Dear Manidha,
If you go through the provisions of the Act, it is crystal clear that it is mandatory to get certified standing orders in terms of the process and procedure as laid down in the Act and State/central Rules as per its applicability. Failure to get it certified is a punishable offense. But, as I pointed out earlier, if you follow the MSOs, it is adequate.
I have not come across any prosecution against any organization yet by the authorities for non-certification, and perhaps Mr. Umakanthan, who has served in that authority, can shed more light on this aspect.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
660If you go through the provisions of the Act, it is crystal clear that it is mandatory to get certified standing orders in terms of the process and procedure as laid down in the Act and State/central Rules as per its applicability. Failure to get it certified is a punishable offense. But, as I pointed out earlier, if you follow the MSOs, it is adequate.
I have not come across any prosecution against any organization yet by the authorities for non-certification, and perhaps Mr. Umakanthan, who has served in that authority, can shed more light on this aspect.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you very much for clarifying Mr. Vinayak. This helps. Warm Regards, Manisha
From India, Attapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Attapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All ++++++++++++++ Thanks for your inputs. Wish a happy and prosperous festival of lights, DIWALI +++++++++++++
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In case, if you are not proceeding towards enacting MSO/SO or unionized set up, alternative arrangements may be made to set up a mechanism in the form of a 'Grievance Cell' comprising the employer's and employees' representatives, and an Appellate Committee to deal with grievances raised and complaints received. This type of setup team is functional in government and quasi-government institutions.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
In continuation of my query in this post, I need your advice/suggestions on the following points, please:
1. How does a Certifying Officer decide on the number of employees he would like to meet to elect the three workmen representatives?
2. Can the management suggest to the Certifying Officer about the employees who can be part of this meeting?
3. If, for some reason, the workmen representatives resign from the organization or would want to discontinue being a representative, then who is obliged to inform the Certifying Officer and what is generally the next step in this situation?
4. Can the HR/Employee Relations team, who are involved in drafting the standing orders, be part of the meeting for electing the workmen representative?
I request your advice, please.
Warm Regards,
Manisha
From India, Attapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In continuation of my query in this post, I need your advice/suggestions on the following points, please:
1. How does a Certifying Officer decide on the number of employees he would like to meet to elect the three workmen representatives?
2. Can the management suggest to the Certifying Officer about the employees who can be part of this meeting?
3. If, for some reason, the workmen representatives resign from the organization or would want to discontinue being a representative, then who is obliged to inform the Certifying Officer and what is generally the next step in this situation?
4. Can the HR/Employee Relations team, who are involved in drafting the standing orders, be part of the meeting for electing the workmen representative?
I request your advice, please.
Warm Regards,
Manisha
From India, Attapur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Certain humble words of clarification, as suggested by our friend Mr. Vinayak Nagarkar in his post dated 29-10-2018.
In the first place, the history of no penal action against the violation/non-compliance of any explicit provision of a Law so far may be indicative of the laxity of enforcement but cannot be construed as an implied sanction or precedent for continued non-compliance forever. Had the Legislature thought that the permanent adoption of the MSO is sufficient compliance, there would have been no necessity for the introduction of exclusive provisions for certification and amendment, nor to have captioned Sec. 12-A of the Act as "Temporary application of model Standing orders." Similarly, it is not at all warranted to provide for penal provisions, including enhanced punishment for a continuing offense. MSOs are simply guidelines to be followed while drafting and certifying Standing Orders befitting the peculiar nature of the activities of the industrial establishment concerned. Even an employer who has already got a CSO cannot simply implement the provisions of the subsequent amendment in the MSO without amending his existing CSO.
The practical difficulties highlighted in the process of certification would pale into insignificance if the proposed conditions of service are fair and legal in all respects. I am of the firm view that if an employer treats a trade union as a parallel institution of fostering amity between the Capital and Labor, he need not be scared of its lawful differences in matters of employment, including the certification or amendment of standing orders. For her latest queries, Manisha may refer to rule 6 of the IE(SO) Central Rules or the corresponding Rules of her State.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the first place, the history of no penal action against the violation/non-compliance of any explicit provision of a Law so far may be indicative of the laxity of enforcement but cannot be construed as an implied sanction or precedent for continued non-compliance forever. Had the Legislature thought that the permanent adoption of the MSO is sufficient compliance, there would have been no necessity for the introduction of exclusive provisions for certification and amendment, nor to have captioned Sec. 12-A of the Act as "Temporary application of model Standing orders." Similarly, it is not at all warranted to provide for penal provisions, including enhanced punishment for a continuing offense. MSOs are simply guidelines to be followed while drafting and certifying Standing Orders befitting the peculiar nature of the activities of the industrial establishment concerned. Even an employer who has already got a CSO cannot simply implement the provisions of the subsequent amendment in the MSO without amending his existing CSO.
The practical difficulties highlighted in the process of certification would pale into insignificance if the proposed conditions of service are fair and legal in all respects. I am of the firm view that if an employer treats a trade union as a parallel institution of fostering amity between the Capital and Labor, he need not be scared of its lawful differences in matters of employment, including the certification or amendment of standing orders. For her latest queries, Manisha may refer to rule 6 of the IE(SO) Central Rules or the corresponding Rules of her State.
From India, Salem
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.