Vikramlamhe
Hr Professional
Kuljit Pal Singh
Legal Professional
Kumaresank
Labour & Industrial Laws
Raj Kumar Hansdah
Shrm, Od, Hrd, Pms
K C S Kutty
Labour Laws
Coorporate
Hr Mrktng
+5 Others

Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
its all in the news of pilot going on collective sick leave demandeding reinstatement of 2 sacked pilots on forming union aviators' guild. as strike is illegal when concilliation is under proceeding how will this action of Jet pilots looked upon in ID ACT and TRADE UNION ACT?
Is ESMA applicable in such situation?
please discuss the issue in terms of industrial relations and legislation

This is for all

Attached Images
File Type: jpg pic12623.jpg (57.0 KB, 364 views)

Dear Friend,
Very interesting scenerio from view point of legal experts..
All three legislations are independent to each other,
Trade Unions Act: Pilots are having right to form union under the Act, this is not a statutory but fundamental right to form association or trade union.
ID Act: Going on mass sick leave will amounts to misconduct under this Act.
ESMA: Govt can invoke this Act when strike afffects the public at large.
The way out is settlement only.. else it will be legal tangle all the way...

Yes, I agree.
But I seek have some more observations and opinions on it.
Could this have been averted if handled with empathy and open-ness ?
Can an empowered HR, good HR policies and Organization Culture prevent such incidences ?
Can HR be empowered enough to persuade the Management to accept its advice ?
If you remember, Jet Airways was the first to start the "Recession" scare in India, sometime last September; when it sacked ground staff and trainees en-masse. It led to a massive flood-gates of "recession" led downsizing by companies in all sectors. Now that the "green shoots" of recovery are emerging, do you think the employees will forgive and forget Naresh Goyal's Jet Airways ??
What is your take on this 'event' ?

Dear rajkumar,
In my opinion it starts with the organizational values.All HR initiatives are based on the same.Moreover a proactive approach,foresightedness on the part of management empathetic view of the employees issues have a potential to avert such crises.
R G Ratnawat

one more question do pilot come under the definition of "workmen" ?
under ID act WORKMAN [(Sn.2(s)]
*
ALL EMPLOYEES IN AN ESTABLISHMENT ARE NOT 'WORKMEN' UNDER THE ID ACT. ONLY EMPLOYEES DOING ANY MANUAL, UNSKILLED, SKILLED, TECHNICAL, OPERATIONAL, CLERICAL HOWEVER MANAGERIAL STAFF ARE TOTALLY EXCLUDED IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR SALARY.

Hi Friends,
Yes, Pilots come under the category of Workmen, time and again Apex Court expand the defn of Workmen under ID Act.
Now, there is debate going on that wheather the amendment of ID Act should be made to exclude them.

Pilots in civil aviation are coming under the definition of Workman under ID Act.
Any person employed in any industry They are in aviation industry
to do manual, unskilled, skilled, technical They are doing technical and
operational, clerical, or supervisory work skilled work
term of employment expressed or implied terms expressed
They are not excluded because they have no managerial functions, and not in supervisory capacity.
Pilots in Airforce do not come under the definition of workman because they are excluded
as they are subject to Air foce Act of 1950.

Dear Sir,
There are so many rulings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that Who is a workman shall be decided by the nature of job not by the salary he is drawing.
So Piolets come under the category of workman uner the ID Act,197.
In the same way a Teacher is not a workman.
Who is a workman it will be decided based on the nature of job he/she is pergforming.

Salary or social status is not the cirteria for deciding who is a workman or not.
Though civil aviation pilots are getting hefty wages (as mentioned by You) and staying in Five Star Hotels during their stay between duty) or
having a better social status, they are coming under the definition of
"Workman" under the ID Act 1947.
At the same time, a Manager, who may get a salary of Rs 10,000/- per month comes to work by walk or cycle and living an ordinary house, does not come under the defintion of WORKMAN. Because is he exercising the Managerial powers and does managerial functions. He is a Manager and not a workman.
The difference is NATURE OF WORK and nothing else.


This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.






About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service



All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™