공무원 노동조합의 단체교섭 및 단체협약에 관한 연구

The Act on the Establishment and Operation, etc. of Public Officials’ Trade Unions(hereinafter “APOTU”) has been enforced since January 28, 2006. The purpose of this paper is to research into legal problems about collective bargaining and collective agreement of public officials’ trade unions. The union parties of collective bargaining can be enlarged to unions which have substantial requirements, though they don’t have establishment notification from government. Branch offices of unions can have unique collective bargaining rights if they act independently above organizing unit(minimum limits) which prescribed in APOTU. The scope of collective bargaining duty on government can include not only the matters on that it has finally decisive power, but also the matters that it has in jurisdiction. The negotiator party representing government will be the Minister of Government Administration in principle as in main countries which have public officials’ trade unions. The limitation on scope of persons to whom the union may delegate negotiating authority should be abrogated. In connection with bargaining matters, APOTU prescribes pay, welfare and other working conditions. It shows a special feature which has pay negotiation as subject compared with that of main countries. According to APOTU, matters concerning policy decisions made under the authority of the state or local governments, and matters concerning management and operation, such as the exercising of the right to appointment are excluded from collective bargaining. However policy decision or management and operation matters which are directly related to working conditions can be collective bargaining subjects. In this paper, the concrete judicial precedents on this matter in Japan have been presented. Unlike in the private sector, working conditions for public officials are determined and affected by laws and budgets. Therefore, the effect of matters agreed upon as a result of collective bargaining can be hardly made to prevail that of laws and budgets. Accordingly APOTU prescribes, if some contents of collective agreements are stipulated in laws, regulations and budgets, they are considered ineffective. But compliance with what is agreed upon is guaranteed by ensuring that the government’ representatives carry out the contents in good faith. The more concrete measures should be complemented referring those of Japan system.