The first collective agreement model was produced in the late 1960s by the Malta Employers' Association and the General Workers Union. It was an eight-page document with a limited number of sections and is considered a milestone in Maltese Industrial Relations. Most collective agreements which are currently in force resemble the structure of this model agreement. The experience and expertise of negotiating employers and trade unions in the past fifty years did not lead to a revised collective agreement model although practitioners often agree that it is desirable.

Some may argue that a model that is working should not be changed. An understanding of the collective agreement process shall clarify the need for changes to the model. A collective agreement is a contract which binds the two parties, usually the employer or employer group on one side and the trade union on the other. Besides binding both parties, it also binds the employer and the category of employees which are part of the agreement, whether they are members of the negotiating union or not.

The employer and the union have different responsibilities in the process which starts from the preparation to initiate negotiations, the negotiations meetings, the approval by affected employees who are members of the union, followed by the implementation. Whilst the preparation and negotiations processes are carried out by both the employer and the union, the implementation of the collective agreement is a process that depends entirely on the employer. Many tend to oversee this process and hence a change in model is required.

The signing of a new collective agreement may be seen as the most important milestone in the process. It is the culmination of a lengthy process of negotiations, consultations, research, studies and at times disputes. Whilst both the employer and the union have control of the process, to some extent, the control of the implementation shifts towards the employer.

It is not the union who issues the revised salaries and allowances as applicable. It is not the union which changes the work conditions of employees. Yet employees turn to the union when the implementation is not done according to what is expected. The union would then make pressure with the employer to carry out the implementation of the agreement. Disagreement during the process may lead to industrial unrest and may give rise to the first disputes between the parties following the agreement signing.

The accuracy of the collective agreement in principle, in spirit and as reflected in the text are essential for a smooth process. An implementation plan is very often not found in any agreement. Furthermore, very often the officers who are tasked with the implementation of the agreement were never party in negotiations. This calls for the requirement to introduce an implementation plan as an integral part of the agreement and which is agreed upon between the two parties before signing the agreement. An implementation plan with clear timeframes and targets would ease the implementation process and would avoid escalations during the period of the agreement. It would also enable the union to participate in the process rather than having the onus of the implementation on one party. An implementation plan eases the processes of individual or collective disputes which may reach institutions rather than the parties in an agreement. The leeway of interpretation by any individual or institution would be reduced.

Closely related to the implementation is the process of monitoring and evaluation. Although both parties may carry out an evaluation of the agreement before starting negotiations on a new agreement, the process is not captured in the collective agreement. Furthermore, parties often carry out the evaluation process independently and if any, they may discuss the findings during the first negotiations meeting. By integrating a monitoring and an evaluation process in agreements, both negotiators set a common yardstick to be used and may agree about a unified and structured process rather than separate ones. Resources would also be shared.

A revised collective agreement model may still be in the back burner when considering that the majority of collective agreements signed in Malta are negotiated by a single influential government entity, which models all agreements and may resist change. However, we have seen changes in structures and operations at various levels in the private and public sectors, with a focus on efficiency and accountability. This augurs well to a revised collective agreement model in the coming years.

Marco Bonnici is President of the Malta Union of Teachers