Is Nonunionized Workman Entitled To Get Wage Benefit Of Recently Signed Settlement? - CiteHR
Cite.Co is a repository of information created by your industry peers and experienced seniors sharing their experience and insights.
Join Us and help by adding your inputs. Contributions From Other Members Follow Below...
I have little different explanation on the point. In general, when agreements between parties are reached to, they are by way of collective bargaining. The workers have a recognised union and hence it is the sole bargaining agent. It represents the all workers employed in the unit and not just its members. So the settlement is binding on the entire workers and all are entitled to receive benefit of the settlement. The idea of paying benefits only to members of the recognised union is not only dangerous but it jeopardizes the concept of collective bargaining. In case a work load is to be delivered as against a rise in wages as per the agreement, then the workers who are not members can say I do not want rise and I will not work as per the norms. This is dangerous. This needs to be dealt with immediately. 2(p) settlement under ID Act gives such an impression that, benefits are available to those who have signed the settlement. However, in the given situation, this reference is called for. So, the agreement signed by the Recognised Union is on behalf of all workers and not just on behalf of its members.

Adv. K. H. Kulkarni

Union is the representative of bargain able category of employees. When there are multiple union functioning at one place, it becomes difficult with whom to negotiate. There are various practices followed by companies to decide the sole bargaining agent(union) under state laws.

These are:

1) Election : If there is one union registered but there are fractions and their by laws permits to have election in every 3 yrs.

2) Referendum : There is opinion poll to get the exact following of union. This happens when you have multiple membership.

3) Check off : This is decided by the monthly/annual membership paid by their members.

Based on the outcome, the union is recognized and various states like Maharashtra has practice of recognizing union, with certain conditions.

The negotiations with the majority union is to ensure the bargaining process just and fairas it covers majority of employees.

Settlement:

1) Bipartite: Between two parties(Union and Management) . This done if the demand notice is reffered to conciliation officer. This settlement is under clause 18(1) of Industrial Disputes Act 1947. This is applicable to the union members who have signed the settlement but will not apply who joined later and became union members.

2) Tripartite: If the demand notice is refereed for conciliation and under section(12 ) of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 the conciliation officer invites all union or only majority union and settlement is signed under (12)(3) and 18(3), will applicable to all bargain able category of employees who are on the rolls of the company and also who joins after signing the settlement.

Thanks,

Mritunjay Nath Sahu

GM(HR)

All employees i.e those who are on rolls and even addition in force are entitled benefit under 18 (1) or 12 (3) settlement. So there is no relevence on non-membership in the union will affect his revision.
Regards,
T Muralidaran

I feel ,your question don’t arise because recognised union done agreement on behalf of company employees .so you need to give agreement benefit to all the employees of company
Dear Mr.Nikumbh,
If the concerned workman is a signatory to the settlement the company is bound to extend the benefits to him as agreed as per the settlement. The question of union membership will have no relevance.


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™