Unfair Labour Practices

Ravideep Singh
Reg. No. 11611106
 Concept of Fairness

 ‘Fairness’ can be used as a synonym for equitable,

reasonable, impartial, just, honest, balanced, according to the
rules, right. All these synonyms contain a high degree of
ethical and moral notions and consequently so do the notion
of fairness. As such the notion of fairness is not only difficult
to define but is also flexible. Different people from different
cultures and backgrounds also might have different views as
to exactly what constitutes fairness. As Richard Baxter points
out, fairness is a concept that is ambiguous and difficult to
ascertain. Consequently its meaning must be deduced with
reference to surrounding circumstances.
Background of labour practices
 The main concern of labour relations is on the relationships
that exist between the employer and the employee, and the
labour practices that arise from the interests of such
relationships. Labour relations can be of both international
and domestic form and all deal with matters such as
remuneration, job security, minimum wages, health and
safety, social security and working time amongst others. Any
form of violations of such laws by employers or unions is
therefore termed as unfair labour relations.
Any employment relationship has three
stages
1. a beginning: when the employee applies for
employment
2. a middle: as long as the employment relationship
continues
3. an end: when the employee is dismissed, resigns
or retires
 Unfair conduct of an employer during the
course of employment
1. refusal to promote or demotion
2. unfair conduct during the course of the probation
period
3. refusal to provide benefits or training
4. unfair suspension
5. disciplinary action short of dismissal such as warnings
or suspension without pay or transfers
 H.D. Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India & Ors
1986 AIR SC 132, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 842

 The 5th Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act contains a list of

unfair labour practices as defined in Section 2(ra). Item 10 reads
as follows:
 "To employ workmen as 'badlis', casuals or temporaries and to
continue them as such for years, with the object of depriving
them of the status and privileges of permanent workmen." We
have no option but to observe that the bank, in this case, has
indulged in methods amounting to unfair labour practice.
 Haryana State Electronics Development Corporation Ltd. v.
Mamni
MANU/SC/8137/2006 : (2006)IILLJ744SC
 Therein the action on the part of the employer to terminate the
services of an employee on regular basis and reappoint after a gap
of one or two days was found to be infringing the provisions of
Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. This Court held: In
this case the services of the respondent had been terminated on a
regular basis and she had been reappointed after a gap of one or
two days. Such a course of action was adopted by the Appellant
with a view to defeat the object of the Act.
Union of India and Ors. v. Ramchander and
Anr. (2005) 9 SCC 365
 The respondents were appointed against casual labourers but
nevertheless they continued in service for four spells and that too their
reappointments were made immediately within a few days of
termination on completion of 89 days. It shows that sufficient work
was available with the employer and had there been no termination on
completion of 89 days, they would have completed 240 days of
continuous employment. In that view of the matter the appellants had
violated Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act. We do not find
any error or illegality in the decision rendered by the Division Bench.
We direct the appellants to re-employ the respondents as daily-
wagers. In that case, this Court did not lay down any law having
universal application. Directions were issued in the facts and
circumstances of the case. It is worthwhile to note that this Court did
not direct regularization of services of the workman but merely
directed Appellants therein to reemploy Respondents as daily wagers.
The said decision, therefore, does not have any application in the
instant case
 THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT
1947
 THE FIFTH SCHEDULE See Section 2(ra) Unfair Labour
Practices
I. On the part of employers and trade unions of
employers
 1. To interfere with, restrain from, or coerce, workmen in the exercise
of their right to organise, form, join or assist a trade union or to engage
in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other
mutual aid or protection, that is to say:
 (a) Threatening workmen with discharge or dismissal, if they join a trade
union;
 (b) Threatening a lock-out or closure, if a trade union is organised;
 (c) Granting wage increase to workmen at crucial periods of trade union
organisation, with a view to undermining the efforts of the trade union
organisation.
 Conti…..
 2. To dominate, interfere with or contribute support, financial or
otherwise, to any trade union, that is to say:
 (a) an employer taking an active interest in organising a trade union of
his workmen; &
 3. To establish employer sponsored trade unions of workmen.
 Conti…..
 4. To encourage or discourage membership in any trade union by
discriminating against any workman, that is to say:
 (a) discharging or punishing a workman, because he urged other workmen to
join or organise a trade union;
 (b) discharging or dismissing a workman for taking part in any strike (not
being a strike which is deemed to be an illegal strike under this Act);
 (c) changing seniority rating of workmen because of trade union activities;
 (d) refusing to promote workmen to higher posts on account of their trade
union activities;
 (e) giving unmerited promotions to certain workmen with a view to creating
discord amongst other workmen, or to undermine the strength of their trade
union;
 (f) Discharging office-bearers or active members of the trade union on
account of their trade union activities.
 5. To discharge or dismiss workmen
 (a) by way of victimisation;
 (b) not in good faith, but in the colourable exercise of the employer's
rights;
 (c) by falsely implicating a workman in a criminal case on false evidence
or on concocted evidence;
 (d) for patently false reasons;
 (e) on untrue allegations of absence without leave;
 (f) in utter disregard of the principles of natural justice in the conduct
of domestic enquiry or with undue haste;
 (g) for misconduct of a minor or technical character, without having
any regard to the nature of the particular misconduct or the past record
or service of the workman, thereby leading to a disproportionate
punishment.
 6. To abolish the work of a regular nature being done by workmen, and
to give such work to contractors as a measure of breaking a strike.
 7. To transfer a workman mala fide from one place to another, under
the guise of following management policy.
 8. To insist upon individual workmen, who are on a legal strike to sign a
good conduct bond, as a pre-condition to allowing them to resume
work.

 9. To show favouritism or partiality to one set of workers regardless of

merit.
 10. To employ workmen as "badlis", casuals or
temporaries and to continue them as such for years,
with the object of depriving them of the status and
privileges of permanent workmen.
 11. To discharge or discriminate against any workman for filing
charges or testifying against an employer in any enquiry or
proceeding relating to any industrial dispute.
 12. To recruit workmen during a strike which is not an illegal
strike.
 13. Failure to implement award, settlement or agreement.
 14. To indulge in acts of force or violence.
 15. To refuse to bargain collectively, in good faith with the
recognised trade unions.
 16. Proposing or continuing a lock-out deemed to be illegal
under this Act.
Thank You For Your Patience