Dynamics of Trade Unionism in

New Economy

A case presentation by:

TEAM - 6

Presenters
Nishant - Princy - Rohit - Shweta - Urvie - Vidisha
 Company Information
• PLB – 15 manufacturing units and corporate offices in and
around bengaluru
•
• Deals with manufacturing and supply of electronic and
mechanical spare parts
•
• Applies concepts like Kanaban (JIT), TQM, MDP
•
• Annual Turnover of 2500 crores
•
• 6000 workers with 80% women (16-25 age group)
•
 Bad Practices - 1
• One-third of the employees are trainees but not covered under
Apprentices Act, 1961
•
• Long distance between home and workplace is knowingly
made more
•
• Socialization among employees not entertained
•
• An appointed caretaker looks into all issues rather than any
line or personnel manager
•
• After the age of 25, employees are forced to leave their jobs
•
 Union of workers
• A group of workers approached the Centre of Indian Trade
Unions Bangalore
•
• With their guidance a meeting of around 1000 employees was
held on 22 May 1998
•
• An Union named PLBB Group Companies Karmikara Sangha,
Bangalore was formed
•
• Formed as per the provisions of Trade Unions Act, 1926
•
 Trade Unions Act,1926
• The objectives of the SANGHA were laid down
•
• The office bearers and heads were chosen
•
• It was registered by the Dy. Registrar of Trade Unions,
Bangalore Division II
•
• Certificate of Registration (Form C) was issued
•
 Union Meet
• Wages were very meager
•
• Service standards were poor
•
• Many demands were addressed and noted down
•
• July 31, 1998 the SANGHA made the demands before the
management
•
• SANGHA was ready for meetings on negotiation of the
demands
 Bad Practices - 2
• Instead of listening to the demands it started to harass the
employees by various means
•
• Suspensions crossed 300 by November, 1998
•
• 700 trainees were discontinued
•
•
• As a result, a strike was declared

 SANGHA - Actions
• Filed cases with the Commissioner of Labor
•
•
• Petitions in the High Court of Karnataka to obtain stay orders
on the prohibitory orders
• Official strike across all branches commenced on Nov 19,
1998
• Dharna near legislative assembly
•
 Management’s Response
v
 Hired Casual workers
v
vShifted
– production units to Kerala and Noida
v
v
 Govt. Intervention
Commissioner of labor sends a letter on Nov 25, 1998 to CEO,


CITU and the SANGHA



• Registration of SANGHA was null and void

• Need for a separate union for each unit of the company
• Most important issue was the working condition of the workers
• Conciliation meeting to be conveyed on Nov 27, 1998
• Refrain from any kind of provocative acts so as to maintain
peace and harmony
• Dy. Registrar issued a show-cause notice to the SANGHA


–
 SANGHA’s Reaction
v Commissioner was raising unnecessary objections
vIt urged the Commissioner not to precipitate the issue under the
guise of technicalities
–
vThe SANGHA claimed that the certificate was issued under the
section 9 of the Trade Union Act, 1926
vExpressed willingness to participate in the meeting
vPointed out that there was no action against mgt. for indulging
in unfair labor practices
vIt also seek clarifications regarding unions whose objects
extend beyond a state
vSANGHA filed a petition in High Court of Karnataka against
the Dy. Registrar’s notice
v
 Conciliation Meeting
vThe mgt. attended only after summons were issued. Meeting

was held on Jan 13, 1999.
vMgt. claimed that workers were happy because of the wage
hike and the few workers were instigated to join the SANGHA
–
vMgt. did not consider SANGHA as a trade union
vFailure report of the meeting was sent on Jan 27, 1999
----------
vAfter the meeting, they offered wage hike for workers resulting in
weakening of the strike
vHigh Court ordered to call off the strike
vHigh Court in turn referred the case to Industrial Tribunal on Feb, 99.
v
 Terms of Reference
1.
(a) whether the demands made by the SANGHA are legal?
(b) Whether the workers are entitled to interim relief?
(c) If, yes to what relief they are eligible?
–

2.
(a) whether strike commenced on November 19, 1998 by the
workers is legal?
(b) If not, to what relief the workers are entitled?
v
 SANGHA’s Response
v No provision of interim relief for the workers
v
vSANGHA – files a writ petition against the order of
reference
v
v
 Govt. Influence
v The then Labor Minister passed an order for interim relief of
Rs.300 per worker per month
v
– Secretary to the ministry of commerce and industries
vPrinciple
submitted a note to the govt.
v
vChief Minister also intervened
v
vGovt. ordered the prohibition of strike
v
vChief Minister supported the management
v
v
 Bommanahalli Case
vMarch 25, 1999 – 50 men attacked the bus carrying 40 employees

vPelted by stone and set on fire
v10 employees sustained burnt injuries, 3 burnt severely
vPolice arrived late
– to meet all the expenses and claimed that the attackers were
vMgt. promised
part of the CITU
vCITU denied the allegations
vPolice charged sheeted nearly 50 persons
vSessions court convicted 7 out of them
vAfter SANGHA filed an appeal in the High Court, another 5 were convicted
vThe later 5 were granted bail
vThe case is still pending in the supreme court
v
v
v
 At the end…
v On April 14, 1999 the five month old strike was called off
v
vCame down heavily on the Chief Minister and the registrar
v –
vUpheld–the registration of SANGHA

v
vMeantime, company has closed its present operations
v
vMoved into software development business
v
v
 Reasons for Trade Union
Formation
Question: Why the workers organize themselves
into a trade union?


• Conditions of employment
• Irregular employment
• Union instrumentality
• Lack of power
• Reduced dependency on management
 Management’s Reactions
Question: How should management react to such


efforts


• Meet expectations
• Collective bargaining
• Develop trust
• Welfare activities

 PLB’s approach to SANGHA
Question:In the instant case the management of


PLB was right in its approach. Do you agree or

disagree. Explain your views.


• Hike wages
• Abruptly changing the shift timings,
• Stopping canteen facilities,
• Stopping the transport facility, and
• Suspending the activities of the SANGHA
• Suspending, refusing employment, and
terminating/retrenching employees without valid reasons
 Was PLB’s approach
correct?
•
• Incorrect
• Reasons
•
Ø Terminated workers without valid reasons
Ø Reluctant to negotiate
Ø Used influential power to weaken union

 Trade Union Formation -
CASE
Question: Delineate the process of trade union


formation and registration using this case.


• Group of workers went to Center of Indian Trade Unions Bangalore
region.
• Over 1000 employees from different factories met
• PLBB group Companies Karmikara Sangh formed.
• Objectives of the Sangha were laid down
• Appointed office bearers of CITU as President and General
Secretary
• Application for registration submitted to Deputy Registrar of Trade
Union, Bangalore Division 2
• Certificate of registration was issued in Form C
• The management was informed about the registration and formation
of the Trade Union
 Trade Union Formation -
LAW
• Any 7 or more members by subscribing their name can form a
trade union
•
• At least 10% or 100 workmen (whichever is less) should be
the members of Trade Union on the date of making of the
application
•
• Any application for the formation of a Trade Union needs to
be submitted to and verified by the Registrar
•
• Under Section 3 (2), the government may appoint as many
additional and deputy registrar of trade unions who may
exercise the power of the registrar at any situation
 Role of Registrar - CASE
Question: Comment on the role played by the


Registrar of Trade Unions.



• Registration of the SANGHA was ab initio void

• A separate union for each unit of the Company needs to be
registered
• Most important issue was the condition of the workmen
• That a conciliation meeting was convened at the level of the
Deputy Commissioner of labor and Conciliation officer of
the area on November 27, 1998 at 3PM,
• Refrain from every kind of provocative acts
 Duties of Registrar - LAW
• Registrar can be defined as:
 (i) A Registrar of Trade Unions appointed by the
appropriate Government under section 3, and includes an
additional or Deputy Registrar of Trade Unions; and
 (ii) In relation to any Trade Union, the Registrar
appointed for the State in which the head or registered office,
as the case may be, of the Trade Union is situated;


• Receiving the application

• Verifying and scrutinizing the application
• Issuing the certificate of registration
• Withdraw or cancel registration
•
•

 CITU

Q u e stio n : Comment on the role of the Government

– the Labor and Chief Minister, the police and the
la b o r d e p a rtm e n t - in th is ca se . E sta b lish e d in 1 9 7 1 ,
a s a re su lt to th e sp lit in th e A IT U C

Goal of organizing the workers to further their interests in

Economic, Social and Political matters
Structure
Methods adopted – legislative, demonstrations, agitations and
intensification

 Role of Government

Biased towards management

Change in the labor minister
CMs statement – contributions to the revenue of the
state

 Role of Labor Department

Unaware of their jurisdiction

Ignorance of law – threat of withdrawal of the
certificate of registration
Harassed the Union
Issued the Show Cause Notice with mala fide
intentions at the instance
 Role of Police

Unable to ensure safety of workers


Not on time
 IR Manager
Question: What lesson do you draw from this case


for your future role as an IR manager?





• To ensure peace and harmony by pro active employee relations
• Statutory compliance
• Employee Welfare
• Grievance Redressal
• Personnel Administration - Canteen, Security, Recreation club & Medical
 CONCLUSION
v The case gives an excellent example of BAD industrial
relations
v
– the management’s wrong decisions, the govt.
vApart from
intervention was not perfect and as expected
v
vThis case reflects the various loopholes in the govt.’s system of
managing the labor legislations
v
vThis case gives an vivid understanding for how and where an
IR manager should act and try to make peace
v
v
 COMPANY NAME


British Physical Laboratories

v
v
v
v