 56J. AIR L. & CoM.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Rights and Impact Bargaining
    MANAGEMENT RIGHTS AND IMPACT BARGAINING Presented by: KATHERINE HESSE KEVIN BRESNAHAN MICHAEL MACCARO MURPHY, HESSE TOOMEY & LEHANE, LLP OCTOBER 29, 2010 578449 © 2010 Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane LLP. All Rights 1 Reserved. Agenda To discuss briefly the concept and scope of “inherent” management rights To provide an overview of an employer’s bargaining obligations pursuant to M.G.L. c. 150E To discuss the differences between mandatory, permissive, and illegal subjects of bargaining 578449 © 2010 Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane LLP. All Rights 2 Reserved. Agenda To review the difference between “decisional” bargaining and “effects” or “impact” bargaining and what that obligation entails To take a look at when “impasse” is reached and when the employer can implement its decisions To discuss defenses that an employer may have to a failure to bargain charge To analyze some current impact bargaining issues that are facing employers 578449 © 2010 Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane LLP. All Rights 3 Reserved. Management Rights: Introduction Generally speaking, the employer retains the right to manage its organization except as restricted by a collective bargaining agreement. A management rights clause contained in a collective bargaining agreement may reserve specific rights to an employer. A zipper or scope clause can affect when either party can force the other to bargain mid-contract. An evergreen clause (about which more later) can limit the employer’s right to implement changes. 578449 © 2010 Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane LLP. All Rights 4 Reserved. Legal Background: The Duty to Bargain The duty to bargain is found in Section 6 of M.G.L. c. 150E It provides that an employer and union must: Meet at reasonable times (including meetings in advance of the employer’s budget- making process), and Negotiate in good faith about wages, hours, standards of productivity and performance, and any other terms and conditions of employment.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (8Mb)
    A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of Warwick Permanent WRAP URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/110022 Copyright and reuse: This thesis is made available online and is protected by original copyright. Please scroll down to view the document itself. Please refer to the repository record for this item for information to help you to cite it. Our policy information is available from the repository home page. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected] warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications TH E BRITISH LIBRARY DOCUMENT SUPPLY CENTRE THE POLITICAL APPARATUSES OF PRODUCTION: GENERATION AND RESOLUTION OF INDUSTRIAL CONFLICT ---------------- IN CANADA AND BRITAIN AUTHOR LARRY HAIVEN INSTITUTION University of Warwick and DATE I o t a ’S Attention is drawn to the fact that the copyright of this thesis rests with its_ author. This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author and that no information derived from it may be published without the author’s prior written consent. THE BRITISH LIBRARY DOCUM ENT SUPfLY CENTRE ~ n ~ n cm* mi! RÉDUCTION X ________21 Cflro. ^ THE POLITICAL APPARATUSES OF PRODUCTION: GENERATION AND RESOLUTION OF INDUSTRIAL CONFLICT IN CANADA AND BRITAIN LA R R Y H AIV EN \ A Thesis Submitted in Fulfillment of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy ■; 9. c t <> o e School of Industrial and December, 1988 Business Studies University of Warwick SUMMARY This study explores the subject of cross-national variations in industrial conflict, looking specifically at a 'matched set' of factories in Canada and Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Developments in Aviation Law George S
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 63 | Issue 1 Article 4 1997 Recent Developments in Aviation Law George S. Petkoff Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation George S. Petkoff, Recent Developments in Aviation Law, 63 J. Air L. & Com. 67 (1997) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol63/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN AVIATION LAW GEORGE S. PETKOFF*tt TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EMPLOYMENT LAW .............................. 69 A. RAILWAY LABOR ACT ............................ 69 B. AILIN-E DEREGULATION ACT PREEMPTION ....... 77 C. DuE PROCESS ................................... 79 D. LABOR LAWS .................................... 81 E. FAMILY AND MEDICAL LAVE ACT OF 1993 ...... 82 F. RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ........................ 84 II. NEGLIGENCE ..................................... 87 A. AIRCRAFT CRASHES .............................. 87 * George Petkoff is a trial lawyer devoted to the defense of aviation and insur- ance cases. He is the managing partner at the law firm of Petkoff and Lancaster, in Memphis, Tennessee. Mr. Petkoff is past chairman of the Aerospace Commit- tee of the Defense Research and Trial Lawyers Association (1989-91); past chair- man of the Aviation Insurance Committee of the Federation of Insurance and Corporate Counsel (1990); and past president (1987) and chairman of the board (1988) of the Tennessee Defense Lawyers Association. Currently, he is the Direc- tor of the Attorneys' Section of the Aviation Insurance Association.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018-21 CA Quality Control Agreement QCCC
    QUALITY CONTROL AGREEMENT Between: NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING COMPANIES SIGNATORY HERETO - And - QUALITY CONTROL COUNCIL OF CANADA (QCCC) - And - NDT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION EffeCtive May 1, 2018 to April 30, 2021 Rev. 2019-02-20 i Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE 1 RECOGNITION ..................................................................................... 2 ARTICLE 2 SCOPE .................................................................................................. 3 ARTICLE 3 UNION SECURITY ............................................................................... 4 ARTICLE 4 JURISDICTION OF WORK ................................................................... 6 ARTICLE 5 UNION REPRESENTATION AND ACCESS TO JOBS ........................ 7 ARTICLE 6 WORK DAY AND WORK WEEK .......................................................... 8 ARTICLE 7 OVERTIME ........................................................................................... 8 ARTICLE 8 NORTHERN WORK .............................................................................. 9 ARTICLE 9 EXPENSES, TRAVEL, STANDBY AND DRIVING TIME ...................... 9 ARTICLE 10 CLASSIFICATIONS, WAGES, AND PREMIUMS ............................... 11 ARTICLE 11 REPORTING FOR WORK – SEE APPENDIX FOR EACH REGION . 13 ARTICLE 12 RECOGNIZED HOLIDAYS ................................................................. 13 ARTICLE 13 VACATION PAY .................................................................................. 13 ARTICLE 14 PAY DAY ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]