The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
10
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
10-15
10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue04-03
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
09 February 2025
ACCEPTED
12 March 2025
PUBLISHED
08 April 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue04 2025
CITATION
Rzaeva Guzalya Turgunbayevna. (2025). The role of trade unions in legal
support of collective agreements. The American Journal of Political Science
Law and Criminology, 7(04), 10
–
15.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue04-03
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
The role of trade unions in
legal support of collective
agreements
Rzaeva Guzalya Turgunbayevna
PhD student at TSUL, Uzbekistan
Abstract:
In the article below, scientists are given such
concepts as “collective agreement”, “collective
negotiations”. In
addition, the place of trade unions in
matters of including a collective agreement at an
enterprise is revealed, and the stages of collective
negotiations between the employer and employees of
the organization regarding the conclusion, amendment
and operation of a collective agreement are listed, and
different versions of scientists about who are the parties
to the collective agreement are discussed. In addition,
the author tried to describe and give examples to
disclose the subject, types and purposes of including
collective agreements, those benefits that may be
provided for by the norms of this document; for this
purpose, the methodology of comparative analysis of
collective agreements of the Republic of Uzbekistan was
used (indicating statistics on the conclusion of collective
agreements in the republic) with other foreign
countries. International labor standards in the field of
labor are considered, citing the norms of the
Conventions of the International Labor Organization
(ratified by the Republic of Uzbekistan), regulating
issues of collective bargaining and freedom to conclude
a collective agreement at the enterprise. In the
conclusion, the author gives several proposals for
improving legislation in this direction.
Keywords:
Collective agreement, collective bargaining,
trade union, representative div of workers,
International Labor Organization (ILO).
Introduction:
Collective negotiations and the conclusion
of collective agreements are defined as the main form
of social partnership, which is aimed, on the one hand,
at achieving social peace, and on the other, at regulating
labor and other directly related relations, and
establishing working conditions.[1].
This article will highlight some issues related to the
participation of a trade union in concluding a collective
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
11
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
agreement. At different stages of state development,
the collective agreement performed, with varying
success, only a production and distribution function.
Thus, it differed significantly from similar agreements
in countries with developed market economies, where,
as a result of long historical evolution, the collective
agreement is characterized by a regulatory and
protective function.
The concept and nature of a collective agreement have
always been the central topic of research by labor
scholars. For example, L.S. Tal believed that a collective
agreement is a specific agreement not related to civil
law contracts. He gave it a detailed description: a
collective agreement is an agreement between a group
or union of workers and individual employers or their
union, establishing the content of future labor
agreements in the event of their conclusion by these
employers and members of the group or union [2 p.3].
I.S. Voitinsky made a huge contribution to the
development of the doctrine of collective agreements.
He developed theoretical models of the concept and
content of collective agreements and was able to
formulate well-founded conclusions about collective
agreements, which are still relevant today. Thus,
according to the teachings of I.S. Voitinsky, a collective
agreement establishes labor standards, but at the
same time, the subject of the collective agreement is
divided into a team (group or trade union) and an
individual (an individual worker). A collective
agreement creates a certain form of contractual
relations, but its legal consequences fall not on the
person (group or legal entity) that is the counterparty
to the agreement, but on individuals, the circle of
which is not defined and who do not enter into legal
relations with the employer under this agreement.
Also, a collective agreement, according to I.S.
Voitinsky, is only a preliminary agreement determining
the content of those agreements that may be
concluded in the future with an individual employee.
At the same time, the collective agreement establishes
the minimum rights of workers, and deviation from its
terms in favor of workers is allowed. He also indicated
that an unregistered collective agreement has the
force of only a unilateral promise, since registration
gives it the status of a source of law [3 p.116-187].
Until the 1930s, collective agreements played a dual
role: they developed and supplemented the provisions
of labor legislation, and also regulated social relations
not regulated by labor legislation. In the 1930s, the
importance of collective agreements significantly
decreased, and from 1935 to 1947, they were not
concluded at all [4 p.162].
The restoration of collective bargaining practice was
associated with the adoption of the “General Provisions
on
the
Procedure
for
Concluding
Collective
Agreements,” adopted on November 27, 1987 in the
USSR. The imposition of the structure of the content of
collective agreements “from above”
was eliminated,
and their registration was abolished [5 p.166].
To sum up, we can say that a collective agreement is a
very necessary local act at the level of an organization,
which discloses the roles of the employer and the
representative div of employees, regulates their
relations, there are procedures for reconciling emerging
contradictions and, most importantly, ways to
overcome difficulties in protecting the labor rights of
employees.
In the history of independent Uzbekistan, issues of
concluding, determining the content of a collective
agreement, and making changes to it are regulated by
the norms of the Labor Code of the Republic of
Uzbekistan (hereinafter LC RUz).
According to Article 65 of the Labor Code of the Republic
of Uzbekistan, a collective agreement is understood to
be a legal act on labor that regulates individual labor
relations and directly related social relations in an
organization or individual entrepreneur and is
concluded by employees represented by their
representatives and the employer.
METHODS
During the study, the following methods of cognition
were widely used: analysis, synthesis, logic, comparative
legal analysis, observation, generalization, system
analysis. In addition, data from the Federation of Trade
Unions of Uzbekistan on statistics of collective
agreements in organizations were studied.
RESULTS
By means of a collective agreement it is possible to find
a balance of interests of both employees and
employers. Therefore, it is not surprising that in the
conditions of reforming labor legislation, the collective
agreement comes to the forefront and becomes the
main document, where higher standards will be
established in comparison with those that will be fixed
in the Labor Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Unfortunately, today's statistics on the conclusion of
collective agreements (especially in commercial
organizations) show that it is very difficult to achieve the
desired model of labor relations regulation (within the
framework of social partnership, concluding collective
agreements). Moreover, the indicators show that in
commercial organizations the percentage of collective
agreements concluded is several times lower than in the
public sector. These statistics are given in Appendix [6].
According to the Federation of Trade Unions of
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
12
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
Uzbekistan [7], today in the republic there is one
General Agreement, 105 sectoral agreements, 14
territorial agreements at the level of the Republic of
Karakalpakstan, regions and the city of Tashkent, more
than 111,789 collective agreements directly at
enterprises and organizations. But this number is
insufficient if we compare the number of existing
organizations in the republic.
It should be noted that such a sad picture is not only
observed in our country. Thus, there is a clear trend
towards a decrease in the spread of collective
agreements to British workers. If in Great Britain in
1984 collective agreements applied to approximately
71% of workers, then by the 1990s this figure had
dropped to 54%, and at present it is believed that
collective agreements protect only about 30% of
workers in Great Britain. And according to the British
Trade Union Congress, in 2005 collective agreements
applied to only 7% of British workers [8 p.64].
According to the author, the main factors that hinder
the conclusion of collective agreements are the lack of
initiative of the parties and, first of all, such initiative is
absent in commercial organizations. Often, workers
are not united in them, representative bodies of
workers have not been created that could organize
themselves with the initiative to conclude a collective
agreement, and if such representative bodies (trade
unions) operate in commercial organizations, then the
work to protect the rights and legitimate interests of
workers is weak. Well, and, of course, organizations of
the private sector of the economy do not want to take
on additional obligations to create a system of
additional guarantees for workers, because the main
social function of a collective agreement is the function
of protecting workers. It is expressed in the focus of the
collective agreement on protecting, first of all, the
collective interests of workers, and not the employer.
At the same time, a collective agreement is a kind of
instrument for ensuring fairness and equality of
workers in labor relations, the main document
regulating issues of labor protection and employment,
ensuring social guarantees for workers.
It should be noted that concluding a collective
agreement in a commercial organization has its
advantages. First of all, these include direct interaction
between employees and the employer, the search for
the most optimal conditions for organizing the labor
process in the company, and a comprehensive solution
to a wide range of social and labor issues. Moreover,
when concluding a collective agreement, which will
establish additional guarantees for the company's
employees (former employees of the company), the
motivation of employees to work increases, the
efficiency of the work of an individual employee
increases, which is beneficial to the employer.
In addition, collective agreements can establish
additional payments for work in a multi-shift mode,
compensation
payments
for
business
trips,
reimbursement of expenses for the use of property
belonging to the employee, additional payments for the
mobile and traveling nature of work, additional
payments for long-term work experience, additional
payments for work in difficult and harmful working
conditions, additional payments for climatic conditions
in the summer and winter periods, and much more.
Analysis of research results
Moving on to the participation of the trade union in
concluding a collective agreement, it should be said that
the Labor Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan in defining
a collective agreement identifies two parties:
employees and the employer. Despite this, the science
of labor law is still debating the advisability of
recognizing employees and the employer as parties to a
collective agreement. There is a point of view according
to which the "labor collective" or employees in general
cannot be recognized as an independent subject of law
[10 p. 263], since the theory of law identifies only two
types of subjects: individuals and legal entities. Neither
the labor collective nor the organizations of employees
can be classified as the named subjects.
Thus, A.F. Nurtdinova, analyzing the status of the parties
to a collective agreement, notes that by calling
“workers” as a party, we use this term to denote a social
institution (class) covered by cooperation in the broad
sense of the word. She then suggests recognizing trade
unions as a party to a collective agreement, since they,
unlike the work collective or employees of the
enterprise, “although they do not always have the rights
of a legal entity, are nevertheless a legally defined
subject of law” [11 p.81].
It should be said that even Kantorovich Ya.A. defended
the independent role of trade unions as a tool for
protecting the collective interests of workers, including
when concluding a collective agreement. He called one
of the principles of collective bargaining regulation the
exclusive right of trade unions to act on behalf of the
workers of the enterprise [12 p.176-190].
In connection with the above, the author considers it
appropriate to recognize the “trade union” as the
subject of this right and officially recognize its status.
The conclusion of a collective agreement is preceded by
collective negotiations between representatives of the
employer and representatives of employees. Today, the
rules governing all procedures related to collective
negotiations, settlement of disagreements, guarantees
and compensation for persons participating in
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
13
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
negotiations apply to all levels - from a collective
agreement within an organization to agreements at all
levels. Modern legislation complies in this aspect with
international legal norms [13].
The Labor Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan does not
contain the concept of "collective negotiations", but
international acts will help to fill this gap. Thus, the
Convention of the International Labor Organization
(hereinafter ILO) No. 154 "On the Promotion of
Collective Bargaining" (this Convention has been
ratified by the Republic of Uzbekistan) contains the
concept of collective negotiations and defines it as all
negotiations that are conducted between an
employer, a group of employers or one or more
employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or
more workers' organizations, on the other, for the
purpose of determining the conditions of work and
employment, and (or) regulating relations between
employers and employees, and (or) regulating
relations between employers or their organizations
and an organization or organizations of employees.
The Labor Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan does not
limit the employer and the trade union in choosing the
issues to be discussed during collective bargaining.
Both parties have sufficient freedom in choosing the
place, time and procedure for holding negotiations. It
is important to remember that the employer is obliged
to create conditions that ensure the activities of
employee representatives and the negotiating
commission, including providing them free of charge
with premises for meetings, holding meetings and
consultations, means of internal communication and
information, copying and other office equipment, and
places for placing stands [14].
Having a fairly large freedom in choosing issues, often
the trade union, acting as representatives of
employees
during
collective
negotiations
on
concluding a collective agreement, strives to defend
benefits for its members. For example, increased
guarantees for members of an elected trade union
organization may be provided, related to the need to
obtain preliminary consent from a higher trade union
in all cases of termination of labor relations at the
initiative of the employer.
If we turn to the legislation, we will see that the status
of trade unions is regulated in legislation in more
detail. According to Article 29 of the Law on Trade
Unions, it is the trade unions, their associations,
divisions and primary trade union organizations that
have the preferential right to conduct collective
negotiations, conclude collective agreements and
contracts on behalf of employees.
CONCLUSIONS
Let's consider the main problems encountered during
negotiations between a trade union and an employer on
issues of concluding or amending a collective
agreement. First of all, it is necessary to focus on the
problems of the trade union's legitimacy in representing
the interests of employees when concluding or
amending a collective agreement. Let's consider several
options for representing employees by a trade union(s)
during negotiations with an employer on concluding,
amending, or extending a collective agreement.
If a company has one primary trade union organization
that unites more than half of the employees, it has the
exclusive right to represent the interests of employees
during collective negotiations, amendments and
conclusion of a collective agreement, and control over
its implementation. This provision complies with
international labor standards. According to ILO
Recommendations No. 91 (1951), priority in concluding
a collective agreement at an enterprise is given to
representative organizations of workers, and in the
absence of such public organizations at the enterprise,
a collective agreement is concluded with other
representatives of workers.
However, there is a certain gap in the current legislation
related to proving the legality of the primary trade union
organization's representation in collective negotiations
on concluding a collective agreement. Employers often
cannot, and do not want to, establish the fact of the
legality of the representation of the primary trade union
organization for conducting negotiations on concluding
a collective agreement.
Due to the lack of a mechanism in the legislation for
employers to recognize the trade unions being created,
as well as the lack of an indication in the legislation of
the legal fact from which moment a trade union can be
considered legitimate in representing the interests of
the company's employees, the rights of the latter are
constantly violated, which does not make it possible to
fully represent the interests of both an individual
employee and the entire company team.
Moreover, several primary trade union organizations
can be created at once in a company. The company's
employees can be members of all the company's trade
union organizations. And in practice, a paradoxical
situation can arise when, for example, two trade union
organizations de jure represent the interests of more
than half of the employees and simultaneously send a
notice to the employer about the beginning of collective
negotiations on the issue of concluding a collective
agreement. The legislation does not provide an answer
to what the employer should do in such a situation.
Two or more primary trade union organizations, which
together unite more than half of the employees of a
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
14
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
given employer, by decision of their elected bodies
may create a single representative div to conduct
collective negotiations and subsequently implement all
procedures related to the development and conclusion
of a single collective agreement.
The basis for the formation of such a single div is the
principle of proportional representation depending on
the number of trade union members. Each trade union
organization
independently
determines
its
representative (representatives). At the same time, it
must include a representative of each of the primary
trade union organizations that created the single
representative div. The single representative div
has the right to send the employer (his representative)
a proposal to begin collective negotiations on the
preparation, conclusion or amendment of a collective
agreement on behalf of all employees.
If none of the primary trade union organizations or the
primary trade union organizations as a whole that wish
to create a single representative div unite more than
half of the employees of a given employer, then the
general meeting (conference) of employees may, by
secret ballot, determine the primary trade union
organization that, with the consent of its elected div,
is instructed to send the employer (his representative)
a proposal to begin collective negotiations on behalf of
all employees.
Therefore, in order to prevent controversial situations
when trade unions wish to initiate the conclusion of a
collective agreement, we believe that it is necessary to
supplement Article 65 of the Labor Code of the
Republic of Uzbekistan and provide that if there are
two or more primary trade union organizations
operating in a company, each of which unites more
than half of the employees, the latter may either form
a representative div in the manner determined by
legislation and the primary trade union organizations
themselves, which has the right to send the employer
a proposal to begin collective negotiations on the
conclusion of a collective agreement.
Or, a procedure can be established whereby one trade
union is given a privileged right to participate in
negotiations on the issue of concluding a collective
agreement with the employer. Such experience exists
in the USA and Great Britain. For example, in the USA,
if there are several trade unions at one enterprise, but
only one of them must be selected for negotiations
with the employer, then the most representative (by
number of members) is selected, which is given the
authority to conduct collective negotiations on behalf
of all employees of the enterprise. The employer, in
turn, is obliged to negotiate only with it.
A similar situation applies in the UK. There, the
employer draws up an agreement with one of the trade
unions at the enterprise on collective bargaining. This
agreement is concluded only with the trade union that
undertakes to renounce the right to strike for the
duration of this agreement.
The issue of concluding a collective agreement in a
separate structural division is also interesting. As is
known, collective agreements operate at the local level,
i.e. in a specific organization. The collective agreement
applies to the entire organization, including branches
and representative offices located in another locality. In
accordance with Part 2 of Article 65 of the Labor Code
of the Republic of Uzbekistan, a collective agreement
can be concluded in the organization as a whole, as well
as in its separate divisions. To do this, the head of the
organization must grant the appropriate powers to the
head of the separate structural division. When
concluding a collective agreement in a branch, this legal
act will apply only to a specific branch. However, the
conditions that will be included in it should not put the
employees of the branch in a worse position compared
to the conditions of the collective agreement of the
entire organization. At the same time, the employees of
the branch do not have the right to demand more
favorable conditions for themselves at the expense of
infringement of the interests of employees of other
structural divisions.
Korshunova T.Yu. believes that the conclusion of
collective agreements at the level of a separate
structural division of an organization violates the unified
system of social partnership and proposes to provide for
the right of employees of branches and representative
offices to discuss the collective agreement concluded in
the organization. The comments and proposals they
express should be taken into account in the process of
collective negotiations [15 p.35].
If the company does not have a collective agreement
and it is planned to conclude one, we believe that it is
advisable to invite representatives of employees of
separate structural divisions to discuss the terms of the
collective agreement and make appropriate changes to
the Labor Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, since the
legislator does not indicate that, for example, a trade
union operating in a branch has the right to participate
in the negotiation process on issues of concluding a
collective agreement in the organization. At the same
time, by concluding a collective agreement at the
organizational level, the parties extend its effect to the
entire company (branches, representative offices, etc.),
and the involvement of representatives of employees,
for example, of a branch will be logical, since they know
the specifics of labor organization in the branch, etc. At
the same time, we should agree with the position of T.L.
Soshnikova, who believes that it is advisable to conclude
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
15
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
a collective agreement in branches in the absence of a
single collective agreement of the organization as a
whole. It would be desirable to reflect this provision in
Part 2 of Article 65 of the Labor Code of the Republic
of Uzbekistan in order to exclude a conflict of interest
between the parent organization and its separate
divisions [15].
The next thing I would like to draw your attention to is
the term of validity of the collective agreement when
the owner of the organization changes. In this matter,
the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan applied
domestic collective bargaining regulation of labor with
world practice and reproduces the structures adopted
throughout the world. From the point of view of
comparative law, it is noteworthy that the acts of the
European Union contain a more favorable rule for
employees regarding the validity of the collective
agreement when the form of ownership of the
organization changes than that contained in our
legislation.
Thus, according to Article 74 of the Labor Code of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, when the owner of the
enterprise's
property
changes,
the
collective
agreement remains in effect for six months. And, the
European Union Directive of February 14, 1977 No.
77/187 sets a period of one year in this case.
Therefore, the author considers it appropriate to
amend Article 74 of the Labor Code of the Republic of
Uzbekistan in terms of terms, in particular, to replace
the “six
-
month period” of validity of the collective
agreement at the enterprise with “one year”.
REFERENCES
Nuritdinova AF Rossiya Federatsiyasi Mehnat
kodeksida ijtimoiy sheriklik // Iqtisodiyot va huquq. -
2002. - 4-son. P.20.
Tsitulskiy VF Zamonaviy davrda jamoa shartnomasi:
tezisning referatı. Yuridik fanlar nomzodi nomidagi
Moscow davlat universiteti. MV Lomonosov. - 1993 yil.
3-bet.
Voytinishii IS SSSR mehnat qonuni. M.: Davlat
nashriyoti. - 1925. 28-29-betlar, 116-187-betlar.
Lushnikov AM, Lushnikova MV Mehnat huquqi kursi. 2
jildda darslik. T.2. M.: “Statut” nashriyoti.
- 2009 yil.
162-bet.
Shu yerda. 166-bet
O'zbekiston Kasaba uyushmalari federatsiyasi portali
(kasaba.uz)
O'zbekiston Kasaba uyushmalari federatsiyasi portali
(kasaba.uz)
Qarang: Lyutov LN Buyuk Britaniyadagi jamoaviy
mehnat qonuni. M.: Wolters Kluwer nashriyoti. - 2009.
B.64.
Rossiya mehnat huquqi kursi: 3 jildda T.1 / Ed. EB
Xoxlova,
Sankt-Petersburg:
Sankt-Petersburg
universiteti nashriyoti. - 1996 yil. 263-bet.
Nurtdinova AF Mehnat munosabatlarini jamoaviy
shartnomaviy tartibga solish: nazariy muammolar: dis.
akademik tanlov uchun qadam. Ph.D. qonuniy Sci.
Rossiya Federatsiyasi Hukumati huzuridagi Qonunchilik
va qiyosiy huquq instituti. M. - 1998. B.81.
Kantorovich Ya.A. Collected collection. L. - 1924. S. 176-
190.
Kurennaya AM Ish beruvchi va uning ijtimoiy sherigi
o'rtasidagi tashkiliy darajadagi o'zaro munosabatlar //
SPS Consultant Plus, 2010 yil.
XMT "Korxona rahbariyati va ishchilar o'rtasidagi
munosabatlar to'g'risida" gi 129-sonli maxsus Tavsiyani
qabul qildi (1967), bu, xususan, tashkilotni boshqarishda
ishtirok etish va jamoaviy bitimlarni o'tkazishda
ishchilarga ma'lumot berishni nazarda tutadi.
Korshunova T.Yu. Mehnat sohasidagi ijtimoiy sheriklik:
qonunchilikni takomillashtirish muammolari // Mehnat
huquqi. - 2014 yil - 3-son. 35-bet
Soshnikova T.J.I. Problems of sovershenstvovaniya
qonunodatelstva o socialnom partnershiptve //
«Trudovoe pravo» - 2008. -
№12 // SPS «Konsultant
Plus».
