How Should Management Handle Union Conflicts and Ensure Legal Compliance in the Mill?

Incident Overview

Our organization is a manufacturing unit under a registered cooperative society. Recently, there was an unfortunate incident. The day before the incident, the accounts department prepared the details for the payment of earned leave encashment and submitted them to our bank for disbursement. However, due to a bank server link failure, the payment could not be processed that day.

Union's Initial Response

On the evening of that day, the president of the workers' union questioned the organization's Deputy Manager (Finance) about the nonpayment of EL encashment. The manager explained the bank link failure and assured that they were in constant communication with bank officials for possible payment the next morning. The union president agreed and left with the assurance of payment disbursement the following day.

Escalation of the Situation

Shockingly, the next morning, when the manager arrived for duty, the union president and other members did not allow the manager and other accounts department officers to enter the mill. The union president raised the same question regarding the nonpayment of the EL encashment, and the same reply was given by the manager and staff.

A staff member requested permission to enter the mill for duty, but the union president physically forced and pushed the officer outside the gate. The situation escalated when the officer defended himself by pushing the union president back. Management and security personnel intervened, ending the altercation.

Management's Stance

The workers' union members realized their fault and blamed the officer by falsely claiming he attacked the union president first. The management observed the incident and decided not to take immediate administrative action to maintain a peaceful work atmosphere. They assured that a decision would be made shortly.

The mill management believes no permission was sought before the incident, and they are not liable for the payment of EL encashment on any particular day or time. The management is focused on maintaining a healthy work atmosphere to ensure uninterrupted production. They believe the officer is not responsible for any punishment in this incident.

Seeking Resolution

The management has attempted to engage in discussions with the union to establish a compromise or friendly relationship, but the union is adamant about demanding punishment for the officer. If the management complies, it could create an unhealthy atmosphere affecting the trust between management and staff.

Please share your valuable suggestions. Also, provide guidance on the legal procedures for handling union unethical activities and ensuring compliance with mill administration in the future to prevent such incidents. The mill management is prepared to work within the legal framework and take necessary actions against those deserving punishment to maintain a positive work environment.

Warm Regards.

The inability of the management to arrange for the disbursal of the leave encashment amount due to server failure is the basic reason for the trouble. It is not clear from the post whether the link was restored immediately in the meantime so as to make the disbursement the next day as promised by the Deputy Manager (Finance) to the Union President. If not, whether any notice was put up on the notice board. If the answer is negative, it is a clear indication of a lack of situational management on the part of the management.

However, the failure of such a timely action on the part of the management cannot justify the counter-action of the workmen on the following day, preventing the members of staff from attending their duty. Certainly, this would be a serious misconduct on the part of the Union President as well as all the workmen directly involved in it, irrespective of their numbers and official status in the union.

The physical altercation that ensued at the entrance of the mill between the Union President and the particular member of staff is quite unfortunate and could have been avoided had one of them tempered the reflex action. Anyway, the further course of action depends, in my opinion, on the appropriate choice of the management between the following two options:

(a) Taking a tough stand on the undisciplined behavior of the Union President and the workmen involved in the incident of picketing and obstruction if your so-called justifications in your post are true and unbiased.

(b) Adopting a damage-control mode by simultaneous disbursement of leave encashment and convincing the Union to leave the altercation issue jointly to the arbitration of the Chief Executive of the Society or a senior official of the Labour Department and abide by the decision in this regard.

While seeking views on a proper solution to this type of problem, it is better that the total number of workmen in the industry and the existence of other unions, particularly for staff, etc., should be mentioned.

Regards

I would tend to see the whole incident in a different perspective. The union president was trying to use this issue to score a point or convey a message to management. The finance manager was a tool or an object to vent his anger. One needs to take a strong line in the matter - investigate and punish the guilty. Management can always be magnanimous after they secure strong evidence against the union leader. Maintaining good relations is a two-way street backed by firm but kind management.

Thank you very much for the reply. We are also very much aware that if the situation is not stable, the organization will ultimately suffer badly. If they are not ready for a peaceful atmosphere, they need to think and should try to realize their mistakes. They should also think ten times more in the future before engaging in such activities. Therefore, if the management is considering legal action, what will be the procedure to pursue it? Please share your valuable knowledge and thoughts on this.

Regards.