please can tell me any one if the factory workers want to do the strike after all discussions regarding a issue(any grievance) what is the process of employees side and the management side (have they inform to inspector of factories) what is the process of grievance handeling.
From India, Hyderabad
1From India, Hyderabad
First as a HR should act diplomatic bcas its a serious issue as far as Company's concern. 1st frame Grievance Committee with the members of Workers. Then only the prob ll b solved and arrested in floor level itself.
Try to do it
Reg
Suku
9842023923
From India, Mumbai
Try to do it
Reg
Suku
9842023923
From India, Mumbai
Dear Gopi,
Soon after the management receive the strike notification officially through employee union, the management before communicating to any one in labour department or inspector of factories, should send a meeting request to the employee union representatives to see if any oportunity is available to resolve the issues. It's a common phenomenon in factory environment to threaten management about the strike to invite attention.
Being in HR it is essential to strike a balance in relationships between employees and management. Normally the gap in relationship and lack of communication leads to all hassels. Involving any goverment officials during the initial stages complicates the system and cause irrepairable damages as most of the time the officails have selfish motives.
The grievance handling committee should always comprise of management and workers. While forming the committee, see to that you chose level headed people who think of business and human relationships as well. Most of the time it is the management fault which triggers unrest among employees. For example: not communicating to its employees about management strategies related to future growth, product performance, company performance etc. Some time not having proper employee engagement initiatives also lead to dissat among employees.
The apropraite time to to inform Inspector of factories or labour department is only when you reach point of no return.
Victor Rodrigues
9845517355
From India
Soon after the management receive the strike notification officially through employee union, the management before communicating to any one in labour department or inspector of factories, should send a meeting request to the employee union representatives to see if any oportunity is available to resolve the issues. It's a common phenomenon in factory environment to threaten management about the strike to invite attention.
Being in HR it is essential to strike a balance in relationships between employees and management. Normally the gap in relationship and lack of communication leads to all hassels. Involving any goverment officials during the initial stages complicates the system and cause irrepairable damages as most of the time the officails have selfish motives.
The grievance handling committee should always comprise of management and workers. While forming the committee, see to that you chose level headed people who think of business and human relationships as well. Most of the time it is the management fault which triggers unrest among employees. For example: not communicating to its employees about management strategies related to future growth, product performance, company performance etc. Some time not having proper employee engagement initiatives also lead to dissat among employees.
The apropraite time to to inform Inspector of factories or labour department is only when you reach point of no return.
Victor Rodrigues
9845517355
From India
Dear Devilal,
The usual question every employee have for all potential employers is - all said and done whats in there for me?
It's not working for 12 hours matter but how productive these working hours are. In a way the demand for 8 hours of work is justified as every individual has social life apart from work. When every HR organisation is focussing on work life balance, why your employer is forcing you to work 12 hours ?
You may hire more people if you have challanges to meet production targets. Convene a meeting with some sensible employees along with your leadership and know their pulse before some disaster strucks.
Always remember; out put of a happy employee is greater than an over worked and exhausted employee.
Victor Rodrigues
9845517355
From India
The usual question every employee have for all potential employers is - all said and done whats in there for me?
It's not working for 12 hours matter but how productive these working hours are. In a way the demand for 8 hours of work is justified as every individual has social life apart from work. When every HR organisation is focussing on work life balance, why your employer is forcing you to work 12 hours ?
You may hire more people if you have challanges to meet production targets. Convene a meeting with some sensible employees along with your leadership and know their pulse before some disaster strucks.
Always remember; out put of a happy employee is greater than an over worked and exhausted employee.
Victor Rodrigues
9845517355
From India
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 refrains generally the Trade Unions from going on strike. Its focal thrust is on more efficient alternative mechanisms for dispute settlement, such as, reference to Industrial Tribunals, compulsory adjudication, conciliation, etc. In fact the very intention behind its enactment as illustrated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons, was to overcome the defect in the Trade Unions Act, 1926, which was, that it imposed restraints on the right to strike but did not provide for alternative settlement of the disputes.
The Statement further reads as under: "The power to refer disputes to Industrial Tribunals and enforce their awards is an essential corollary to the obligation that lies on the Government to secure conclusive determination of the disputes with a view to redressing the legitimate grievances of the parties thereto, such obligation arising from the imposition of restraints on the rights of strike and lock-out, which must remain inviolate, except where considerations of public interest override such right".
Thus, the concept of alternative settlement mechanisms in industrial disputes was statutorily ushered in the Act with a view to providing a forum and compelling parties to resort to the forum for arbitration so as to avoid confrontation and dislocation in industry, that a developing country like India can ill-afford. Peace and harmony in industry and uninterrupted production being the demand of the time, it was considered wise to arm the Government with the power to compel the parties to resort to arbitration and a necessary corollary to avoid confrontation and trial of strength which are considered wasteful from national and public interest point of view (xxii).
Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 7A, 7B, 9, 10 and 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provide alternative measures for settlement of industrial disputes elaborately. Section 4 (xxiii) of the Act provides for a diplomatic procedure which endeavours to settle a controversy by assisting parties to reach a voluntary agreement and the ultimate decision is made by the parties themselves (xxiv). The conciliation machinery provided for in the Act, can take note of the existing as well as apprehended disputes either on its own or on being approached by either of the parties. Since the final decision is with the parties themselves, they cannot complain that their practical freedom has been impaired or that they have been forced into a settlement which is unacceptable to them (xxv).
Section 6 provides for the constitution of a Court of Inquiry, that enquires into the merits of the issues and prepares a report on them that is "intended to serve as the focus of public opinion and of pressure from Government authorities" (xxvi). Section 10 A provides for voluntary arbitration. Voluntary arbitration seems to be the best method for settlement of all types of industrial disputes. The disputes can be resolved speedily and is less formal than trials. The greatest advantage of arbitration is that there is no right of appeal, review or writ petition. Besides, it may well reduce a company's litigation costs and its potential exposure to ruinous liability apart from redeeming the workmen from frustration (xxvii). Apart from these, Sections 7, 7A and 7B deal with the constitution of adjudicatory authorities, viz., Labour Courts, Tribunals or National Tribunals, respectively.
It is submitted that these alternative machinery for settlement of industrial disputes are proving to be highly effective. Report of the National Commission on Labour (xxviii), according to which "during the years 1959-66, out of the total disputes handled by each year, the percentage of settlements had varied between 57 and 83. The remaining disputes, it is reported, were settled mutually referred to voluntary arbitration or arbitration under the Act or to adjudication or were not pursued by the parties. During the period 1965-67, the percentage of settlements reached in Bihar ranged from 51 to 86, in Assam from 65.5 to 92.3. In U.P., Punjab and Delhi, in the year 1966, the percentage of disputes settled was 60, whereas in Kerala it ranged around 80 per cent. The statistics for settlement of disputes by alternative mechanism are greater those for that by strike where the disputes are mainly left unresolved.
The provision of such an elaborate and effective mechanism for settlement of industrial disputes, along with a reading of the Statement of Objects and Reasons, is a definitive indication of the fact that the statute enshrines a preference to these alternative mechanisms over strikes.
All the best
<link outdated-removed> ( Search On Cite | Search On Google )
From India, Vijayawada
The Statement further reads as under: "The power to refer disputes to Industrial Tribunals and enforce their awards is an essential corollary to the obligation that lies on the Government to secure conclusive determination of the disputes with a view to redressing the legitimate grievances of the parties thereto, such obligation arising from the imposition of restraints on the rights of strike and lock-out, which must remain inviolate, except where considerations of public interest override such right".
Thus, the concept of alternative settlement mechanisms in industrial disputes was statutorily ushered in the Act with a view to providing a forum and compelling parties to resort to the forum for arbitration so as to avoid confrontation and dislocation in industry, that a developing country like India can ill-afford. Peace and harmony in industry and uninterrupted production being the demand of the time, it was considered wise to arm the Government with the power to compel the parties to resort to arbitration and a necessary corollary to avoid confrontation and trial of strength which are considered wasteful from national and public interest point of view (xxii).
Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 7A, 7B, 9, 10 and 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provide alternative measures for settlement of industrial disputes elaborately. Section 4 (xxiii) of the Act provides for a diplomatic procedure which endeavours to settle a controversy by assisting parties to reach a voluntary agreement and the ultimate decision is made by the parties themselves (xxiv). The conciliation machinery provided for in the Act, can take note of the existing as well as apprehended disputes either on its own or on being approached by either of the parties. Since the final decision is with the parties themselves, they cannot complain that their practical freedom has been impaired or that they have been forced into a settlement which is unacceptable to them (xxv).
Section 6 provides for the constitution of a Court of Inquiry, that enquires into the merits of the issues and prepares a report on them that is "intended to serve as the focus of public opinion and of pressure from Government authorities" (xxvi). Section 10 A provides for voluntary arbitration. Voluntary arbitration seems to be the best method for settlement of all types of industrial disputes. The disputes can be resolved speedily and is less formal than trials. The greatest advantage of arbitration is that there is no right of appeal, review or writ petition. Besides, it may well reduce a company's litigation costs and its potential exposure to ruinous liability apart from redeeming the workmen from frustration (xxvii). Apart from these, Sections 7, 7A and 7B deal with the constitution of adjudicatory authorities, viz., Labour Courts, Tribunals or National Tribunals, respectively.
It is submitted that these alternative machinery for settlement of industrial disputes are proving to be highly effective. Report of the National Commission on Labour (xxviii), according to which "during the years 1959-66, out of the total disputes handled by each year, the percentage of settlements had varied between 57 and 83. The remaining disputes, it is reported, were settled mutually referred to voluntary arbitration or arbitration under the Act or to adjudication or were not pursued by the parties. During the period 1965-67, the percentage of settlements reached in Bihar ranged from 51 to 86, in Assam from 65.5 to 92.3. In U.P., Punjab and Delhi, in the year 1966, the percentage of disputes settled was 60, whereas in Kerala it ranged around 80 per cent. The statistics for settlement of disputes by alternative mechanism are greater those for that by strike where the disputes are mainly left unresolved.
The provision of such an elaborate and effective mechanism for settlement of industrial disputes, along with a reading of the Statement of Objects and Reasons, is a definitive indication of the fact that the statute enshrines a preference to these alternative mechanisms over strikes.
All the best
<link outdated-removed> ( Search On Cite | Search On Google )
From India, Vijayawada
Dear Mr.Devilal,
Reading this entire issue i would like to suugest you that your company might be marwadi management company and it happens with these companies only.
As per factories act 1948, no wrokmen or employee permitted to work more than 48 Hrs considering overlapping and O.T it permited for 52 Hrs in week.
if workmen go for strike they will win and management have to lose the game.
Case will never stand in front of any of the Govt.Authority.
My suggestion is that convey this message to your management and whach don`t take chance of voilence. let management should take the decission.
where Human resouce is not considered then let them face.
Regards,
Nilesh Kumar Harge
From India, Pune
Reading this entire issue i would like to suugest you that your company might be marwadi management company and it happens with these companies only.
As per factories act 1948, no wrokmen or employee permitted to work more than 48 Hrs considering overlapping and O.T it permited for 52 Hrs in week.
if workmen go for strike they will win and management have to lose the game.
Case will never stand in front of any of the Govt.Authority.
My suggestion is that convey this message to your management and whach don`t take chance of voilence. let management should take the decission.
where Human resouce is not considered then let them face.
Regards,
Nilesh Kumar Harge
From India, Pune
As said above it 12 hrs working is only for a few security personnel, it may be adjusted. If this is for all the workers, no govt will allow for 12 hrs continue working. If you have a trade union, they can demand for 8 hrs working and OT thereafter. It may be noted that no law allows for 12 hrs working. It may be allowed on rare occasions, if there is work pressure that too on double the wages as OT for beyond 8 hrs working.
regards,
prrsarma
From India, Hyderabad
regards,
prrsarma
From India, Hyderabad
Hi All,
Thanks for the information.
I have a query regarding Grievance commitee.
1. Is contractor worker a part of Grievance committee
2. If not how can their grievances be solved.
Kindly revert at the earliest, it is of utmost important.
awaiting reply
Thank You
Smita
From India, Gurgaon
Thanks for the information.
I have a query regarding Grievance commitee.
1. Is contractor worker a part of Grievance committee
2. If not how can their grievances be solved.
Kindly revert at the earliest, it is of utmost important.
awaiting reply
Thank You
Smita
From India, Gurgaon
Hi
Contract workmen should not be part of the grievance committee. However, grievance pertaining to contract may be handled by the grievance committee. Grievance committee should ideally consist of equal representation from workmen as well as management. Representation from women employees are must for grievance committee. The committee should ideally have a term of 6 months and after the term the other employees should get chance to become member of grievance committee.
Unlike works committee, grievance committee is not an elected body, it is a nominated body.
Please revert for clarification if any.
S Rangarajan
From India, Pondicherry
Contract workmen should not be part of the grievance committee. However, grievance pertaining to contract may be handled by the grievance committee. Grievance committee should ideally consist of equal representation from workmen as well as management. Representation from women employees are must for grievance committee. The committee should ideally have a term of 6 months and after the term the other employees should get chance to become member of grievance committee.
Unlike works committee, grievance committee is not an elected body, it is a nominated body.
Please revert for clarification if any.
S Rangarajan
From India, Pondicherry
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.
Tamil-Nadu-Fact ories-Rules-195 0-With-FORMS.pd f