我國政府於民國九十年開始陸續公佈了企業併購相關法令，民國九十一年企業併購法頒佈施行，再加上公司法修法完成，企業併購相關法制成行。在企業併購時，員工常常會因為企業成本或是營運的考量而遭遇到工作條件上的改變或是裁員的可能，企業在集體勞資關係面向與工會的互動以及團體協約的效力關係到員工的權益。工會在併購過程中的權利以及角色，團體協約在併購後效力的延續以及繼承，再者團體協約因併購而可能造成當事人一方消滅，而使效力消滅，若要訂立新協約，有何規定是本研究所要研究的重點。 企業併購分為合併、收購、分割，企業併購在企業併購的方式中，不論是以資產收購或是股權收購的方式進行對併購公司的收購，都不會造成公司法人格的變動，而合併、營業轉讓或分割將會造成公司法人格的改變。因此在合併以及分割時，各種權利義務的繼承上較為複雜，而收購的情形收購則必需由收購企業承繼勞動關係上的權利義務。依據工會法規定，工會因應企業的併購必須做合併或分立。我國在相關法令上並沒有給予協商權以及資訊權的，僅讓雇主與個別勞工單獨商訂留用。除此之外就只有在大量解僱規定雇主必需與工會協商。而實務上我國的併購案也因此工會要爭取資訊權就相當困難，而協商也在雇主被動的狀況下進行。現行團體協約十四條以及第二十七條規定必需由新雇主概括承受團體協約，但是在分割上卻完全沒有規定。 在我國關於工會資訊權以及協商權是需要加強的部份，其內容可以不涉及營業機密，僅對於勞工可能受到的影響以及員工之後的安置方案進行資訊的提供以及協商，這方面可以參考歐盟以及歐洲國家、以及日本的規定，給予相關的資訊權；而協商不必全盤接受工會的意見，而是勞資進行協商，取得雙方的共識。在我國企業分割團體協約繼承規定上相當缺乏，可參考日本的勞動契約承繼法的規定，由工會與新舊雇主協商要繼承的協約部分。在併購後團體協約的規定應該要統一，可以讓兩企業內勞工在較公平的環境下工作，也不會有糾紛。除此之外，團體協約因為併購而失去效力這方面，應該要給予其餘後效力的保護。 / Our government announce the Laws about mergers and acquisitions（M＆A）after 2000 and then announce“ Business Mergers and Acquisitions Law ”in 2002 .While M＆A , the staff will usually be dismissed because enterprises want to increase their earning . The rights of the trade unions and collective agreement ,the purposes of collective labor relationship ,are the important issues about employees’ rights about M＆A . The role of trade unions about M＆A and collective agreements ’ effect should be influenced . Collective agreements ’ effect are changed because of M＆A . One of the key points of this study is what the rules are when enterprise and trade union want to sign new collective agreement . The article 4 (2) of “Business Mergers and Acquisitions Law”：Merger and acquisition include merger, consolidation, acquisition ,and division of a company . Only acquisition do not change the company’s body corporate in the three type of M&A ,and the other two types do .So what the employee’s rights are in the situations of consolidation and division are more complex than the situation of acquisition . According to “Labor Union Law”, trade union must consolidate or divisive because of M&A .There are no regulations about informing and consulting trade unions in our country’s laws. The companies must informate and consulate trade unions in the situation of collective redundancy .As the result, trade unions get the information hard about M&A ,and collective bargaining is a hard work .In the article 14 and article 27 of ” Collective Agreement Law ”provide that new employers must abide by the collective agreement which is signed by the original employer and trade union, but there are no regulations about the situation division. In our laws, the regulations about informing and consulting trade unions in our country’s laws must increase. It can not include the secrets of operation of enterprise. It contain what the staff will be influenced and how to settle the staff after M&A is enough. About the issues ,we can refer to the regulations in the EU , UK, German , and Japan. The companies of M&A can accept all of the suggestions of the trade unions when collective bargaining . After collective bargaining between the companies and the trade union of M&A, it can get balance option between the employers and the employee. There are no regulations in our laws about collective agreement’s effect about the situation of division. We can refer to the system of Japan which provide that the employers and employees can negotiate about which provisions of the original collective bargaining the new employer must abide by when the situation of division .After M&A ,there must be the same collective agreement for the two enterprises’ employees. They will feel fair in this situation . On the other hand, if M&A delegalize the collective agreement , the labor conditions shall continue to constitute part of the labor contract between the parties to the expired agreement until otherwise provided by a labor contract.