Hi R/Saswath sir,
We have negotiated with the union sitting across the table and come to the conclusion for the hike in their wages for the five years with a certain amount of lump sum hike, taking into consideration this pandemic and the last wage settlement, and the financial condition of the company. We negotiated with the union on the hike of a certain amount, including all the statutory contributions of the employer's part. It was almost negotiated with the union, but one day they suddenly came to the office and denied the conditions of negotiation (at that time, the agreement was not signed) and called for a strike without giving any intimation.
They were denying that the statutory part of the employer would not be a part of the lump sum hike, which we discussed during the meeting.
Regards,
Ravi B.
From India, Nagpur
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
7We have negotiated with the union sitting across the table and come to the conclusion for the hike in their wages for the five years with a certain amount of lump sum hike, taking into consideration this pandemic and the last wage settlement, and the financial condition of the company. We negotiated with the union on the hike of a certain amount, including all the statutory contributions of the employer's part. It was almost negotiated with the union, but one day they suddenly came to the office and denied the conditions of negotiation (at that time, the agreement was not signed) and called for a strike without giving any intimation.
They were denying that the statutory part of the employer would not be a part of the lump sum hike, which we discussed during the meeting.
Regards,
Ravi B.
From India, Nagpur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What you are telling us now is completely different from what you put in the Original Post Such things will create a problem as members will give you wrong advice...
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear CiteHR member Shri Ravi ji,
I certainly agree with Mr. Saswata Banerjee that posting a query with incomplete facts or not giving the correct position of a particular situation is inappropriate as you will not get adequate and relevant opinions.
Even now, it is not clear as to what action has been taken by your management when so many days have passed.
A written notice should be issued/pasted on the notice board about the financial health of the company and the demand of the Union. It should be intimated that a strike without notice is illegal, and sudden stoppage of work will cause financial loss to the company and result in non-acceptance of the demand of the Union. The workers should be advised to return to duty, failing which their services would be terminated. It should also be indicated that management is open to discussion on the demand and will consider the interests of the workers to the best of its ability according to the availability of funds.
A copy of the notice should be given to the Labour Department and the local police for information.
What were the previous conditions of the last agreement with the Union? These also need to be reviewed.
It is requested to all CiteHR members that full details of circumstances along with the actions taken so far should invariably be indicated in the thread to enable the Contributing Experts to offer a correct opinion as far as possible.
With best wishes and regards to all experts,
Chandra Mani Lal Srivastava Master Consultant 9315516083
New Delhi/24.01.2022/8:27 am
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I certainly agree with Mr. Saswata Banerjee that posting a query with incomplete facts or not giving the correct position of a particular situation is inappropriate as you will not get adequate and relevant opinions.
Even now, it is not clear as to what action has been taken by your management when so many days have passed.
A written notice should be issued/pasted on the notice board about the financial health of the company and the demand of the Union. It should be intimated that a strike without notice is illegal, and sudden stoppage of work will cause financial loss to the company and result in non-acceptance of the demand of the Union. The workers should be advised to return to duty, failing which their services would be terminated. It should also be indicated that management is open to discussion on the demand and will consider the interests of the workers to the best of its ability according to the availability of funds.
A copy of the notice should be given to the Labour Department and the local police for information.
What were the previous conditions of the last agreement with the Union? These also need to be reviewed.
It is requested to all CiteHR members that full details of circumstances along with the actions taken so far should invariably be indicated in the thread to enable the Contributing Experts to offer a correct opinion as far as possible.
With best wishes and regards to all experts,
Chandra Mani Lal Srivastava Master Consultant 9315516083
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear colleagues,
This poster, Mr. Ravi Belhe, does not seem to give full or true facts of the IR issues being faced by him and has now come out with another story not fully disclosed earlier. Reasons for not giving full facts right at the start are best known to him.
I don't believe this person is reliable and deserves any free advice.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR and Employee Relations Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This poster, Mr. Ravi Belhe, does not seem to give full or true facts of the IR issues being faced by him and has now come out with another story not fully disclosed earlier. Reasons for not giving full facts right at the start are best known to him.
I don't believe this person is reliable and deserves any free advice.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR and Employee Relations Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Ravi,
I have been closely following the thread from the very beginning and I appreciate the suggestions given by our members to effectively handle the situation despite the lack of establishment-related particulars and the factual contradictions found in your posts. In this regard, I am in complete agreement with the views of M/S Saswata Banerjee and C.M.L. Srivastava.
In respect of any consequential deadlock resulting in a strike arising out of a partly negotiated bilateral settlement on the charter of demands, the query seeking clarification should contain the following particulars without fail:
1) The type of industry
2) Whether it is a public utility service
3) Total number of people employed under the category of 'workman'
4) Number of trade unions functioning in the industry
5) Whether the union recognition was under the Code of Discipline/any specific law in force or just as per the discretion of the management based on majority membership.
6) Whether the management follows the practice of converting the bilateral settlement into a tripartite settlement u/s 12(3) of the ID Act, 1947?
7) Whether the current bilateral negotiations were started without delay on the expiry of the previous settlement
From your last post, it is discernible that the bilateral negotiations were not concluded amicably, which is the reason for the union's sudden strike move.
As pointed out earlier by others, if yours is a public utility service, a notice of strike u/s 22 and if not, u/s 23 of the ID Act is mandatory. Otherwise, the strike would be deemed illegal. In any case, it is the duty of the management to inform the conciliation officer for the area within 24 hours of the strike. The conciliation officer would commence his conciliatory talks immediately inviting all the parties concerned. He would certainly advise the workmen to call off the strike in view of his conciliation. The management has to participate in the talks without fail. They can appraise the officer of their stand on the issues and facilitate an amicable settlement by relaxing their earlier stand to the possible extent. But the management should not insist on signing the settlement with the recognized union only. If the terms are agreeable, the unrecognized union would also be permitted by the conciliation officer to participate in the talks and sign the settlement reached in his presence.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have been closely following the thread from the very beginning and I appreciate the suggestions given by our members to effectively handle the situation despite the lack of establishment-related particulars and the factual contradictions found in your posts. In this regard, I am in complete agreement with the views of M/S Saswata Banerjee and C.M.L. Srivastava.
In respect of any consequential deadlock resulting in a strike arising out of a partly negotiated bilateral settlement on the charter of demands, the query seeking clarification should contain the following particulars without fail:
1) The type of industry
2) Whether it is a public utility service
3) Total number of people employed under the category of 'workman'
4) Number of trade unions functioning in the industry
5) Whether the union recognition was under the Code of Discipline/any specific law in force or just as per the discretion of the management based on majority membership.
6) Whether the management follows the practice of converting the bilateral settlement into a tripartite settlement u/s 12(3) of the ID Act, 1947?
7) Whether the current bilateral negotiations were started without delay on the expiry of the previous settlement
From your last post, it is discernible that the bilateral negotiations were not concluded amicably, which is the reason for the union's sudden strike move.
As pointed out earlier by others, if yours is a public utility service, a notice of strike u/s 22 and if not, u/s 23 of the ID Act is mandatory. Otherwise, the strike would be deemed illegal. In any case, it is the duty of the management to inform the conciliation officer for the area within 24 hours of the strike. The conciliation officer would commence his conciliatory talks immediately inviting all the parties concerned. He would certainly advise the workmen to call off the strike in view of his conciliation. The management has to participate in the talks without fail. They can appraise the officer of their stand on the issues and facilitate an amicable settlement by relaxing their earlier stand to the possible extent. But the management should not insist on signing the settlement with the recognized union only. If the terms are agreeable, the unrecognized union would also be permitted by the conciliation officer to participate in the talks and sign the settlement reached in his presence.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Dispciplinary Action.doc
DISCIPLINARY ACTION.ppt