Dear All,
Kindly clarify.
I am working in LTD company. Recently, we have done an agreement for 3 years from 2014 to 2017. All union leaders signed at the time of the agreement and accepted it. We have 2 unions, AITUC and BMS. AITUC made the agreement. In previous agreements, we had VDA, but the current agreement does not have VDA. After the agreement was done, the general secretary of AITUC is demanding VDA, and the second union, BMS, is supporting this demand. Now, the issue is with DCL.
My query is: Once the agreement is done, can changes be made? We asked DCL to refer to court. The agreement was done by both parties (Employer & AITUC).
Kindly help me out.
With Regards,
Siva Kumar
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Kindly clarify.
I am working in LTD company. Recently, we have done an agreement for 3 years from 2014 to 2017. All union leaders signed at the time of the agreement and accepted it. We have 2 unions, AITUC and BMS. AITUC made the agreement. In previous agreements, we had VDA, but the current agreement does not have VDA. After the agreement was done, the general secretary of AITUC is demanding VDA, and the second union, BMS, is supporting this demand. Now, the issue is with DCL.
My query is: Once the agreement is done, can changes be made? We asked DCL to refer to court. The agreement was done by both parties (Employer & AITUC).
Kindly help me out.
With Regards,
Siva Kumar
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Buddy,
Once an agreement is signed after mutual consensus between the employer and employee under the ID Act 18(1) sec, that agreement will be in operation for the time mentioned in the agreement and it is binding. It cannot be revoked by one party; however, if both parties agree to make changes, then it can be done by framing a new agreement.
With Regards,
Mr. Thumbs Up
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
105Once an agreement is signed after mutual consensus between the employer and employee under the ID Act 18(1) sec, that agreement will be in operation for the time mentioned in the agreement and it is binding. It cannot be revoked by one party; however, if both parties agree to make changes, then it can be done by framing a new agreement.
With Regards,
Mr. Thumbs Up
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Shiva,
To me, your narration of the particular point leading to backing-off by both the representative Trade Unions after signing the settlement under section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seems to be unclear. It would have been better had you mentioned the particular clause of the settlement as well as the saving clause, if any, speaking about modifications of earlier terms and demands if any not considered.
I do agree with Kumaran's point that once signed by the parties, all the terms of the settlement are impliedly understood to have the mutual consent of the parties concerned and will have an uninterrupted lease of life as agreed upon.
"VDA" can be interpreted differently. The immediate connotation appears to everyone as that of VDA linked to any Cost of Living Index. In my experience, I found some managements skeptical about VDA linked to COL on the ground of unpredictability of their financial commitment over the period of settlement and prefer differential rates of DA over the years covered by the settlement, thus fulfilling the aspect of variability in the matter of payment of DA. Both practices have their own pros and cons.
Normally, switching over from VDA linked to COL will not be acceptable to workmen. Such being the general perception, what prompted your management towards the switch-over in this aspect and how they convinced both the unions are matters of deep analysis. It might be the management used the concession of any long-term demand as a barter, and on the face of it, the union leaders signed the settlement and then backed off after its objection by all the workmen.
So, in my opinion, your management should review the settlement to restore cordial relations rather than preferring adjudication.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To me, your narration of the particular point leading to backing-off by both the representative Trade Unions after signing the settlement under section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seems to be unclear. It would have been better had you mentioned the particular clause of the settlement as well as the saving clause, if any, speaking about modifications of earlier terms and demands if any not considered.
I do agree with Kumaran's point that once signed by the parties, all the terms of the settlement are impliedly understood to have the mutual consent of the parties concerned and will have an uninterrupted lease of life as agreed upon.
"VDA" can be interpreted differently. The immediate connotation appears to everyone as that of VDA linked to any Cost of Living Index. In my experience, I found some managements skeptical about VDA linked to COL on the ground of unpredictability of their financial commitment over the period of settlement and prefer differential rates of DA over the years covered by the settlement, thus fulfilling the aspect of variability in the matter of payment of DA. Both practices have their own pros and cons.
Normally, switching over from VDA linked to COL will not be acceptable to workmen. Such being the general perception, what prompted your management towards the switch-over in this aspect and how they convinced both the unions are matters of deep analysis. It might be the management used the concession of any long-term demand as a barter, and on the face of it, the union leaders signed the settlement and then backed off after its objection by all the workmen.
So, in my opinion, your management should review the settlement to restore cordial relations rather than preferring adjudication.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It all depends on the terms of the agreement. If the agreement resolves some issues and leaves open other issues, and if that includes VDA, then probably it is open to the unions to raise the VDA issue. If the agreement is on wage fixation and it includes a formula on DA agreed to by the majority union, then it is stopped from raising the VDA issue again. If the agreement contains a clause that it sets at rest all disputes and contains an undertaking by the union that it will not agitate any other issue during the currency of the existing settlement, then you need to invoke that clause to stop the union from raising the VDA issue. You need to take a stand according to the terms of your agreement.
B. Saikumar
Navi Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
B. Saikumar
Navi Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I fully agree with Sai Kumar .You have to take Stand other wise any Union will raise the issue again and again, for other issues also.Since more than One Union is Involved .
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Siva Kumar,
I am with B. Saikumar. But I need to understand, do you have a recognized union in your plant? In the case of a multiplicity of unions, you must sign the settlement with the Recognized Union or with the union that has more members.
Regards,
Govind Pawar
9823411433
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am with B. Saikumar. But I need to understand, do you have a recognized union in your plant? In the case of a multiplicity of unions, you must sign the settlement with the Recognized Union or with the union that has more members.
Regards,
Govind Pawar
9823411433
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Siva,
Your statement, "We asked DCL to refer to court" is not understood, when you have not mentioned what exactly is the objection of the management in agreeing to the demand of the unions. By the way, why does the management want interference from a third party, especially the court, in maintaining cordial employer-employee relations? Employer-employee relations should always be voluntary and consensual, not imposed by any outside agencies, such as court judgments, etc.
There is no hard and fast rule to stick to an agreement if it is deficient in some way. There is no harm in modifying the agreement between the employer and the unions in the interest of the organization's productivity, management's respectability, and peace within the organization, provided there is no substantial loss to the organization and both parties agree.
So, you have to decide whether there is any harm in accepting the demands of the union on the issue of VDA.
In fact, management should prefer not to invite any outside interference in the organization's management issues. Such interference should be rare, occurring only when the management feels completely handicapped due to unjustified demands from the unions/employees.
Please remember, the costs of disputes are substantial and unbearable in terms of money, productivity, and the organization's reputation, as well as the management's respectability.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your statement, "We asked DCL to refer to court" is not understood, when you have not mentioned what exactly is the objection of the management in agreeing to the demand of the unions. By the way, why does the management want interference from a third party, especially the court, in maintaining cordial employer-employee relations? Employer-employee relations should always be voluntary and consensual, not imposed by any outside agencies, such as court judgments, etc.
There is no hard and fast rule to stick to an agreement if it is deficient in some way. There is no harm in modifying the agreement between the employer and the unions in the interest of the organization's productivity, management's respectability, and peace within the organization, provided there is no substantial loss to the organization and both parties agree.
So, you have to decide whether there is any harm in accepting the demands of the union on the issue of VDA.
In fact, management should prefer not to invite any outside interference in the organization's management issues. Such interference should be rare, occurring only when the management feels completely handicapped due to unjustified demands from the unions/employees.
Please remember, the costs of disputes are substantial and unbearable in terms of money, productivity, and the organization's reputation, as well as the management's respectability.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Employee agreement.doc
Employee Relations.ppt