User:Lwking/sandbox

History of Collective Bargaining
Wage bargaining in Israel has changed from a very centralized corporatist system that collectively represented almost all workers, to a decentralized, pluralist, system with many wage agreements in different sectors of labor. Until the 1990's, bargaining was negotiated between the Private Employers' Association representing businesses and the Histadrut representing the labor force. The state's role in these negotiations was unofficial and its main purpose was to promulgate the new agreements to the people. Negotiations over wages were conducted at the state-wide level, determining standard pay across whole sectors of industry. Additionally, the Histadrut also conducted negotiations regarding healthcare and pensions, both of which it administered for many workers. Due to a decrease in both union and employer association memberships, it has been harder to collectivize workers across labor sectors. This decentralization is also attributed to the rise of unions outside the traditional Histadrut, or General Federation of Trade Unions, which had previously not been allowed under the laws of the more corporatist system.

Collective Bargaining Today
Israel's remaining unionized workforce is trying to regain some of the corporatist arrangements that were common in the 20th century. Current laws do not mandate that employers negotiate collective agreements with labor. In the 2009-2010 budget, however, a clause was inserted into the labor law that would have made it mandatory for employers with over 1/3 of their labor force unionized to initiate collective agreements with their workers.

While membership in a trade union is voluntary, the coverage of a collective agreement is determined by law so as to achieve compre- hensive coverage. (columbia)

In 2000,34 percent were neither members nor covered and hence complete "outsiders" to the industrial relations system (columbia)

Unlike 1980s, when the core of the union's activity was conducted under the umbrella of statewide negotiated agreements, the system is currently more decentralized. More independent unions (columbia)

A recent survey found that only about 45 per- cent of the employers are still linked to the collective industrial relations system (Haberfeld et al., 2006). This compares with sporadic evidence regarding the past, when it was estimated that more than 80 percent of the employers were members. (columbia)

These changes are not readily apparent at first, as the process of change was not grounded in a broad legislative reform, as in other countries, such as Australia or New Zealand. The change has been incremental and dispersed in the various areas of labor law. (Columbia)

However, in resonance with the prescription of corporatist negotiations, statutory and case-law sought to ensure a high level of centralization and concentration. Thus, the law imposed severe barriers on breakaway unions or the establishment of trade unions outside the General Histadrut. Moreover, the law eased the requirements for negotiat- ing broad collective agreements-agreements extending beyond the single enterprise or workplace. (Columbia)

page 8 from book "Histradut runs large health care system (Kupat Holim) that covers over 70% of the population in Israel

Histadrut also runs large pension funds

Mundlak views the Israeli transition to pluralism as having been accompanied by substantially increased numbers of active players in the system and by a drastic decline in the central- ity of collectively bargained norms