Dear Professionals,
Can someone please elaborate Section 18(3) of ID Act?
How is the settlement made under this section different from that under 18(1) or 12(3)?
What are the circumstances in which 18(3) settlement could be made?
Thanks in advance for clarifications.
Regards,
Jeev.
From India, Bangalore
6Can someone please elaborate Section 18(3) of ID Act?
How is the settlement made under this section different from that under 18(1) or 12(3)?
What are the circumstances in which 18(3) settlement could be made?
Thanks in advance for clarifications.
Regards,
Jeev.
From India, Bangalore
Dear Jeevan,
As per the 18(1) of the ID act any settlement arrived between the management and the union (bi partite) shall be binding only on the workers party to the settlement. In other words it shall not be binding on members of union other than the one which is the party to the settlement.
As per 18 (3) of the act if the settlement between the two parties is certified by the conciliation office/ ALC or LC the same shall be binding on all worker whether they are member of the union which is party to the agreement or not. This is typically a tri partite agreement.
Hope this is of some help.
Best wishes,
Sunil Joshi
PGCHRM - XLRI
From United States, Bedford
As per the 18(1) of the ID act any settlement arrived between the management and the union (bi partite) shall be binding only on the workers party to the settlement. In other words it shall not be binding on members of union other than the one which is the party to the settlement.
As per 18 (3) of the act if the settlement between the two parties is certified by the conciliation office/ ALC or LC the same shall be binding on all worker whether they are member of the union which is party to the agreement or not. This is typically a tri partite agreement.
Hope this is of some help.
Best wishes,
Sunil Joshi
PGCHRM - XLRI
From United States, Bedford
Dear Jeevaneyan,
Section 12 gives us the Duties of Conciliation Officer under the Act and describes his jurisdiction and limits regarding the duties. This has nothing to do with the process of Settlement but describes what are the duties of Conciliation Officers should be to have a settlement valid under the Act.
For example: Let us take a criminal offence like Murder. It involves: 1)Police 2) Judiciary. Now IPC and CrPC describes the duties and responsibilities of Police and Judiciary in one part: The other part describes how the trial is to be conducted and what punishment to be meted out in case of conviction according to the gravity of the offence.
So, to compare between the duties of the Judiciary and trial or quantum of punishment is not proper.
On the other hand Section 18 describes which sort of settlement arrived will be binding:
Sub Section 1, says: A Bipartaite Agreement is valid for the parties involved in the settlement.
Sub Section 2, says: Aribritation Award is binding on the parties to has referred the dispute for arbitration, subjected to that it does not violates any provisions of sub-section (3)
Section 18(3) explains that in case of any decision arrived either by the (1)Conciliation proceedings
(2)Notification issued by Appropriate Government u/s10A(3)
(3) Labour Court
(4) Industrial Tribunal
will be binding on parties described in Section 18(a),(b),(c),(d).
Revert back for further queries.
Regards,
SC
From India, Thane
Section 12 gives us the Duties of Conciliation Officer under the Act and describes his jurisdiction and limits regarding the duties. This has nothing to do with the process of Settlement but describes what are the duties of Conciliation Officers should be to have a settlement valid under the Act.
For example: Let us take a criminal offence like Murder. It involves: 1)Police 2) Judiciary. Now IPC and CrPC describes the duties and responsibilities of Police and Judiciary in one part: The other part describes how the trial is to be conducted and what punishment to be meted out in case of conviction according to the gravity of the offence.
So, to compare between the duties of the Judiciary and trial or quantum of punishment is not proper.
On the other hand Section 18 describes which sort of settlement arrived will be binding:
Sub Section 1, says: A Bipartaite Agreement is valid for the parties involved in the settlement.
Sub Section 2, says: Aribritation Award is binding on the parties to has referred the dispute for arbitration, subjected to that it does not violates any provisions of sub-section (3)
Section 18(3) explains that in case of any decision arrived either by the (1)Conciliation proceedings
(2)Notification issued by Appropriate Government u/s10A(3)
(3) Labour Court
(4) Industrial Tribunal
will be binding on parties described in Section 18(a),(b),(c),(d).
Revert back for further queries.
Regards,
SC
From India, Thane
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Circular No 1-2018 Processing of income-tax returns under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act .pdf
Performance Review 2008(employee Section).ppt