5780447578

140 Z6(g*łrw Hafti

considcrable phyrical and meotal cffort is dccidcd by thc cmploycr actio* togcthcr wilh cmployccs’ rcpxcscntativcs clcctcd in aocordance wilh tk procedurę followcd in Ibe undertaking in question and upon consultatiom wilh thc physician taking carc of thc cmployccs and taking Account of tk need lo ensure hcnllh and safety at work to cmployccs (Art. 15ł^r § 1 L.C)t

-    If thcrc is no iradc union organisation in an undertaking, Ihe cmplojer concludcs company pension agreement with cmployccs' representation ap-pointed in accordancc with thc procedurę followcd by the empłoyer is qucstion. The authorisation lo negotiate with respect lo thc subject in qucstion espires 24 monlhs aRer thc representation has bccn appomted oc carlicr if al least half of its members havc ceased to work for thc cmploycr or if a tradc union organisation is established (Art. 11 § 3-6 of thc Aa cf 20 Apnl 2004 on pension schemes for cmployccs);

-    Rules and conditions of ihe usc of scrviccs and benefits financed by thc corporatc sodal benefits fund arc dccidcd by thc cmploycr in ihe reki of procedurę. If thcrc is no tradc union organisation in the enterprise tk empłoyer agrees thc rules of proceduro with thc cmploycr electcd by tk staff to represent their inlcrcsts (Art. 8 § 2 of the Act of 4 March 1994 oo work place social benefits fund**).

The abovc mentioncd cascs of legał authorisation of non-union represena-tivcs of cmployccs to conduct collectise bargaining highlight thc proviśonai naturę of the representation which obvious!y is thcrc to play the role of aa artificial limb until cmployccs' representation question is propcrly solvcd foc the purposc of collcctivc bargaining where tradc unions arc absent from u undertaking. Neserthcless, such an arrangement for cmployccs’ representatioa as a party to collcctive ncgotiations and a porty to colkctivc agreement shouH be criticiscd. Doubts relate in particular to thc fact that in most cascs tk proceduro for appointing thc rcproscn(ativcs is rcfcrrcd to as the „appointia; following thc proceduro adopted by the cmploycr” with no rcscrvation that cmployccs should clcct their representation. Provisions do not offer any legii protcction to cmployccs who represent thc staff. Thus I share thc vic* presenled in thc doctrinc that it is hard to coasider such employccs’ reprcscata-tion a genuinc representation of colłective rights and interests.⁴’ We may rui thc thesis that duc to negotiating weakness of thcsc rcprcscntativc$, tk legislator ullowed fictious bargaining. Particularly strange is thc ability givtn to thcsc rcprcsentativcs to concludc agrccmcnts which dccply interferc with cmployccs’ interests, such us agrccmcnts to suspend thc company intenul rcgulalions (mainly pay rcgulations) or thc provisioas of cmpłoymcnt contrach.

“ I. Cif l_ 19%, No. 70, Hem 335 ar amendcd

" J. Stelins, "Charakter prawny poriwummta o Momwmm mniej korryilnjch wino-Łów ł» Irminie ma " fl.egal naturę of the agreement to apply Jera favowrablc terma of cup lojTKOt], PoAsmo r Prano 2003, No. 9, p. 76

en. PROSPKCTS FOR KMPLOVEES’ REPRESENTATION IN CDLLECTIYE BARGAINING WITHIN THE FIRM

L Importance of a proper cmployccs’ represeotatioa witfain tbc firm in thc

light of thc trend to deceotraliiatioa of collccti>c bargaining

Deccntralisation of collcclivc bargaining m Foland is obvious.¹ Suficcs to say that in 2005 thcrc wre only 14 national Ievd cołlcctivc labour igreements with 10 mdustry-widc ones. Besides thcrc wcrc 123 multi-cmp-Joyer collectivc agrccmcnts concludcd by mu nici pali tics and cotnmuncs and covenng thc non-ieaching staff employed in cducational establishment¹ (121 igrccmcnts) and thosc employed in public Utilities, housmg and social wdfarc fcctow (2 agrccmcnts).⁴’

Under such circumstanccs thc importance of thc appropnatc shaping of anployccs’ representation in collcctivc bargaining in undertakings is unqucs-Uonable.

t\\ OIIIF.R REMARKS OF THE NATIONAL REPORTFR CONCERNLNG THE SUBJKCT Ot THL GENERAL REPORT

The above presented legał rcgulations conccrning thc representation of anployccs in collcctivc bargaining in undertakings in Poland cali for somc wmmary rcmarks:

1)    For cmployecs¹ representation in itn undertaking thc fundamenta! problem focuses around the inconsistcncy of thc statutory model of thc representation imposed upon them with the needs of smal! and medium si/cd eoterprises. The problem could be solvcd if Uadc unions could decide upon thc form of representation at thc lcvd of an undertaking and by giving up making the prcsencc of trade unions dependent on thc number mcm bers. In smali enterprises in which the thrcshold of 10 members is in most cascs wuttainablc. tradc union delegates wouid be a morę approprialc lypc of representation.⁴⁴ Their capacity to represent anployccs in collcctivc matters to which thc principlc of generał representation applics should be conditioncd by thc support of thc majority of thc stad cxprcsscd in a sccrct ballot.

2)    The way unions’ rcprescntativcness is rcgulated in an undertaking is aoonsisicnt with the rcality of colJcctivc craploymcnt relations in Poland. The

1

   For rcasofis tet Z. II a jo, “Co4kctivt Labour Agrrementt...”. pp 191-206 and literaturę Rferred co.

¹¹ Source. inforicaiion rcceivod by ihe Aut hor from the Mioktry of Labour aod Sooal hAcy (kun: OOP I 4332.3g.MK 06 Ref. No. 1169,06 of 22 March 2006).

*    Set: 7. Majo. Porre/a p/anni gtrocoHidka. pp. £-7.