西方世界先進諸國中，採取結合「程序性規範」與「制定法」兩個模式，介入勞資雙方集體協商的國家，以美國1935年的國家勞工關係法（National Labor Relations Act）最早出現。1999年，英國終於立法通過一個有關集體協商的「就業關係法」（the Employment Relations Act），企圖建立以自願承認為主，強制承認為輔的新式「工會承認」程序：勞資雙方建立集體協商關係的第一道程序。在2007年12月，台灣所通過的團體協約法導入集體協商程序性規範，是最晚近產生的一部結合「程序性規範」和「制定法」模式之勞工法。本文的目的是以英國和美國對集體協商的程序性規範為基礎，來檢視台灣集體協商的法定程序，以及比較其差異性。本文結論認為，台灣集體協商程序規範，以及救濟的配套措施（即不當勞動行為裁決委員會）兩者的運作和配合程度，將是影響台灣集體協商能否建立和順利運作的重要因素之一。

Among labor laws in developed countries, National Labor Relations Act of USA in 1935 was the first statute with the combination of procedural and substantial rules in an attempt to intervene in collective agreement. In 1999, UK introduced the Employment Relations Act which combines voluntary recognition with compulsory one as a new approach for union recognition. In December 2008, Taiwan modified Collective Agreement Law by introducing procedural rules into collective bargaining, which is the latest collective bargaining law with substantial and procedural rules. This study found that the extent to which the procedural rules of Collective Agreement Law perfectly work with its remedial and punishment mechanisms would be critical to the success of the new Collective Agreement Law of Taiwan.