UNIT 2 EVOLUTION OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS

Objectives

Aftcr going tlirougli this unit, you should be able to:

o explain the historical perspective of industrial relatio~is in India;

o appreciate tlie impact of globalisation, technological changes, and other forces on industrial relations;

o identify tlie issues and cliallenges confronting industrial relations in India.

Structure

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Industrial Relations in India

2.3 Government's Role

2.4 Current Developments

2.5 Indi~strial Relations Scenario

2.6 Issues and Clial leiiges I

2.7 Summary

2.8 Self-Assessme~it Questions

2.9 'Fu~-tlier Readings

2.1 INTRODUCTION

In order to understand tlie issues and problems associated with indi~strial relations, it is desirable to study its various evolutionary phases. Practically speaking, tlie growth of industrial relations in India is in no way different from that of other parts oftlie globe. 'rhevarious stages of industrial relations progressed fro111 primitive stage to factory or industrial capitalis~li stage. The eliiergelice of tripartite consultative systetn and voluntary and statutory approach to industrial relations, immensely contributed to tlie growth of a particular system of industrial relations in our country. Also the fast changing technological development, industrial production techniques, and ideological values liave brought forth in tlie industrial world a unique type of employer-employee relationship. For a proper theoretical perspective of industrial relations, it seems essential to liave a historical review of industrial relations in India.

2.2 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS IN INDIA

India was greatly advanced in tlie field of industry and comnierce in the past, as evidenced from its ancient literature. In ancient times, tlie lligllest occupatioli in our country was agriculture followed by trading. Manual services formed tlie tliird rung of occupation. S~nall ~ila~iufacturers in their cottages, ~nostly on hereditary basis, carried on a large number of occupations. Ancient scriptures and laws of our country laid empliasis on tlie promotion and mainte~~ance of peaceful relations between capital and labom. From tlie very early days, craftsmen and workers felt the necessity of being

i~nited. The i~tility of i~nions has been stated in Sz(kkr YajurvedaSunihita, "if men are united, nothing can deter tliem." Kai~tilyas'sArthn,~hn,stra gives a cornpreliensive picture of tlie organisation and functions oftlie social and political institutions of India and a good description of i~nions of eniployees, craftsmen orartisans. There were we1 I-organised gui Ids, which worked according to their own byelaws for tlie ~nanagement of tlie unions. Idowever, there were no organisations of workers during the Mi~glial rule. Tlie labourers were entirely dependent on their masters and forced worlc was talcen from them. tlistorical evidence fi~rtlier shows tlie existe~lce of rilles of conduct and prescribed procedure for tlie senle~nent of dispi~tes for PI-omoting cordial relations between tlie parties. Tlie working ~.elations, how eve^., in those days were more or less of a personal cliaracter ancl are very rn~~cli dislingl~isliable from tlie present-day indi~strial relations as have gradually developed wit11 the growth of Iarge- scale industries.

Evolution of Industrinl Relations and

Current Dcvelopnlents

A study of modern industrial relations in India can be made in three distinct phases. The first phase can be considered to liave commenced from the middle of tlie ninetee~itli century and ended by tlie end oftlie First World War. Tlie seconcl phase comprises the period tlierexfter till the attainment of indepenclence in 1947, and tlie thircl phase represents the post-independence era.

First Phase: During tlie first phase, tlie British Government in India was largely interested in eni-.arcing penalties for breach of contract and in regulating the conditions ofworlc with aview to minimising tlie competitive advantages ofindigenous elnployers against tlie British employers. A series of legislative measures were adopted during the latter half o.Ftlie nineteenth centmy, which can be considered as tlie beginning of industrial relations in India.

The close of tlie First World War gave a new twist to tlie labour l~olicy, as it created certain social, economic and political conditions that raisecl new hopes among the people for a new social order. There was intense labour unrest because workers' earnings did not keep pace wit11 tlie rise in prices and wit11 their aspirations. The constitutional develop~nelits in India lecl to tlie election ofrepresentatives to the Central and Provincial legislatures wlro tool< a leading role iii initiating social legislation. Tlie establisli~nent of International Labour 01.ganisatio1i (ILO) in 191 9 greatly influeliced tlie labour legislation and industrial relations policy in India. The emergence of trade ~ ~ n i o n s in India, particularly the formation of All Inclia 'Trade Union Congress (AITUC) in 1920 was anotl~er significant event in tlie history oc industrial relations in oi~rcountry.

Second Phase: Tlie policy after tlie First World War related to improvement in the working conditio~is and pl-ovision of social security benefits. Du~sing the two clecades following tlie war, a number of laws were enacted for the implementation of tlie above policy. 'The Trade Dispi~tes Act, 1929 sought to provide a conciliation machinery to bring about peaceIkI settlement of disputes. The Royal Commission on Labour (1929- 3 1) ~nade a co~nprehensive survey of labour proble~ns in India, particularly tlie working conditions in tlie context of health, safety, and welfare oftlie workers and made certain recomrneridations of far-reilcliing consequences.

The Second World War gave a new spurt in tlie labour field. The exigencies oftlie war made it esselitial for the government to maintain an adequately co~ltented labour force for ~naximisi~ig production. Tlie Government of India had, therefore, to step in arid assilrne wide powers of controlling and regulating tlie conditio~is of work and well'are of industrial workers. It embarked upon a two-fold action iri this regard, ~iarnely, (i) statutory regulation of industrial relations tliroi~gli the Defence of Inclia rules and the orders made thereunder; and (ii) bringing all tlie interests together at acolnrnon forum for shaping labour policy.

Conceptu:tl P r m e w o r k of Tripartite consultative system was one ofthe most important developments in the Employment Relations sphere of industrial relations in our country. Tripartite consultation epito~nises the

faith of India in the ILO's pl~ilosopl~y and objectives. The Royal Co~n~niss io~l on Labour recommended the need for tripartite labour machinery on the pattern of 1LO as early as 193 1 . But the first step in this direction was taken only in the year 1942, when the first tripartite labour conference was held at New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Tl~e conference consisted of two organisatims, namely, the Indian Labour Conference (TLC) and the Standing Labour Committee (SLC). I n the state sphere, State Labour Advisory Boards were also set LIP for consultation on labour ~natters. Gradually, tripartism developed into a fill]-fledged system, a kind of parliament for labour and management.

The ob-jectives set before the two tripartite bodies at the time oftheir inception in 1942 were: (a) promotion of ~~niforrnity in labour legislatioi~; (b) laying down of a proced~~re for the settle~nent of industrial disputes; and (c) discussion of all matters of All-India importance as between employers and employees.

The ILCISLC have itnmensely contributed in achievi~ig the objectives set before them. They facilitated enactment of central legislation and enabled discussion 011 all labour matters of national importance. Different social, economic and administrative matters concerning laboi~r policies and programmes were discussed in the various meetings of ILC/SLC.

Third Phase: After independence, an Industrial Truce Resol~~tion was adopted in 1947 at a tripartite conference. The conference e~nphasised the need for respecting t l~e m~l t~~a l i ty of interests between labour and capital. It recommended to the parties the method of mutual discussion of all proble~ns common to both, and settle all disputes without recourse to interruption in or slowing down of production.

T l ~ e post-independence period of industrial relations policy aimed at the establishment of peace in industry, and grant of a fair deal to workers. The government sought to achieve these aims through appropriate labour legislation, labour ad~ninistration, and industrial adjudication. State inte~vention in industrial relations was justified on the grouncl that it helped to check the growth of industrial unrest. However, it was noticed that the spirit of litigation grew and delays attendant on legal processes gave rise to widespread dissatisfaction. Hence, since 1958 a new approach was introd~~ced to counteract the ~~nhealthy trends of litigation and delays in adjudication. Its emphasis was based on the principles of industrial democracy, on prevention of ~ ~ n r e s t by tiniely action at the appropriate stages, and giving of adequate attention to root causes of industrial unrest.

While the groundwork of labour policy was prepared during the forties, a superstructure on Lhis groundwork was built in the fifties. It is the Constitution of India and the five-year plans, which largely helped in raising the superstructure. The Preamble to the Constit~~tion and the chapter on Directive Principles of State Policy enunciate the ele~nents of labour policy. The successive five-year plans since 195 1 clearly enunciated the clirectio~~s of industrial relations policy. These entailed the building up of industrial democracy in I<eeping with the requirements of a socialisi society, which sought to be established tl~rough a parliamentary for111 of government.

A brief account ofthe industrial relations policy during five-year plans is given below:

The approach to labour proble~ns in the First Five-Year Plan (195 1-56) was based on I

considerations which were related, on the one hand, "to the requirements of the well- being of the working class", and on the other, "to its vital contribution to the economic 1

stability and progress of t l ~ e country." It considered the worker as "the principal instrument in the fulfillment ofthe targets of the Plan and in the achievement of I

e co~~omic progress. Further, the Plan stated that l~ar~nonious relations between capital 1 I

and labour are essential for the realisation of the Plan in the industrial sector. The Plan Evolutioii of

emphasised that the "workers' right of association, organisation and collective Industrial Relations nnd

bargaining shoulcl be accepted without reservation as the fundamental basis ofthe Current Developmellts

mutual relationsliip", and tlie trade unions "shoulcl be welco~ned and helped to function as part and parcel of the industrial system".

Much of what had been said in regard to industrial relations in the First Plan was reiterated in the Second Five-Year Plan (I 956-61). Tlie Second Plan considered a strong trade union move~nent to be necessary both for safeguarding Llie interests of labour and for realising tlie targets of production. Multiplicity of trade unions, political rivalries, lack of resources, and disunity in the I-anlts of worlters were, according to the Plan document, some ofthe major weaknesses in a number of existing unions. Tlie importance of preventive measures For achieving industrial peace was particularly stressed and greater e~npliasis was placed on the avoidance of disputes at all levels. It also e~nphasised on tlie increased association of labour with management.

The Third Five-Year Plan (196 1-66) expressed great hopcs in the voluntary approach initiated cluring the Seconcl 1'lan period to give a more positive orientation to industrial relations, based on moral rather than legal sanctions. Tlic Plan highlighted the need for increasing application of the principle of voluntary arbitration in resolving differences between worlters and employers and recommcndcd that the govern~nent should take tlie initiative in drawing L I ~ J panels of arbitrators on a regional and industry-wise basis. Further, tlie Plan recommcndcd tliat the worlts committees should be strengthened and made an active agency for the democratic ad~ninistration of labour matters.

The Fourth Five-Year Plan ( 1 969-74) suggested no changes i n the system of reg~~lating labour relations by legislative and voluntary arrangements started from earlier plans. It devoted a good deal of attention to employment and training. It also laid stress on strengthening labour adruinistration l'or better cnl'orccment of labour laws, rcsearcli in labour laws, and expansion ol'training programnies Ibr labour officers.

I The Fifth Five-Year Plan (1 974-79) laid great emphasis on cmployment, both in rural and urban sectors. After tlie promulgation of emergency in June 1975, the government devised a new pattern of bipartite consultative process in an attempt to create a

I climate of healthy industrial relations, leading to increased production, by eschewing lay-offs, retrenchments, closures, strikes and lockouts. Tlie new machinery sougllt to f o r ~ n ~ ~ l a t e policies at tllc national, state, and industry levels for the speedy resolution of ind~~strial confl icts and for pro~noti~ig industrial harmony. During the emergency, tlie Government of India through a ~.esolution adopted a scheme of worlters' participation in industry at shop and plant levels on 3O1I1 October, 1 975.

The iniportance of cooperative attitude on the part of e~ilployers and eiiiployees for the maintenance of healthy industrial relatio~is lias been empliasised in the Sixth Five-Year Plan ( 1 980-85). According to tlie plan, strikes and lockouts should be ~.esorte'd to only in the last stage. Effective arrangements should also be made for the settlement of

I inter-union clisp~~tes and to discourage unfair practices and irresponsible conduct. While suggesting tlie growth of trade ~ ~ n i o n s on healthy lines, tlie Plan stressed on

I their social obligations and ~aoles in many areas of nation buildi~ig activities and in improving the qi~ality of life of workers. Furtliermore, it cmphasised on necessary changes in the existing laws on trade ~~nions , industrial relations and standing orders for promoting I~annonious industrial relations.

Tlle t l ~ r ~ ~ s t of the Seventh Five-Year Plan (1986-91) is on improvement it1 capacity utilisation, efficiency and productivity. The Plan states that a sound policy oftackling industrial sickness in fi~ture: has to be evolved wllicli while protecting tlie interests of

C'onceptunl Framework of labour woura also ~ z l ~ t : I I I W account rtie ract that Government cannot bear the ]luge Etnploytnent Relations burden of losses. There is considerable scope for improvement in industrial relations,

I which would obviate the need for strikes and tlie justification for lockouts. In the proper management of industrial relations tlie responsibility of ~ ~ n i o n s and e~iiployees lias to be identified and inter-union rivalry and intra-union divisions should be avoided.

According to the Eighth Five-Year Plan (1992-97), labour participation in management is a lnealis of bringitig about a state of industrial democracy. Ever since independence, tlie government has been stressing tlie need to introduce workers' participation in management and various sche~nes were notificcl from time to time. However, the results have fallen far sliorl ofexpectations. Tlie need to bring forward a suitable legislation for effective impleme~itation ofthe schemehas been felt. Besides legislation, proper education and training of workers ancl cooperation from both employers and employees to overcollie proble~ns arising out of tlie existence of multiplicity of trade u11ions and inter-union rivalry will go a long way in promoting the system of participative management.

According to tIieNi11th Five-Year Plan (1997-2002), the planning process attempts to create conditions for improvement in labour productivity and for provision of social security to supplement the operations ofthe labour market. The resources have been directed through tlie plan program ~nes towards skill formation and developnient, exchange of information on job opportu~iities, monitoring of working co~iditions, creatior~ of ind~istrial harmony, and insurance against disease and unemployment for the workers and their faniilies. Tlie planning co~nmission observed that the situation of surplus labour, coup led with the e~nploy~nent of most ofthe worlcers i n the unorganised segments of tlie economy, lias given rise to unliealtliy social practices lilce bonded labour, child labour, and adverse working conditions faced by the migrant labour.

2.3 GOVERNMENT'S ROLE

The main issue in regard to thegovernment's role in industrial relationy 15 tlie degree of state intervention. In India, particularly after independence, the government lias been playiug a co1iip1-ehensive and dominant role in shaping tlie patter11,of industr.ial relations. 111 the mixed economy of our country, tlie state has e~iierged as a big '

employer. Tlre government evolves through tripartite forums the nonns or standards, which are in the nature of guidelines shaping employer-employee relatio~is. It accepts the responsibility ofensuring co~ifor~nity to tliese norliis through the adniinistralive and judicial mechanism. It enacts legislation on laboi~r and implements both the substantive and procedural laws.

The industrial relations policy of tlie government forms part of tlie broader labour policy. The tenets of this policy, as stated by tlieNational Commissioll on Labour, are: (i) primacy to the maintenance of industrial pzace; (ii) encouragement for mutual settlemetit of dispirtes through collective bargaining and vol~~ntary arbitration; (iii) recognition oftlie workers' right to peaceful direct action, i.e., strike; and (iv) tripartite consultation.

The state interve~ition primarily aims at preserving industrial peace and lias, therefore, focused attention on: (a) the avoidance of industrial disputes; and (b) tlie expeditious settlement of i~~dustrial disputes wlie~i they do arise. The adjudication ant1 other regulative aspects of the role ofthe gover~i~nent continue to form the core of industrial relations in India.

Evolr~tion of 2.4 CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS 111dustrinl Relations and

Current Developments

The current developments in tlie field of inclustrial relations are basically related to structural changes, acquisitions and mergers, globalisation, liberalisation, and technological changes.

Structural Changes

The main aspects of the structural changes having an impact on tlie industrial relations system in the country could be mentioned as:

i) Productio~i reorganisation or decentralised production making a thin organised sector employment more thinner. The large-sized units sliiftecl to flatter structures ancl opted for decentralised decision-making. Tllesc nits reorganised tlicir prod~~ction by trimming their sizeand carrying out production in m~~ltiple units or by externalising their production, i.e., concentrating on core activitics with higher value addition, ancl subcontracting the other worl</production to other ancillary units. These measures of economic relbrms have distinctly aikcted tlie industrial relations system in the country as i t lias li~i~ited its institutions and ~ractices to tlie formal organised sector in the large-sized units. As such, the system has come uncler pressure to acl.ji~st and adapt to tlie chal le~iges of growtli ol'small and medium i~nits and sliift its employment In favou~~ofunorganised sector.

ii) Globalisation and technological changes proved disruptive for the system i n terms ol'displacement oflnbour, i.e.,job losses, dcstabilising tlie wage structure, and n sliift in skiII/occupation composition of labour.

iii) Ascendancy in managerial rights and tlie weakening of trade ~~nions gave greater flexibility to management in utilisation of labour and in handling industrial conflict.

Mergers and Acquisitions

I n merger, two or more existing companies go into liquidation and a new company is formed to talceovel.tIieir business. An acquisition arises when there is a purchase by one company of the whole or part of the shares, 01. tlie wl~ole or part of tlie nsscts, of another company in consideration for payment in cash or by issuc of shares or otlier securities in tlie acquiring company or partly in one form and 11artly in the other, The process of merger is the result of agreement and contract bet~veen tlie transikro~. and transferee companies.

The concept of mergers ancl accluisitio~is is very ~ni~cli popular in the current economic scenario. More so, it is a. significantly popnlar concept after 1990s in India on the birth of econom ic liberalisation and globalisation. The basic premises for mergers and acquisitions are the consolidation process for survival of existing ~~ndertakings, and large groups absorbing tlie small entities.

A series of personnel problems normally occur when one company acquires another. People aspect is very important in the process of acquisition.

TIie communications framework is the ~ilost impol-tant factor for smooth integration in an acquisition. With effective co~nmu~iication, tlie acquiring company can develop a climate of conficlence and, IiopeFi~Ily, eliminate much of tlie friction, which frequently occurs. Goocl commi~~iicatio~i is an essential part of good human relations. The labour relations considerations when one company acq~~ires another are t~~iion relations history, representatio~i of e~nployees in unions, history ofwork stoppages, strikes and lockouts, grievance settlement, collective bargaining and signing of ngree~ne~its and settlements.

Conceptual Framework of GlOba]isa(ion Employment Relations

Globalisation can be conceptually explained as tlie process of economic or co~n~nercial integration of a company or a country wit11 tlie rest of tlie world. Tlie ~nag~iitude of sucli integration will determine tlie extent of globalisation acco~nplished by tlie colnpaliy or the country as tlie case may be. It is important to note that globalisatio~l is not an 'event' but a 'process.'

Some segments of the labour force have suffered froni the direct and indirect effects of globalisation more tlian others. Increased trade and increased colnpetition have led to job losses in tlie advanced econoniies, probably not too liiany in aggregate terms but concentrated in low-skilled labour intensive industries with liigll labour costs. In addition, organisational changes such as co~itracting-out, and downsizing of per~iianent staff liave affected Iow-skilled workers Inore tlian high-skilled workers and have contributed to widening wage disparities (ILO, 1997).

I n tlie process of globalisatiorl tile power of trade unions, as measured by trade-union density, lias declined almost everywhere around the world, in developed as well as in developing countries. Evidently, some other factors have contributed to tlie evol~~tion of trade ~lnion ~nenibersliip sucli as the demise of state socialism in Central and Eastern Europe, tlie process of economic restructuring, and the shift from manufacturing to service e~nployment. Neve~.theless, globalisation as sucli lias an impact on labour and labour relations, which lias contributed colisiderably to tlie significa~it decline oftrade-union density in general. Only some developing countries have benefited from globalisation. In many countries, including the advanced econo~nies, income inequality and poverty lias grow11 considerably.

Technological Changcs

Tlie inter-relationship between tecli~iological cliange and industrial relations time ant1 again lias been the focus of attention of groups in society. Technology lias an impact on labour management issues such as manpower, job security, and training red~~ndancy. All tlie three parties in illdustrial relations are closely concerned with the effects ofteclinology. Tecli~iological change raises sensitive industrial relations issues, especially where it involves work intensification, rationalisatio~~ or reductions in employment. Industrial relations issues, especially relating to employment levels and work organisatio~~, were seen as important in deciding upon new plant, ~naclii~~ery or equipment. Technological change affects the work environment and alters the relatio~iship between tile elnployers and eniployees. It affects labour in two ways, economic and social. The first category co~lsists of redundancy, occupational adjustment, allocation ofgains, and transfer and retraining problems. The second category includes psychological factors such as resistance to change, job satisfaction, and worker and u~iion relations.

Privatisation

Privatisation is one of the major elements of structural adjust~nent process taking place in different parts of the world. It involves co~nplex social and labour issues. Apprehensions about privatisation concern potential loss of present and future jobs. However, there is not enough evidence to suggest that privatisatio~~ per se destroys jobs. Tlie trade unions are co~~cerned about privatisation due to fears about job loss and potential adverse effects on tlie dynamics of trade uilions and their rights.

Evolution of 2.5 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS SCENARIO Industrial Relations and

Current Develol~ments The Second National Commission on Labour 2002 lias made [lie following observations about tlie industrial relations scenario in India:

1) It is increasingly noticed tliat trade i~nions do not normally give a call for strike becaiise they are afraid tliat a strike may lead to tlie closure oftlie unit.

2) Service sector workers feel they liave become outsiders and are becoming increasingly disinterested in tracle tunion activities.

3) l'liere is a tl-end to resolve ma-jor dispi~tes through negotiations at bipartite level. Tlie nature of dispi~tes or demands is changing. Instead ofdernanding higher wages, allowances or facilities, trade unions now demand job seci~rity and some are even willing to accept wage cuts or wage freezes in return forjob protection. Dispi~tes relating to non-payment ofwages or separation benefits are on the rise.

4) 'L'lie attitilde of tlie Government, especially oftlie Central Government, towards worlcers and employers seems to have i~ndergone a change. Now, permissions for closure or retrenchment are more easily granted.

5 ) The conciliation machinery is more eager to consider problems ofemployers and today consicler issi~es like increase in productivity, cost reduction, financial diffici~lties of'tlie employer, co~npetition, marlcet fluctuations, etc. They are also not too serious in implementing the awards of labour courts awarded long back alter protracted litigation against cmployers wherein reinstatement or regulariszition of workers was required.

6 ) Tlie industrial relations machinery is not pursuing seriously the recovery proceedings against employzrs who coi11d not pay heavy dues of workers, if tlie financial position ofthe employer is very bad.

7) 'fhe laboi~r adji~dication machinery is more willing to entertain tlie conccrns of industry.

2.6 ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ? 7 1 lie foremost issue lor the intlustrial relations system in India is tliat it has come iuider pressure to adapt to tlie new environment tliat lias emerged after the introduction of stn~ctural changes envisaged i~nder economic reforms.

Under the impact ot'restructuring process, the largc-sized firms are downsizing their activities and shifting tlieir prod~~ctio~l to other. smaller allied units. As such, tlie employnient in tlie organised sector is slirinlting and the major share ofadditional employment is being generatc 1 in the ~~norganisecl sector than in tlie orgaliised sector.

In a decentrnlised sector ol's~nall arrcl medii~m sized units and tlie enterprises in tlie services sectoldand high-tech segment there is a wide differential in wage determination and benefits across tlie industries. Along with tlie wide dispersion of wages and other beneI<ts, tlie other feature of 1:Iiis decentraliseci sector is tlie i~ne~i~ployrne~it/job insecurity. Tlie trend is towarcls increasing casual isation of labour.

The restructuring process, prodi~ction reorganisation, and technology changes1 upgradation liave made tlie problems of ~~nemployment of laboi~r more widespread and acute. Tlie tl-aclitional industrial relations systelll and its institutions and practices were most suited to the tasks of protecting ancl promoting 111~ interests ofworkers with secure permanent employment. Tlie challenge for tlie industrial relations sistem lies in whether tlie new system can provide for any alternative to the traditional system.

Conceptual Framework of Tlie focus of i~id~lstrial relations has sliifted from the region/industry level to tlie Employment Relntions enterprise or even plant level.

111 the new productiou context, tlie large-sized firms liave declined and s~iiall and ~nedi~~m-sized firms liave increased. Most of these firms remain beyond the purview of labour legislation and the organisations of labour in these scattered units are weak and ineffective.

2.7 SUMMARY

Tlie study of modern industrial relations in India can be made in three distinct phases - first pliase fro111 tlie middle oftlie nirleteentli century to the First World War, tlie second phase fro111 the Second World War to tlie attainment of independence, and tlie last pliase from post-independence era onwards. Tlie various five-year plans stressed liarmoniot~s empluyer-employee relations for tlie eco~io~iiic development of tlie country. Tlie economic reforms introduced under libcralisation, privatisation, and globalisation liave exposed Indian ecolioiny to widespread and co~iipreliensive changes to meet tlie onslauglit ofcompetitive forces. The genesis of indnstrial relations in India shows that the stale started with a 1aissez-f~ii.e policy, rol lowed it up wit11 protective labour legislation and paternal adlninistration, actively interfered in the field of industrial relations treating it as a law and order problem, and subsequently, extended its control overal~nost tlie entire labour field. While tlie basic contents of the industrial relations policy lias practically remained unaltered throughout, tlie emphasis ofcol~rse lias changed from one aspect to tlie other, in tlie context of tlie contemporary social, e c o ~ ~ o ~ i i ic and political factors.

2.8 SELF-ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS -

I) Give a historical review of industrial relatio~is in India.

2) Wliat are tlie factors responsible for tlie evolutio~i of 4ndian laboi~r policy?

3) Wliat are tlie recent developments in the field of industrial relations in India?

2.9 FURTHER READINGS

Gove14nment of India, The Repurl of the Secoiid N~itional Con~n~i,s~sion on Lahottr 2002.

Marnoria, C.B., and Canalcar, S.B., Dynamics of Iildustriol Relatioi7s, I-limalaya Publishing House, Mumbai, 2000.

-

LTNTT 3 CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL FRAMEWO OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS: CONVENTIONS, ID ACT, TRADE UNION ACT

Objectives

After going tlirougli this unit, you should be able to:

e i~nderstand tlie role of Indian Co~istitution in evolving labour policy;

e identify tlie impact of internal and external forces 011 industrial relations; and

e faliiiliarise with tlie industrial relations related labour laws in India.

Structures

Introduction

Constit~~tional Framework

Tlie Impact of ILO on Industrial Relations

Role of Law in Industrial Relations

The Trade Unions Act 1926

Tlie Tndi~strial En~ployme~it (Standing Orders) Act 1946

The Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Case

Sil~nmary

Self-Assessment Questio~is

Further Readings

3.1 INTRODUCTION Tlie Constitution of India lias guaranteed some'fundamental riglits to the citizens and lias also laid down certain directive principles of state policy for tlie achievement of a social order based on justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. The Constitution amply provides for tlie up1 ifttnent of labour by guaranteeing certain fundamental ~.iglits to all. Article 14 lays dow~i that the State shall not deny to any person ecluality before the law or tlie equal protection of laws. Traffic in liunian beings and forced labour, and the ernploynient of children in factories or ~n i~ ies or other hazardous work is prohibited. Tlie directive principles, though not enforceable by any court, are nevertheless fitndamental in the governance of tlie country, and it shall be tlie duty of tlie State to apply tliose principles in making laws fro111 time to time. The Govern~nent of India, tlierefore, enacted a series of legislntiolis to protect the working class from exploitation and to bring about ilnprovement in theirworking and living conditions. The goals set in our country by tlie Constitution have a bearing 011 industrial legislatioti and adjudication.

3.2 CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK Labour is in tlie concurrent list of the Constitution on which both tlie Centre as well as the States have tlie power to make laws. Article 254 has been enacted to clarify tlie position. Nor~nally, as laid down in Clause (I), in case of any repugnancy between the Union and the State legislation, the legislation of the Union shall prevail.