Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
(ISSN 2250057X)
IMPACT FACTOR: 4.604
website: www.indusedu.org, Volume 4, Issue 5, May)
INTRODUCTION
The system of collective bargaining as a method of settlement of industrial dispute has been
adopted in industrially advanced countries like the United States of America in some Asian
and African Countries. India which has adopted compulsory adjudication system has also
accepted is the principle the system of collective bargaining as a method if settlement of
disputes in India.
Page 31
One other early instance of an employers organisation and industrial union coming together
to solve their problem was in the Coir industry in Travencore State (Kerala) during the
Second world war. In 1938, the Travencore Coir Factory Workers Union, the largest in the
industry in common with coir workers unions in other areas organised a 26-day strike and
won a special allowance at 6% of basic wages from the employers. In 1943 the major
union and the employers association set up a joint body known as the Industrial Relations
Committee.
One of the duties of the committee was to fix rate of wages for all new types of work and
dearness allowances in each coir factory committee, which was recognised by the
management, and these local committees took up the day-to-day problems of the workers and
usually achieved a solution on the spot. Only questions of industry wide importance went to
the Industrial Relations Committee.
One of the very earliest instances of collective bargaining within the individual concerns as
distinct from groups of employers as in Ahmedabad and Kerala was that of the joint steamers
companies in Calcutta. The Bata Shoe Company in West Bengal made its first agreement in
1948. This agreement was for the union set up in a factory for two years. In 1951, the Indian
Aluminum Co., signed the first of its 5 years agreement with its Employees union at its
factory in Belur near Calcutta. The year 1955-56 saw a considerable extension of the field of
collective bargaining.
One of the most ardent supporters of collective bargaining in India was V.V. Giri, the then
Labour Minister at the Centre. He always pleaded for substitution of collective bargaining for
compulsory adjudication. This has come to be known as the Giri Approach. It is however a
pity that his approach did not receive enough support both from the employers and the central
unions. The government also showed little interest in collective bargaining due to the reasons
of lack of confidence in the bargaining strength of our trade union, fear of strikes and lock
outs and apprehension of inflation. Inspite of these infirmities collective bargaining
developed to a certain extent in India. Not only some of the above stated industries continue
to settle disputes through collective bargaining, industries all over India had started collective
bargaining though the Government has hardly taken any step legislative or otherwise to
effectively apply it in practice.
Page 32
Page 33
to strengthen collective bargaining, and to intervene in trade disputes only where collective
bargaining was unable to deliver the necessary results. Lot of trust was put on Works
Committees, which was rather misplaced because, Works Committees in the scheme of the
Act have only a limited role to pay.
The provision of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 and the judicial interpretation on the
provision, however, have not encouraged collective bargaining under the Act, as originally
passed, a settlement arrived at otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceedings was
not given any legal status at all. The Amendment Act of 1956 provided that a settlement
arrived at by agreement between the employer and the workmen otherwise than in the course
conciliation proceedings shall be binding only on the parties to it. This provision in Sec.18
(1) in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is in sharp contrast with the provisions relating to
settlement through conciliation proceedings, as the said settlement would bind not only the
members of the union which have signed the settlement, but all workmen employed in the
establishment to which the dispute related and all workmen who subsequently become
employed in the establishment.
Thus under the law, there are only two recognised ways of settling an industrial dispute;
Through bilateral negotiations in which case the settlement binds only the members of the
union which has signed the settlement and through conciliation proceedings in which case the
dispute in so far as establishment is concerned itself stands settled. No reopening of the
matter covered by such a settlement is allowed during the period of operation of the
settlement.
The consequence of the above legal position is that where an employer settles an industrial
dispute bilaterally through a union. He can still be dragged into litigation at the instance of
the union or unions, which are not parties to the settlement.
It is noted that neither the Act nor the rules made there under contains any provision laying
down the circumstances in which the conciliation officer shall intervene and bring about a
settlement during conciliation proceedings. Under the scheme of the Act, the discretion
vested in the conciliation officer appears to be wide. There are no guidelines in the Act or in
the Rules to say which matter he will take up and settle through conciliation and in what
circumstances he will not intervene. He is not duty bound to invite all the unions, which are
in existence in the establishment to participate in the conciliation proceedings. Even if a
website: www.indusedu.org, email id:- editorindus@gmail.com
Page 34
settlement is arrived at which one of the unions in the establishment among many, it binds all
the unions and no further dispute can be raised while the settlement is in force.
Thus it could be seen that the law on the subject is in a highly unsatisfactory state. There have
been attempts made from time to time to remove this lacuna in the Industrial Disputes Act,
and provide for machinery by which the sole bargaining agent on behalf of the workman may
be chosen. Attempts made to remove this lacuna through the Industrial Relations Bill of 1950
and the Trade Unions Bill of 1950 did not materialize due to stiff resistance. An attempt was
made through the code of Discipline in Industry and the code provided the criteria for
recognition of trade unions as bargaining agent. But the code had no legal sanctity
whatsoever and has not been able to render much help in delaying with the problems raised
due to multiplicity of trade unions. The Industrial Relations Bill introduced by the Janata
Government incorporating many of the suggestion made by the National Commission on
Labour 1969 could not be passed by the Legislature. The Trade unions and the Industrial
Disputes Amendment Bill 1988 which contained many provisions for the promotion of
collective bargaining including establishment of bargaining councils and Industrial Relations
Commission. But this Bill also lapsed due to the dissolution of parliament.
PROCESS OF BARGAINING
The collective agreements in India are generally arrived at after a tortuous haggling and
bargaining procedure. Unions prefer this procedure to other procedures because they fear that
if they do not haggle with the management, workers would accuse them of having sold
themselves out to the management can never be a full and final offer. Hence they should not
accept the every first offer but should bargain for better terms.
Most of the agreements are at the plant level though some industry level agreements have
also been concluded. Plant level agreements are common in manufacturing and commercial
establishments. Whereas industry-level agreements are found in plantation and textile
industry. National-level agreements are still uncommon except in the case of departmental
undertakings in the public sector viz. Railways, Post and Telegraphs and Ordinance
Factories.
The parties normally decide the selection of subjects in collective bargaining. However it is
circumscribed by law. For example, the negotiators of a contract must always keep in mind
website: www.indusedu.org, email id:- editorindus@gmail.com
Page 35
the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948, the Payment, of Wages Act, 1936, the Minimum
Wages Act, 1948 and the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. These Act
deals with many subjects such as safety precautions, health measures, amenities, conditions
of employment, minimum wages and payment of wages. Any contract must naturally be
consistent with these acts. The decisions of courts sometimes interpreting other acts, have
also laid down principles on such matters as how bonus must be calculated, retrenchment
must be carried out, rationalisation must be taken, and disciplinary proceedings must be
handled. Some contracts are short and deal with a few matters while others are elaborate and
deal with many.
Page 36
Page 37
It would be desirable to make union recognition compulsory under a central law, in all
undertakings employing 100 or more Workers or where the capital invested in above a
stipulated size. A trade union seeking recognition as a bargaining agent from a individual
employer should be a membership of at least 30% of the workers in the establishment. If it is
for an industry in a local area, the minimum membership should be 25% where more unions
than one contend for recognition, the union having a larger following should be recognised.
Whether it is verification or secret ballot for the recognition of unions, best course, therefore
seems to leave the choice of method, in any particular case, to the discretion of an
independent authority. We suggest that the task should be entrusted to the Industrial Relations
Commission proposed by us. The Commission will have the power to decide the
representative character of unions either by examination of membership records, or of it
considers necessary, by holding an election through secret ballot open to all employees.
A union recognised as the representative union under any procedure, should be statutorily
given the right of sole representation of the workers in any collective bargaining.
Apart from this we have to indicate the place which strike and lock out will have in the
scheme we propose. Collective bargaining cannot exist without the right to strike and lockout. In our view, the right to strike is a democratic right, which cannot be taken away from
the working class in a constitutional set up like ours.
There are certain essential industries/services where in a cessation of work may cause harm to
the community, the economy or the security of the nation itself and as such even this right
may justifiably be abridged or restricted, provided, of course, a specific procedure is laid
down for remedies and redressal of grievances. Therefore in stich industries, the right to
strike may be curtailed but with the simultaneous provision of an effective alternative like
arbitration or adjudication to settle disputes.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Jenkins, R., (1987). Trans-National Corporations and their Development: The
Internationalization of Capital and the Third World. London: Methuen & Co. Limited.
2. Juravich, T. and Bronfenbrenner, K., (2003). Out of the Ashes: The Steel Workers
Global Campaign at Bridgestone/Firestone in W.N. Cookie (eds.) Multinational
Enterprises and Global Human Resource Strategies, WestPoint, CA, Quorum.
website: www.indusedu.org, email id:- editorindus@gmail.com
Page 38
3. Kochan A. T., (2003, April). Collective Actors in Industrial Relations: What future?
IIRA World Congress, Track 4, Rapporteur Report. MIT Institute for Work and
Employment Research and MIT Workplace center.
4. Kothavi, C.R., (1985). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, New Delhi,
Wiley Eastern Limited.
5. Kumar, Ranjit., (2005). Research Methodology-A Step-by-step Guide for Beginners,
(2nd Ed.) Singapore, Pearson Education.
6. Labaw, Patricia J., (1998). Advanced Questionnaire Design. Cambridge, MA: ABT
Books.
7. Marginson, P., Armstrong, P., Edwards, P. and Purcell, J., (1995).
8. Managing Labour in the Global Corporation: A survey based analysis of
Multinationals operating in the UK, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 6 pp. 6, 2-19.
Page 39