The Act is now enshrined in the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 p.179, which provides that collective agreements are definitively considered non-binding in the United Kingdom. This presumption can be rebutted if the agreement is written and includes an express provision that it should be legally enforceable. Both the impact of the general provisions on the individual contract and the remedies for infringement are similar to those relating to collective agreements in general. However, such generally binding provisions do not alter the individual employment contract, as the collective agreement itself does. They are considered quasi-legal provisions. This means, among other things, that the decree on general applicability has no consequences. [52] At the expiry of the decree, the existing individual contract is revived. The result is continuity problems that the judicial system is partly opposed by approaches to contract law. In 1993, the Supreme Court considered overtime pay under a collective agreement. Was the worker entitled to a supplement, even if the collective agreement no longer applied and the endorsement on this point was silent? The Supreme Court held that the answer depended on the reasonable expectations of the parties. [53] In 1994, the question arose as to whether a worker could still receive supplementary sickness benefits from his employer after the corresponding provision of the collective agreement no longer applies to his individual contract. In this case, the Supreme Court used the doctrine of acquired rights: the worker had acquired this specific right by falling ill during the decree period. According to the Supreme Court, he retained that right even after the decree expired.

[54] Although these cases are close to the subsequent granting of generally binding provisions, the Supreme Court has not yet quashed its official opinion. [84]. Article 1: 3, paragraph 2 of the collective agreement of nurses with disabilities provides that exemptions are permitted if they are provided for or tolerated by the provision to which it is derogated (No. 9569, Bijv.Stcrt. 06-06-2001, No. 106). The situation is somewhat different in the event of a conflict between agreements of the same nature and level. When the scope of two sectoral agreements overlaps, the Minister will not declare them of general application until the parties have resolved the issue. However, sometimes the overlaps are not due to the respective areas of application of the agreements, but to the mixed nature of a given undertaking. In this case, this company may be obliged to apply different collective agreements to their employees, depending on their functional function or the department in which they operate.

Finally, the simultaneous application of several inter-professional agreements may occur even if the parties to an individual employment contract agree to apply one collective agreement if they are already legally linked to another. The latter situation is not very different from the situation in which the parties to the individual contract depart from the provisions of the collective agreement by contractual provisions. This means that the parties are bound by the collective agreement, which is de jure, but the courts can tolerate the application of the chosen collective agreement if it is more favourable for the worker. [91] As a general rule, companies employ only the workers needed for their core activities.