Dear Seniors,
Here is interesting case for IR/HR professionals and I request your valuable guidance to deal the matter. Santosh is union leader and working in a MNC company for last 25 years. Several times he had been active participant of workmen wage negotiations agreement as president of the legally registered union. However Management never appreciated Santosh as Union leader and has been on look out for every single opportunity to cow him down especially in past three years when he opted to be out of union activities. He has been very witty and never could be caught doing wrong more so Management did not do it openly till recently as he had been President of employees union on and off during his service till recently.
About three years ago when he was not union office bearer he was issued charge sheet for sleeping charges and domestic enquiry was conducted and proved to be guilty and was coerced to be terminated. As the circumstances were not favoring Santosh gave under taking of not repeating such or similar misconduct including he would not be contesting union election in future and desist from union activities for minimum next two years. Management got this undertaking on Rs. 100 stamp paper and witnesses were then union office bearers as part to this undertaking. Management exhibited a notice informing employees in general about the commitment of Santosh to management and the consequences he would suffer in case of default. The notice continues to be on the notice board for more than two years which is shear harassment to Santosh.
Recently as the two years period expired Santosh contested the union elections and got elected but this time not as a President but as a general member of the union body. Management had sent loud feeler to Santosh not to contest union elections and now to the newly elected panel of not holding the discussions unless they bar the Santosh from their Union panel. New union panel asked Santosh to resign as a union panel member due to managements insistence and this would facilitate co-opt any other member of their choice to complete the union panels minimum number as per bylaws. Santosh explained the union panel he would not resign but would cooperate with them by opting to be not in the union panel as active member. Management being unhappy about this hooked Santosh in small petty matter such as breaking the queue in the employee canteen during the lunch recess and second case of arguing with security for lodging the complaint against him of breaking the queue in the canteen.
Because of coercive tactics and out of sheer power of position the concerned officers and that they are successful in creating a terror to not stand up and support Santosh he is helpless and that his union committee too is not able to extend support out of fear and harassment form the management he is singled out Santosh is being vehemently victimized and not able to take fight with management fearing of a captive punishment. .
Request what lawful remedies are available to Santosh and if really he could be terminated assuming that Santosh so far has tried all other options except falling on the feet’s of the concerned officials or o sot say management. .
Thanking you in anticipation of your valuable advices.
W Narendra
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Here is interesting case for IR/HR professionals and I request your valuable guidance to deal the matter. Santosh is union leader and working in a MNC company for last 25 years. Several times he had been active participant of workmen wage negotiations agreement as president of the legally registered union. However Management never appreciated Santosh as Union leader and has been on look out for every single opportunity to cow him down especially in past three years when he opted to be out of union activities. He has been very witty and never could be caught doing wrong more so Management did not do it openly till recently as he had been President of employees union on and off during his service till recently.
About three years ago when he was not union office bearer he was issued charge sheet for sleeping charges and domestic enquiry was conducted and proved to be guilty and was coerced to be terminated. As the circumstances were not favoring Santosh gave under taking of not repeating such or similar misconduct including he would not be contesting union election in future and desist from union activities for minimum next two years. Management got this undertaking on Rs. 100 stamp paper and witnesses were then union office bearers as part to this undertaking. Management exhibited a notice informing employees in general about the commitment of Santosh to management and the consequences he would suffer in case of default. The notice continues to be on the notice board for more than two years which is shear harassment to Santosh.
Recently as the two years period expired Santosh contested the union elections and got elected but this time not as a President but as a general member of the union body. Management had sent loud feeler to Santosh not to contest union elections and now to the newly elected panel of not holding the discussions unless they bar the Santosh from their Union panel. New union panel asked Santosh to resign as a union panel member due to managements insistence and this would facilitate co-opt any other member of their choice to complete the union panels minimum number as per bylaws. Santosh explained the union panel he would not resign but would cooperate with them by opting to be not in the union panel as active member. Management being unhappy about this hooked Santosh in small petty matter such as breaking the queue in the employee canteen during the lunch recess and second case of arguing with security for lodging the complaint against him of breaking the queue in the canteen.
Because of coercive tactics and out of sheer power of position the concerned officers and that they are successful in creating a terror to not stand up and support Santosh he is helpless and that his union committee too is not able to extend support out of fear and harassment form the management he is singled out Santosh is being vehemently victimized and not able to take fight with management fearing of a captive punishment. .
Request what lawful remedies are available to Santosh and if really he could be terminated assuming that Santosh so far has tried all other options except falling on the feet’s of the concerned officials or o sot say management. .
Thanking you in anticipation of your valuable advices.
W Narendra
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi there,
There are two kinds of misconduct: Major and Minor. A major penalty cannot be imposed for minor misconduct (even if proved); therefore, I do not think they can terminate him. Even if terminated, he can seek recourse in higher courts and get reinstated.
Now, to the point of his leaving the Union Post. This is a dicey situation. In my opinion, Santosh is correct in hanging on to the post. (I think he realized his mistake of not contesting elections during the last 3 years when he received his first charge sheet for sleeping on duty.) My advice would be not to resign from the post; otherwise, he will be a sitting duck for action.
However, this would not please the management. From what I read about the other Union leaders, the Union itself appears to be one out to please the management and without any spine or fighting spirit. I would not be surprised if the management cohorts with the other office bearers and seeks his removal for anti-union activities as may be required according to the bylaws.
Santosh should approach the higher-ups in the Union's affiliated bodies and plead his case and assure his safety for the rest of his service period.
This is all I can think of. Hope this helps.
Robin Varghese
Email: robin_vargh@yahoo.com
Blog: Shooting from the hip (http://www.delhiyounglad.blogspot.com)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
29There are two kinds of misconduct: Major and Minor. A major penalty cannot be imposed for minor misconduct (even if proved); therefore, I do not think they can terminate him. Even if terminated, he can seek recourse in higher courts and get reinstated.
Now, to the point of his leaving the Union Post. This is a dicey situation. In my opinion, Santosh is correct in hanging on to the post. (I think he realized his mistake of not contesting elections during the last 3 years when he received his first charge sheet for sleeping on duty.) My advice would be not to resign from the post; otherwise, he will be a sitting duck for action.
However, this would not please the management. From what I read about the other Union leaders, the Union itself appears to be one out to please the management and without any spine or fighting spirit. I would not be surprised if the management cohorts with the other office bearers and seeks his removal for anti-union activities as may be required according to the bylaws.
Santosh should approach the higher-ups in the Union's affiliated bodies and plead his case and assure his safety for the rest of his service period.
This is all I can think of. Hope this helps.
Robin Varghese
Email: robin_vargh@yahoo.com
Blog: Shooting from the hip (http://www.delhiyounglad.blogspot.com)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
At the outset, I confirmed that the management of the company, especially HR Management, is not aware of the legal obligations under the ID Act. If the company is in Maharashtra, then the management totally violated the MRTU AND PULP law by forcing Santosh to give an undertaking that he would not be part of the office bearers. As per the law, this is an Unfair Labour Practice on the part of management to prevent the legal right of workers to form a union and to collect. You can file a case against the management.
Sleeping on duty does not necessarily prove grounds for dismissal, as one might not be feeling well under the circumstances. You can challenge the decision if they initiated it. What does the inquiry report say? Please check once the statement given by Santosh during the inquiry.
Mangesh Wakodkar
Aurangabad
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sleeping on duty does not necessarily prove grounds for dismissal, as one might not be feeling well under the circumstances. You can challenge the decision if they initiated it. What does the inquiry report say? Please check once the statement given by Santosh during the inquiry.
Mangesh Wakodkar
Aurangabad
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Robin,
Greetings!
Thank you very much for your quick response. I am in agreement with your observations and suggestions. I am happy that at least Santosh is not moving in the wrong direction and is maintaining a semblance of good discipline as a responsible worker and union leader, which he has always been. I would like to know specifically if he could individually file a complaint against a few management officers for harassment/victimization or a case with the Human Rights Commission as I don't have much awareness or knowledge about it.
Regards,
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Greetings!
Thank you very much for your quick response. I am in agreement with your observations and suggestions. I am happy that at least Santosh is not moving in the wrong direction and is maintaining a semblance of good discipline as a responsible worker and union leader, which he has always been. I would like to know specifically if he could individually file a complaint against a few management officers for harassment/victimization or a case with the Human Rights Commission as I don't have much awareness or knowledge about it.
Regards,
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friend,
I have sent a personal email - do not antagonize anyone and do not seek any redressal anywhere for the moment. Try to sort out this issue as per my advice if you agree with it.
All the best,
Robin Varghese
Email: robin_vargh@yahoo.com
Blog: Shooting from the hip - http://www.delhiyounglad.blogspot.com
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have sent a personal email - do not antagonize anyone and do not seek any redressal anywhere for the moment. Try to sort out this issue as per my advice if you agree with it.
All the best,
Robin Varghese
Email: robin_vargh@yahoo.com
Blog: Shooting from the hip - http://www.delhiyounglad.blogspot.com
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
One cannot have the cake and eat it too! Only this proverb comes to my mind after going through the story of Santhosh, the union leader who is actively inclined towards the protection of the interests of his union members, and Santhosh, an ordinary workman who is in dire necessity of keeping his self-esteem and the means of livelihood intact.
The singling out of Santhosh and the insinuations and insults hurled upon by the management, and the moot witnessing of the same by the union as a body, is only indicative of the fact that the union is a mere puppet in the hands of the management. There may be a section of sensitive workmen, but they seem to be a microscopic minority.
The first and foremost essential quality of a leader, particularly a trade union leader, is the ability to lead the followers and not follow them just for the sake of his apparently exalted status. If not, one has to keep himself aloof from such activity. Union leaders are not groomed by workmen but by managements, and that is how the great trade union leaders happen to be mostly dismissed employees.
Leadership cannot be a trait of mere unmindful bravery but of the ability to employ tactics in confrontation and conflict resolution whenever necessary. In my long career as a Conciliation Officer, I've seen a number of good-hearted, straight-forward, and highly knowledgeable trade union leaders, as well as managers messing up the entire things because of their talkative nature that sowed deep down negative impressions in the minds of the other side.
Essentially, a lot of learning on the part of workmen and a lot of unlearning on the part of managers are very much required when they are part of any negotiation team. The intermittent presence of Santhosh in the bargaining team as narrated in the post compels me only to infer that things went only the way the management wanted irrespective of his presence or absence, and even then the management is bent upon harassing him is a point for introspection only by Santhosh, the individual.
So, dear Narendra, have a dispassionate introspection whether you are the Santhosh or not and decide for yourself!
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The singling out of Santhosh and the insinuations and insults hurled upon by the management, and the moot witnessing of the same by the union as a body, is only indicative of the fact that the union is a mere puppet in the hands of the management. There may be a section of sensitive workmen, but they seem to be a microscopic minority.
The first and foremost essential quality of a leader, particularly a trade union leader, is the ability to lead the followers and not follow them just for the sake of his apparently exalted status. If not, one has to keep himself aloof from such activity. Union leaders are not groomed by workmen but by managements, and that is how the great trade union leaders happen to be mostly dismissed employees.
Leadership cannot be a trait of mere unmindful bravery but of the ability to employ tactics in confrontation and conflict resolution whenever necessary. In my long career as a Conciliation Officer, I've seen a number of good-hearted, straight-forward, and highly knowledgeable trade union leaders, as well as managers messing up the entire things because of their talkative nature that sowed deep down negative impressions in the minds of the other side.
Essentially, a lot of learning on the part of workmen and a lot of unlearning on the part of managers are very much required when they are part of any negotiation team. The intermittent presence of Santhosh in the bargaining team as narrated in the post compels me only to infer that things went only the way the management wanted irrespective of his presence or absence, and even then the management is bent upon harassing him is a point for introspection only by Santhosh, the individual.
So, dear Narendra, have a dispassionate introspection whether you are the Santhosh or not and decide for yourself!
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Where Santosh, the union leader, faltered in losing his status and image as the president of the Union:
1. He did not even have witnesses of co-workers to challenge petty charges of sleeping, let alone expect support in union activities. He does not appear to have any legal expert assistance backing him.
2. He did not challenge the management's action regarding the undertaking that he would not participate in union activities. This is a patently unfair labor practice under the Industrial Disputes Act, which could have led to punishment for the management. The court could have given further directions to deter the use of unfair labor practices and victimization.
3. The union should have engaged a proper legal expert to counter all forms of victimization and anti-union activities by the management.
4. He should have involved prominent union leaders to seek their guidance periodically and organized worker meetings with them.
5. He should have organized legal strikes against the unfair labor practices and victimization practiced by the management.
6. As a protected workman under section 33(3) of the ID Act, no action of punishment, dismissal, or changes in service conditions can be taken without the court's permission.
7. If he is performing his duties normally, fabricating false charges against him is also considered unfair trade practice and victimization.
8. He should have informed his fellow workers that today it is his turn, but tomorrow it could be one of them, so they should remain united and avoid illegal actions. Caution must be exercised before any union action is taken.
9. Terminating a union leader under labor laws is not an easy task.
10. The management should realize that it is in the company's interest for both the union and management to work in harmony.
11. A weak union reflects low worker morale.
Thanks,
Sushil
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. He did not even have witnesses of co-workers to challenge petty charges of sleeping, let alone expect support in union activities. He does not appear to have any legal expert assistance backing him.
2. He did not challenge the management's action regarding the undertaking that he would not participate in union activities. This is a patently unfair labor practice under the Industrial Disputes Act, which could have led to punishment for the management. The court could have given further directions to deter the use of unfair labor practices and victimization.
3. The union should have engaged a proper legal expert to counter all forms of victimization and anti-union activities by the management.
4. He should have involved prominent union leaders to seek their guidance periodically and organized worker meetings with them.
5. He should have organized legal strikes against the unfair labor practices and victimization practiced by the management.
6. As a protected workman under section 33(3) of the ID Act, no action of punishment, dismissal, or changes in service conditions can be taken without the court's permission.
7. If he is performing his duties normally, fabricating false charges against him is also considered unfair trade practice and victimization.
8. He should have informed his fellow workers that today it is his turn, but tomorrow it could be one of them, so they should remain united and avoid illegal actions. Caution must be exercised before any union action is taken.
9. Terminating a union leader under labor laws is not an easy task.
10. The management should realize that it is in the company's interest for both the union and management to work in harmony.
11. A weak union reflects low worker morale.
Thanks,
Sushil
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It needs emphasis that the concept of workman is understood in common parlance as a blue-collar job holder, but one should be clear that a technical software engineer or other technical engineer working in an MNC is the grassroots level workforce which produces the product of the company. They are also covered within the definition of workman laid down under the Industrial Disputes Act. Thus, a strong labor union can safeguard their financial security, job security, morale, collective bargaining, and reduce arbitrariness of management. A weak union, as described in the query, will lead to the exploitation of the workforce. Here, Santosh performed badly by not evoking the spirits of the workforce. There are many other indescribable factors that led him to such an awkward situation.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New 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.