labor - The social agenda: collective bargaining but no right to strike

The political season is starting again as next month the National People's Congress (NPC) will convene. Last year the new labor law drew much of the attention, but as the details will be finalized most likely during the upcoming NPC-session, attention is going to new issues that will mark the social debate in the upcoming year.
A new social agenda, as a part of the drive towards what is described as a "socialist harmonious society" will certainly mean more debate. Debate does not automatically mean change, but does indicate a sense of what direction the central government wants to take this country.

Two new points have been emerging on the social agenda: labor arbitration and collective bargaining. I have been writing before about the labor arbitration and it is an obvious extention of the changes in the labor law. Now starting an arbitration procedure is taking too much time and money in terms of legal fees, that even lawyers do not want to touch this issue.
Australian labor law researcher Chris White noted during a recent visit to Beijing and talks with the top-leaders of the Chinese trade union ACFTU another new feature on the social agenda:

In 2007, tripartite regulations will be drawn up governing collective bargaining. It struck me as a significant development, but tripartism the Chinese way. On the lawful strike to protect workers, the right to strike, they are not in favour. They see their task as more consultation, negotiation and prevention of disputes, and when these amendments go through, more rights. Wildcat strikes and social workplace disturbances, public protests e.g. against unpaid wages are on the increase and not organised by the union, but where the union has to settle the dispute with a return to work.

The government is withdrawing from much of the decision making in the economic field and obvious has to give way to new procedures where employers and employees reach consensus on, well almost anything you can think off. Over the past five year larger numbers of employers' organizations have been emerging, while the only allowed Chinese trade union mostly relied on drinking tea and organizing annual trips. To change that and let the trade union play a more meaningful role is going to be a major challenge. Last year's unionization of Wal-Mart and Foxconn have been early signs of that change.
That is possibly one of the reasons there is now quite some reluctance on guaranteeing the right to strike in the law. Chinese know the routine of striking all too well, White notes:

There is neither a lawful right to strike or for strikes to be illegal, so there is both tolerance and repression, where strike leaders are arrested not for organising the strike but usually some trumped up criminal offence or disturbing the peace.

So, the debate is on, but what is most likely going to happen in the short run? In China's campaign-like style of pushing forward change, we are probably going to see public tests in getting collective agreements in place, probably with some foreign enterprises as guinea pigs. It is not going to be a revolution, nor a dramatic change for most companies. It is going to be an interesting learning process, both for the Chinese trade union and the companies involved.