The Comparative Research On Collective Bargaining In Public And Private Department Of America

With the development of labor relations and the change of the socio-economic circumstances, the employees and the employers produced the disputes inevitably. The existence of labor disputes affecting the economic development and the interests of both parties, so both employers and employees need for a neutral and effective way to resolve their labor dispute urgently, so collective bargaining emerged to feed this need. Collective bargaining appeared in the private department, in the following decades, collective bargaining in the private department became maturely. Later, when the public department employees began to realize that their own should have the same rights as private department employees to improve and maintain their own interests, therefore, collective bargaining began to introduce into the public department, and its collective bargaining has some similarities with the private department's, but they still have some differences. The results of America's research in collective bargaining are more abundant both in theory and practice; therefore we selected America as a representative to work over the development of collective bargaining in public and private department. This article will focus on the use of comparative method; select the body of collective bargaining, the scope of collective bargaining, the process of collective bargaining and the effect of government as four dimensions of collective bargaining on the U.S. public and private departments to comparative and analysis of the situation, in order to draw concrete conclusions. This mainly refers to public department is both the federal and state administrative organs at all levels of government; the private department includes a variety of for-profit businesses and organizations.The body of collective bargaining, the representative of the public and private department's employees was the trade union which represents the interests of employees, employer representatives were the main government and private employers. The reason for this situation is the rapid development of the U.S. economy and fierce competition between the private department from an economic perspective, which making the lack of stability of the main private department bargaining. From a political perspective, the political systems of"separation of powers"in America making public department employers pay more attention to their own political interests. The scope of collective bargaining, the legal gives a clear provision of the scope which field public and private employees are allowed or prohibited to bargaining. The difference is that public department employees are prohibited to bargaining the wages and other economic areas, but the scope of the private department are much more abroad. Many subject can take into collective bargaining unless the illegal ones. The reason for this result is that the U.S. Constitution's protection of the rights of public employees on the one hand; the public need to maintain the stability on the other hand. The process of collective bargaining, the public and private department are similar in the process of collective bargaining essentially, both of them are covered by the confirm of the bargaining body, formal process of bargaining, the resolve of the impasse during the bargaining, the outcome of bargaining and strikes, but differ in practice, such as recognition of qualification of the private department need to go through the election and authorization, while the public department exists the case of automatic recognition of the body's qualifications; public department collective bargaining in need of public supervision; public department employees have a greater impact on the outcome of the bargaining, and so on; Most importantly, the attitude of the federal government and some state governments to strike is negative. Caused this difference is due to the different structure of public and private departments; the different operation of public and private departments; the different service character of public and private departments; the different interests of public and private departments. The affect of government, the government protects the basic rights of the public and private department employees, while limiting some of the special public sector, such as intelligence and national security-sector employees participate in collective bargaining; government more involved in the process of collective bargaining in the public department, while encouraging the private department through a neutral third method to resolve disputes. The reasons for this situation including that in order to maintain government stability and the credibility of elected officials, the government avoid becoming the body of collective bargaining. According to the economic crisis, the U.S. government's intervention in the private department is necessary, at the same time, the free economy need the government not to intervene in the private department too frequently, which gradually formed a government indirectly affection pattern.The conclusions help us to understand collective bargaining and its different modes in public and private departments more profoundly , which can help China to make a more consummate practice in collective bargaining. Meanwhile, with the deepening of trust, we will understand collective bargaining more abundantly as the research deeply, and use it better in the future practice.