1. Collective bargaining has a price. There are many costs that are often not taken into account when reviewing the contract negotiation process. Workers may be involved in union negotiations, but may be forced to take time off. There is the cost of lost productivity because the two sides come together to get an agreement. Many CBAs are long and require reading time, which further reduces the availability of labour. Employer representatives are also less productive because they are part of this process. The sentence therefore implies „collective bargaining on a contract between, on the one hand, the representatives of management and, on the other hand, those of the employees.“ It also implies an initial but flexible position, from which either party to the negotiations can withdraw graciously to a compromise position. In collective bargaining, it is usually a matter of giving and receiving, because a rigid, hard or rigid position does not lead to a compromise solution. 3. It prevents employees from striking. If there are big problems between workers and employers that are not resolved, it is a popular option for workers to strike. These measures hinder exploitation and thus paralyze businesses.
At the end of the day, it is consumers who suffer. In collective bargaining, workers do not have to stop working because they have representatives working for their benefits. In addition, collective bargaining also protects employers. Collective bargaining will result in an agreement. And that is generally agreed when negotiations are beneficial to both sides. In collective bargaining, employers are also protected in some way because the activity is not fully affected. The idea of collective bargaining arose from labour disputes and the growth of the labour movement and was first fuelled by Samuel Crompers in the United States. In India, the first collective agreement was concluded in 1920, using the example of Mahatma Gandhi, to settle relations between a group of employers and their textile workers in Ahmadabad. 1. It is vulnerable to inequality.
Critics of the collective agreement say it can cause employers or workers to get less of what they earn.