Collective agreements in Germany are legally binding, which is accepted by the population and does not worry them.  [Failed verification] While in Britain there was (and still is) an attitude of „she and us“ in labour relations, the situation is very different in post-war Germany and other northern European countries. Germany has a much broader spirit of cooperation between the social partners. For more than 50 years, German workers have been legally represented on company boards.  Together, management and workers are considered „social partners“.  Certain types of employment guarantees are extended to persons involved in collective agreement negotiations. These workers are not necessarily the representatives of the trade unions. The law also contains special guarantees for the employment of union members (e.B.g. in some cases it is necessary to obtain the opinion of a trade union before dismissal; enhanced protection of the trade union leader and his deputies, etc.). Section 16. Guarantees in the event of dissolution of the company. In the case of the dissolution of the enterprise, the amount of the worker`s right under the collective agreement is deducted from the assets of the dissolved enterprise before those due to the State budget, banks and other creditors. The amount of the sums used to satisfy the demands of the collective of workers under the collective agreement shall be fixed and distributed among the sectors of the undertaking and on behalf of each worker by the winding-up committee, in agreement with the trade unions or other representative bodies approved by the employees who are signatories to the collective agreement and its supplements.
Trade unions or other representative bodies approved by workers are entitled to organise meetings and meetings, to picket and to organise demonstrations outside working hours and without prejudice to the activities of the undertaking, in order to support their demands made during the negotiations with regard to the preparation, the conclusion or revision of a collective agreement or agreement. Formal changes since 1990 preserve distinctions (although these have lost most of their broad social functions and have become increasingly residual). However, they add at least three other regulatory flows: (a) (registered) agreements with an employer with trade unions; (b) (registered) agreements with an employer with a group of workers organised outside trade unions; and (c) registered individual contracts. These additional regulatory flows are directed towards individual enterprises and have introduced into the regulatory system an essential element of decentralisation, as well as an essential element of the enlarged employers` power. Laboratory government favoured the addition of the first two streams, arguing that they constituted a new system of corporate negotiations to complement traditional distinctions. In its Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Act 1996, the coalition government revised and strengthened the provisions on non-union agreements and introduced the third stream of individual contracts registered as Australian Workplace Agreements (AWA). The 2005 labour legislation consolidates this framework and attempts to extend the preferred electricity of registered individual agreements. In addition, it uses corporate power in the Constitution to expand the federal system at the expense of state systems. This expands the scope of the federal system to about 80 percent of all employees and supplants some of the more generous provisions and procedures that are available through public procurement and agreements, as well as through state legislation.
. . .