Ambiguous Law
The Right to Bargain for Job Security in Collective Agreements
Abstract
This article argues that the current provisions which govern job security clauses in collective agreements are ambiguous and problematic. Specifically, the ‘permitted matters’ law is unclear and inconsistently interpreted. Cases which concern almost identical job security clauses have received different treatments. The requirement to consider ‘the interests of employees and employers’ when arbitrating workplace determinations is also ambiguous. It is unclear whether employees’ job security is an interest that should be taken into account, and if so, how much weight should be placed on this consideration. This article argues that the law should be amended to address these ambiguities and to ensure more predictable and fairer outcomes. In contrast with the current provisions, the abolished rules ‘prohibited content’ were clearer and less ambiguous.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).