What if the company does wage agreement with majority of union under section 18(3) and 12(3)
And other minor union does not accept it and challenge this agreement?
Accordingly what is the remedy to the employer and what approach to be taken by the employer to handle such matter
From India, Delhi
And other minor union does not accept it and challenge this agreement?
Accordingly what is the remedy to the employer and what approach to be taken by the employer to handle such matter
From India, Delhi
Dear Girish,
Once any settlement u/s 18(1) becomes converted u/s 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 before a conciliation officer, it stands on a higher pedestal and would also be binding the minority workmen who were not signatories to the settlement and the same would be in force till it is replaced by another settlement. It cannot be successfully challenged by the minority unless the terms are unfair and violative of the provisions of any law and the determination of majority done by misrepresentation of facts and figures. That is the legal position.
However, the effective implementation of a wage settlement whether done u/s 18(1) or 12 (3) of the ID Act,1947 with the majority union in the establishment depends on so many factors like the majority-minority ratio among the unionized workmen, the numerical proportion of the regular and contract labor engaged in the same kind of activities, the fairness of the rate of hike in wages under the settlement and its parity with the prevailing wage rates in similar industries in the region, the proportionality of the hike linked to revision of work load, if any, the rationale behind the distribution of the hike among the various components of the wage-structure, the time gap between the previous settlement and the present one, the effect of the settlement whether retrospective or prospective, the over all performance of the industry and its profitability in the past and present, the possible realignment of union membership afterwards by the effective propaganda of the dissidents and the like.
Therefore, effective implementation of the settlement is in the hands of both the management and the majority union who signed the settlement. The management should avoid negative attitude as well as retaliatory action against the dissidents for anything unpleasant occurred during negotiations.
The management should try to effect the terms of the settlement immediately in the letter and spirit of the settlement in its entirety.
The majority union should also convince all the workmen about the reasonableness of the terms of the settlement and positively highlight the circumstances under which it was signed by means like gate meetings, distribution of hand bills.
From India, Salem
6016Once any settlement u/s 18(1) becomes converted u/s 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 before a conciliation officer, it stands on a higher pedestal and would also be binding the minority workmen who were not signatories to the settlement and the same would be in force till it is replaced by another settlement. It cannot be successfully challenged by the minority unless the terms are unfair and violative of the provisions of any law and the determination of majority done by misrepresentation of facts and figures. That is the legal position.
However, the effective implementation of a wage settlement whether done u/s 18(1) or 12 (3) of the ID Act,1947 with the majority union in the establishment depends on so many factors like the majority-minority ratio among the unionized workmen, the numerical proportion of the regular and contract labor engaged in the same kind of activities, the fairness of the rate of hike in wages under the settlement and its parity with the prevailing wage rates in similar industries in the region, the proportionality of the hike linked to revision of work load, if any, the rationale behind the distribution of the hike among the various components of the wage-structure, the time gap between the previous settlement and the present one, the effect of the settlement whether retrospective or prospective, the over all performance of the industry and its profitability in the past and present, the possible realignment of union membership afterwards by the effective propaganda of the dissidents and the like.
Therefore, effective implementation of the settlement is in the hands of both the management and the majority union who signed the settlement. The management should avoid negative attitude as well as retaliatory action against the dissidents for anything unpleasant occurred during negotiations.
The management should try to effect the terms of the settlement immediately in the letter and spirit of the settlement in its entirety.
The majority union should also convince all the workmen about the reasonableness of the terms of the settlement and positively highlight the circumstances under which it was signed by means like gate meetings, distribution of hand bills.
From India, Salem
More than a legal matter, now it is an industrial relations issue with many possible outcomes. To give a real answer to this there should be a complete grasp of the background information of your unit, the relative strength, the union leadership, how far the settlement meets the workers expectation etc. As advised by Learned Umakanthan Sir, you need to go ahead and implement the settlement and jointly with the majority union try to sell the whole agreement among the workmen. Certain proactive steps are needed from the management side. A very vital question is whether you need to have dialogue with the minority union (read no negotiation), in many cases the real problem of the minority union is that they are not heard and hence would like to make their presence seen or felt. Such ego massage would help in tiding over the crisis.
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Thanks Umakant sir for your nice guidance & will seek your guidance further also.
I read below recently judgement of supreme court where SC says minority union can raise dispute
Even this case was pertaining to contractor labour and ONGC was the signatory on Wage settlement as a evidence of the parties among contractor representative and contractor union leaders
What is impact of this case
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 176
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
L. NAGESWARA RAO; ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.
FEBRUARY 04, 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1033 OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. 9456 OF 2020)
M/S. OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.
VERSUS
THE PRESIDENT, OIL FIELD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ORS.
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Right of minority workmen to raise industrial dispute - A minority union of workers may raise an industrial dispute even if another union which consists of the majority of them enters into a settlement with the employer [Referred to Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. vs.
From India, Delhi
I read below recently judgement of supreme court where SC says minority union can raise dispute
Even this case was pertaining to contractor labour and ONGC was the signatory on Wage settlement as a evidence of the parties among contractor representative and contractor union leaders
What is impact of this case
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 176
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
L. NAGESWARA RAO; ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.
FEBRUARY 04, 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1033 OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. 9456 OF 2020)
M/S. OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.
VERSUS
THE PRESIDENT, OIL FIELD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ORS.
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Right of minority workmen to raise industrial dispute - A minority union of workers may raise an industrial dispute even if another union which consists of the majority of them enters into a settlement with the employer [Referred to Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. vs.
From India, Delhi
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Draft wage agreement.pdf