INTRODUCTION
Industrial Dispute
Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, A ct, 1947, defines “industrial dispute” to mean: any dispute or difference between employers and employers or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any person. The definition of “industrial dispute” contains two limitations. (i)
The adjective “Industrial” relates to the dispute of an industry as defined in the Act, and
(ii)
It expressly states that not all sorts of dispute and differences but the only those which bear upon the relationship of employers and workmen regarding employment, non-employment, terms of employment and conditions of labour are contemplated
The components of industrial disputes can be broken down into four: (i)
Factum of industrial dispute
(ii)
Parties to the dispute
(iii)
Subject-matter of the dispute; and
(iv)
Origin of the dispute
Individual Dispute
To convert the individual dispute into an industrial dispute, it has been recognised by the Court that the dispute must be adopted by an appreciable number of either the entire labour force in the establishment or at least in a particular section thereof to which the dispute relates. In order to convert an individual dispute into an industrial dispute, it should be taken up by the union of workers of the establishment.
1
INDIVIDUAL DISPUTE
Any dispute that arises between a certain workman and the employer is called as an individual dispute. Section 2A was instilled in the Industrial Disputes Act in 1965, because there did not exist, a legislation which provided an individual workman to go into dispute with his/her employer. But as of now, that is a fter 1965, Section 2A came into being there is a provision for this. The Sec 2A defines an individual dispute as: Dismissal, etc., of an individual workman to be deemed to be an industrial dispute. -
Where any employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches, or otherwise terminates the services of an individual workman, any dispute or difference between that workman and his employer connected with, or arising out of, such discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other workman nor any union of workmen is a party to the dispute. By the Sec 2A in the Act, it is discussed that a dispute or a difference between an individual workman and his employer connected with or arising out of: i)
discharge
ii)
dismissal
iii)
retrenchment
iv)
or termination of service of an individual workman shall be deemed as an
industrial dispute, no matter the support of any other workmen or any union of workmen is a party to the said dispute. Now „individual dispute‟ has widened its coverage by bringing within its ambit additional cause of dispute relating to transfer, promotion and computation of dues. At one point of time, it was also said that, the scheme of Industrial Disputes Act did not contemplate machinery provided therein should be dealing with any of the disputes related to individuals but with industries, that is individual workmen was never intended to be a subject of adjudication under the Act.
2
This question did not arise directly but the Supreme Court addressed this situation in the case D.N.Banejee v. P.R.Mukherje1e discussed the scope of „industrial dispute‟ in the context of individual dispute. Here, the judges said that in case of grievance on the part of a workman, he/she can file a petition and in case of interest of the other workmen and their trade union, the trade union can take it up. The oldest perspective of an individual dispute was that it would not be taken into account as the Act did
not deal with such a situations but later it changed which indicated that
individual decisions per se were not industrial dispute unless it was espoused by a trade union or an appreciable number of workmen. Therefore, there is a need for certain conditions for an individual dispute to be industrial disputes which are discussed below. 1. Requirement of appreciable number of workmen is necessary though what an „appreciable number‟ was never conceived because even the courts admit that it cannot mean the majority of the population working in the industry or establishment. Thus the determination of what an appreciable number might be has been left to the case for case determination. In Workmen v. M/s Dharampal Prem Chand 2 , 18 employees out of 45 were dismissed. There was no union of workmen at that point. It was held that they could raise a dispute by themselves. Again in Workmen of Indian Express Newspaper v. Management 3, 31 out of 68 working journalists of the union in the establishment espousing the cause met the requirement. Though in another case it was held that 5 workmen out of 60 was not an appreciable number to continue with proceedings and that case was dismissed. 2. A dispute was to be sponsored by a trade union to become an industrial dispute was another one of the conditions, though this was proved wrong when Newspapers Ltd v. U.P State Industrial Tribunal 4 , the defendant contented by saying that the dispute was not being taken up by a registered trade union. So the Supreme Court rejected this contention held that it is not necessary for a trade union to be registered but taking up the case on the workman‟s behalf was the only element needed to constitute the dispute as an industrial dispute.
1
(1953)1 LLJ 195 (SC) AIR 1966 SC 182 3 (1970)2 LLJ 132 4 (1957)2 LLJ 1(SC) 2
3
The above given points are just two of the reasons; the rest will be dealt with in the topic how individual disputes can be converted to an industrial dispute.
Reference of certain individual disputes to grievance settlement authorities: When a dispute concerning and individual workman arises in an establishment, a workman or any trade union of workmen which the workman is member of, may be prescribed to approach the Grievance Settlement Authority provided for the employer under that settlement. The Grievance Settlement Authority shall follow such procedure and complete proceedings within such as prescribed.
4
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE
Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, defines “industrial dispute” to mean: any dispute or difference between employers and employers or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any person. The definition of “industrial dispute” contains two limitations. (iii)
The adjective “Industrial” relates to the dispute of an industry as defined in the Act, and
(iv)
It expressly states that not all sorts of dispute and differences but the only those which bear upon the relationship of employers and workmen regarding employment, non-employment, terms of employment and conditions of labour are contemplated.
The dispute between the employer and the workmen are usually on the matters of demand for higher wages, non-implementation of bonus schemes, allowances, and conditions for work, working hours, leave and holidays without pay, unjust layoffs and retrenchments, victimization of workers, ill treatment by staff members, sympathetic strikes, political factors, indiscipline etc. These factors can be settled through simply going through some of the important things by the employers by keeping the workmen sati sfied but the employers‟ think of their profit and thus they do not listen to the demands of their workmen. As far as the workmen are considered, they do not assimilate the importance of their work and thus go on about having strikes, lock-outs and gheraos. The components of industrial disputes can be broken down into four: (i)
Factum of industrial dispute
(ii)
Parties to the dispute
(iii)
Subject-matter of the dispute; and
(iv)
Origin of the dispute
5
IMPORTANCE
Industrial and individual disputes are a part of the industry. Thus, they cannot be isolated but it can be avoided from taking place. Both these types of disputes are important because this is the only way that a workman can seek for redressal. The main object of the enactment of the Act is to ensure social justice to both the employees and employers and advance the progress of industry by bringing about the existence of harmony and cordial relationship between the parties so as to bring about industrial peace which would accelerate procedure activity of the country. The Act provides for prevention and settlement of industrial disputes. If asked which one is important then I think it would be industrial dispute because, in case of an industrial dispute the question is about a bunch of workmen, in case they have a grievance and it is not redressed or taken care of then many workmen are under loss. In case of an individual dispute the person to be taken care of is only one person. But in case of a group of workmen even collective bargaining can be done. No doubt, the state intervention in the form of compulsory adjudication has significantly contributed to the settlement of all sorts of industrial disputes between industrial employers and their employees. But its very success is the failure of the collective bargaining process as the normal method of settling industrial disputes. It is far better to leave the management and Trade unions to settle their differences and disputes among themselves than referring the issue to a third party settlement. The settlement of disputes, reached by mutual discussion, debate and negotiation, leaves no rancour behind and helps to create an atmosphere of harmony and co-operation.
6
WHEN DOES INDIVIDUAL DISPUTE BECOME INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE
An individual dispute becomes an industrial dispute when an appreciable number of workmen or the entire labour force in the establishment or at least in a particular section should to which the dispute is related to. Then there is a requirement of the trade union to sponsor the individual dispute so that it can be transformed into an industrial dispute. Then there is a certain time period for the espousal of the dispute, if the time period expires then the dispute even if applied as an industrial dispute will not be accepted to be one. A dispute was to be sponsored by a trade union to become an industrial dispute was another one of the conditions, though this was proved wrong when Newspapers Ltd v. U.P State Industrial Tribunal 5 , the defendant contented by saying that the dispute was not being taken up by a registered trade union. So the Supreme Court rejected this contention held that it is not necessary for a trade union to be registered but taking up the case on the workman‟s behalf was the only element needed to constitute the dispute as an industrial dispute.
5
(1957)2 LLJ 1(SC) 7
CONCLUSION
From all the above topics, it can be deduced that individual disputes usually become industrial disputes as there is a need for support from the other workmen for a certain workman. Then the industrial disputes are possibly more important than the industrial disputes because the number of people who have grievances in this case are more and the intensity of grievance is much higher than that of the i ndividual dispute. And also that with the help of various factors, the individual dispute can be changed to industrial dispute.
8
