Is it a Strike or a Lockout?

Background
24th Jan 1976 Galaxy group of Cos. To National Refineries Corporation Ltd Core Strength Customer satisfaction
Products- Petrochemicals, solvents, aircraft fuel etc Marketed through petrol stations, kerosene dealers, LPG distributor Supplied directly to airlines, industries

Employees Demand
Post nationalization
Demanded reliefs of permanency to all workmen Get the benefits of the settlement entered in1973-74

In 1978-79
Employees filed 2 complaints of unfair labor practices under M.R.T.U & P.U.L.P Act,1971

 On 24th Jan 1980- Charter of demands submitted by employees

Permanency Increase in age of retirement Revision of pay scales

Later
Demonstrations One days strike T.U activities on increase

7th Nov 1981-Threat to serve strike notice

What happened
28th Dec 1981 Union served ultimatum 5th Jan 1982- 250 workmen remained absent from work without any authority

12th Jan 1982 Management placed on record

The prevailing situation Willingness to have long term settlement Condition

 13th Jan 1982 Union convened secret ballot Informed management 92% workers voted for indefinite strike

14th Jan 1982 Plants work stopped Clerical staff continued till 15th Jan 1982

 17th June 1982 -reached settlement Workmen raised Industrial dispute to get wages Industrial tribunal puts blame on both parties Both parties challenge the order in Mumbai High Court

Why it is not a Lockout?

The climate in the organization was very uncertain Agitation of workers

Unauthorized absence of workers

The union had informed the management that 92% of the workers favoured an indefinite strike. This information was conveyed to the government through a letter on 12th Jan Workers who entered the factory on 14th Jan 1982 abstained from doing work.

 The technicians in LPG plant and workmen in utilities, securities & Fire station continued to work
Willful Go-slow attitude by workers
production from 25000 units to 14000 units

On 15th Jan even those workers who did not abstain form work earlier joined others (Chances of unfair labor practices use of coercion) Sec V Industrial Disputes Act 1947

 Rejection of the managements offer at gate meeting The management was compelled to phase out the catalytic plant ( technicians refused to help management)

Managements Standpoint
The only option available to a prudent and responsible management The agitation could result in heavy losses in terms of life and property given the nature of the industry. (inflammable hydrocarbon material) The production cannot be carried out in the absence of even a few workers because each of the stages and processes are mutually dependent If production is to be continued it would result in a catastrophe

 Not shutting down the plant would hold the management responsible not only for gross but also criminal negligence It was an action taken in good faith under Sec.57 of M.R.T.U and P.U.L.P Act 1971 Proper record of letters to the government and the notices sent to the workers maintained No responses for notices sent to workers for reaching an agreement

 The workers did not have the moral authority to go on strike on the grounds of issues which await the final verdict from the Industrial Court. (sub-section (6) of section 58 / section 71 of the Bombay Act)
The management was benevolent enough in not terminating the workers behind the issue Those workers who reported to work during the period between 14th Jan and 17th June were allotted work and received the wages. .

 Workers should be mindful of their duties and responsibilities not only to the company but the nation as a whole The six months strike caused heavy losses to the government It affected the roots of public life

 The constitutional right to workers under Article 41 mentions the right to work within states economic capacity The workers should try to view the issue from the managements view and understand the difficulties in implementing the demands

 The workers were not thoughtful of the merits of gainful employment they had under the government that assured many social security benefits, reasonable standards of living and above all job security They resorted to the extreme form of strike that too an illegal strike

 There is no wrong in the managements stand of No Work, No Pay. The prolonged strike of the workers were nothing more than a suicidal act that had a crippling effect on the society.

 Precedents : - HMT Ltd. (Supra) vs. Head Office Employees Association and Workmen of Indian Telephone Industries Ltd - Engineering Mazdoor Sabha vs. S.Taki Belgram Hence, no compulsion for the management to pay wages for the strike period of six months

THANK YOU