Search results

The problem issues of the theory of subjects of collective labor relationships are investigated in the article.The arguments about the term that should mark the group of employees of the one employer, who exercise collective labor rights and who are united by the one collective interests are mentioned. The appropriateness of using the term «work collective» for description the subject of collective labor relationships is denied and the arguments for the term «collective of employees» are mentioned. The definition of the term «collective of employees» is proposed. The collective of employees is the social legal community of people, who are in the individual labor relationships with one (common) employer and who are able (or should) carry actions for realization of collective labor rights in the cases, explicitly provided by the law. The arguments for the collective of employees is the separated subject of collective labor relationships that can decide issues on its own by using the direct democracy or by representatives are mentioned.The nature and scope of the concept of collective of employees are determined. The conclusions of scientists that the owner, who performs the contract, and bodies, authorized by him, are not members of the collective of employees are detained. The collective of employees consists of at least three employees and is a transformative institution (it can be changed depending on the number of employees, structural units within which the collective is formed, the kind of collective labor relationships).Special features of the sectoral legal personality of collective of employees are clarified. It is proved that the legal presumption of labor legal personality of the collective of employees is exist. The arguments that the presence of at least three employees is the objective moment of acquisition of the legal personality by the collective of employees are mentioned.The forms of legal actions of collective of employees are determined. The author believes that the general meetings, the conference, the authorized representation, the collective compulsory (public or secret) poll of the collective of employees are these forms. The author proposed to make amendments to the labor legislation about the obligation, not the right, of the employee to take a part in the general meetings of the collective of employees or in the collective poll for determination an objective and real opinion of collective of employees about issues that have an important common value for all employees of the collective (or for their majority). ; З'ясовано проблемні питання теорії суб'єктів колективно-трудових правовідносин: 1) заперечено доцільність використання терміна «трудовий колектив» для позначення суб'єкта колективно-трудових правовідносин та наведено аргументи на користь поняття «колектив працівників»; 2) запропоновано колективом працівників вважати спільність трьох і більше осіб, які працюють за трудовим договором в одного роботодавця; 3) підтримано тезу, що колектив працівників є цілісним суб'єктом правовідносин певного виду; 4) наве­дено аргументи на користь законодавчої презумпції трудової правосуб'єктності колективу працівників з моменту, коли він (колектив) об'єктивно сформувався з трьох працівників; 5) визначено форми правової діяльності колективу працівників (загальні збори, конферен­ції, уповноважене представництво, колективне обов'язкове (гласне або таємне) опитування).