ABSTRACT

Industrial peace broadly implies the absence of industrial unrest or the existence of a
harmonious relationship or cooperation between labour and capital in industry. The condition
of the industrial relation between employers and workers has been not a well with the
beginning stage of the industrialisation in India. The factors responsible for this problem are
different in every country. But the very important factor concerning Indian environment is
“unfair labour practice”. Hence, an effort has been made in this paper to study and analyse
the relation between employer and worker’s and it has also been explored that haw the unfair
labour practices has an impact on the industrial relation and peace in the Indian scenario.
Unfair labour practices whether it is from the side of the employer or from the side of the
workmen effect the industrial relation and consequently industrial harmony .And finely it has
long term impact on the overall industrial development.

INTRODUCTION
In any democratic country, the peaceful and fair industrial relations are the pre requisite for
the economic development which will ensure the economic justice to the people. For this to
happen, an environment need to be created which will enable both the employer and the
workmen to come together to save the interests of both through the practices of effective
collective bargaining on occasions of disputes. Such an environment can only be created
when the relations are based on the fair labour practices which demand responsibility from
both the sides. Unfair labour practices have been identified as the key factor to adversely
affect the process of collective bargaining which hampers further the industrial peace and
harmony. The support this legally, there are no very strong legislations though, the Vth
schedule of the Industrial dispute act, 1947 lays down the lists of unfair labour practices.
INDUSTRIAL RELATION AND UNFAIR
LABOUR PRACTICS

The employer and worker’s both are two important pillar of the industry. Generally, the term
‘industrial relation’ used to relation between employer and workers with the working
condition at the workplace. Literally, ‘industrial relations’ means the relationship that
prevails between the organised labour and the management in an industrial enterprise..
There for, good and healthy industrial relation are pre condition of the progress in the
industry .other hand unfair labour practice are different terminology in the industrial world
which is relate to create tension and unrest full atmosphere and also affect the relation
between worker and employer. In Indian scenario where is such a no strong labour policy the
problem of unfair labour practice itself, a biggest barrier for industrial peace.
However, the beginning stage of the labour laws there was no independent relationship
developed between employer and workers in India. The Industrial relations in India were
shaped by the labour policies of the colonial Government and the ideology of political
leadership.
Post Independence, government of India, had effectively intervened in the field of labour
relation and assumed powers for settlement of labour disputes between parties. With a view
to promoting industrial peace the Government of India had evolved a regulatory system by
passing various labour legislations and by framing industrial relations policies .
According to this the former concept of industrial relationship was changed and the new
worker employer relationship took place of the former master servant relationship through the
legislative mechanism in India. The labour laws have not only modified the traditional master
and servant relationship in favour of the workers but had also subordinated the employers’
rights to that of the Government. Apart from it , many efforts have been made to develop
faithful relationship between workers and employer by the government of India through
legislative control. The expression unfair labour practices have been mostly used for any act
to related with Indiscipline between employer and workman from entering the work places;
to indulge in act of force or violence or hold out threats of intimidation in
connection with a strike against non striking workmen or against managerial employer,
threateing workmen with discharge or dismissal, if they join a trade union; threatening a
lockout or closure, if a union is organised etc.
UNFAIR LABOUR PRACTICE AND ITS IMPACT
ON INDUSTRIAL RELATION AND PEACE

The industrial relations system in India is itself inefficient and unfair labour practices have
further deteriorated the situation to a certain extent in some aspects. Unfair Labour Practices
from both parts weakens the trade unionism and thus weakens the industrial relations. From
the part of employers a number of unfair labour practices are adopted to weaken the trade
unionism. When in an industry workers take the resort of strike or other democratic ways to
oppose for their rights the employer use unfair ways of lock-outs or closures or blacklist to
pressurize the workers. It actually weakens the strength of trade union, employers uses the
money power and try to break up the union. In such way employer try to weaken trade union
so that they can keep on the exploitation of workers. Therefore industrial relations are
disturbed and ultimately industrial harmony is disturbed. In the weakening of trade unionism
the part of workers is also responsible. In some situations the honest workers are misguided
and mis-leaded for the interests of some clever people.

When a trade union is leaded by corrupt people they deceive the honest work force of the
industry and the management or employers are always interested in such things. In some
situations these corrupt people call strike for their personal interests and when interests are
fulfilled they take it back. Such unfair labour practices on the part of workers or trade union
weakens the trade unionism and ultimately unrest increases and industrial relations are
disturbed and resultantly industrial harmonyisdisturbed.
Now, it is to see how unfair labour practices decides economic growth of the country.
Disturbed industrial relations and industrial harmony ultimately effects the industrial growth
of an industry. It not only concerns the employers and employees but the community as a
whole.

Constitution, specifically directs the State to take steps to secure participation of workers in
the management of the industry. Therefore, we are of the view that to insist upon such
undertakings from all workmen, irrespective of their conduct, is to subject them to indignity.
The dignity of an individual is the bed-rock of all human rights. It is and should be the basis
of all human relationship including his contract of employment. To insist upon such
undertaking therefore, is to affect the terms of his employment”.
The ILO Approach

The (LO bas considered protection against anti-union discrimination I to be an integral part of
the protection of freedom of association. This term covers restriction or prohibition directed
against individual workers by reasons of their involvement in trade union activities; it may
also be directed against the trade union(s) as a whole by interfering in the functioning of
workers' organisations or by refusal to enter into collective bargaining with the union(s) and
other such unfair labour practices. The protection of workers against threats to their
functioning by employers and employer's organisations is dealt with under the Right to
Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No.98) of the (LO. Article 2 (I) of the
Convention provides that, "Workers'and employers' organisations shall enjoy adequate
protection against any acts of interference by each other or each other's agents or members in
their establishment, functioning or administration." The guarantee against interference bas
been further elaborated in paragraph 2 of the same article by specifying that acts designed to
promote the establishment of workers' organisations under the domination of the employers
or the support of workers' organisations by financial or other means with the object of placing
such organisations under the control of the employers' or employers' organisations.
By virtue of article I of the Convention the workers must be adequately protected against
anti-union discrimination. Protection from anti-union discrimination would cover not only
hiring and dismissal but also any other discriminatory measure such as transfers, refusal of
employment, demotions, disciplinary measures, deprivation of or limitation on wages or
social benefits, or other acts prejudicial to the worker. Protection against acts of anti-union
discrimination in respect of employment is particularly desirable for trade union leaders. The
Workers' Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135) and Workers' Representatives
Recommendation, 1971 (No. 143) establish,that workers representatives in the undertaking
shall enjoy effective protection against
any act prejudicial to them, including dismissal, based on their status or activities as workers'
representatives or based on union membership or participation in union activities, in so far as
they act in conformity with existing laws or collective agreements or other jointly agreed
arrangements. Where trade union representatives and elected representatives exist side by
side, the Workers Representatives Convention provides that, wherever necessary, appropriate
measures shall be taken to ensure that the position of the trade unions or their representatives
in the undertaking is not undermined by the existence of elected representatives. The
recommendation which supplements the Convention provides that (i) the workers must be
provided precise reasons justifying termination of employment, (ii) the availability of special
procedures for the workers' representative to challenge any termination or act of anti-union
discrimination, (iii) the provision of an effective remedy including reinstatement with
payment of unpaid wages in case of unjustified termination of employment, and (iv) the
preference in the matter of retention in employment in case of reduction of the work force.
Articles 4 and 5 of the Labour Relations (Public Service)
Convention, 1978 (No. 151) extends similar protection to public employees just as the Rural
Workers' Organisations Convention, 1975 (No. ~41) in article 3 (2) provides such protection
to rural workers and their organizations .I The Termination of Employment Convention, 1982
(No. 158) also contains similar prohibition. ! Traditionally, therefore, the expression unfair
labour practice has been used synonymously with such actions which interfere in the
collective bargaining process. This has been the common understanding in much of the
western world and also the understanding developed by the ILO itself. However, in India, the
expression 'unfair labour practices' has not always been used to mean only activities which
hinder the smooth functioning of collective bargaining. The expression as used in legislation
and in the decisions of the courts is used in a wider and looser sense to cover unjust
dismissals, unmerited promotions and every form of victimisation, whatever be the cause.
The reason for this appears to be that collective bargaining has never been the central
feature of the framework of employer-employee relations in India.

Indian Policy

Several commentators have noted the Indian labour policy's uneasy attitude towards
collective bargaining as a method of regulating employment relations. The Royal
Commission reporting in 1931 found very little evidence of collective bargaining in India.
The commission rejected a demand made for making recognition obligatory in certain cases.
During the period of State autonomy in ]937-40, the Congress government tried to introduce
legislation for encouraging collective bargaining and curbing unfair labour practices. The
Bombay Industrial Disputes Act. 1939, the precursor to the present Bombay Industrial
Relations Act. 1946 was a result of this policy. The Industrial Disputes Bill introduced in the
Central Legislative Assembly on 28th October, 1946 and which became a law on 1st April,
1947 retained, inter alia, the essential principles of Rule 81-A of the Defence of India Rules
which empowered the government to refer industrial disputes to adjudication and to enforce
their awards.
At around the same time, the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act 1947 introduced what it
termed as 'unfair practices' which should be eschewed by trade unions and employers alike in
their relations with each other. These included activities such as the majority of the members
of the trade unions taking part in an illegal strike, and on the part of the employer,
interference with or restraint on or coercion of his workmen in the exercise of their right to
organise. The Act provided for compulsory recognition of representative unions by
employers and for arbitration of disputes over certification of unions. It is interesting to note
that these measures (which have yet to come into effect more than 50 years later) . deal only
with the issues of non-interference by the employer in trade
union matters and protection' of the workers against victimisation on the basis of their trade
union activities, and not with the criterion for determining a bargaining agent. Mr. Jagjivan
Ram's approach, of balance between collective bargaining and compulsory adjudication,
found reflection in the Labour Relations Bill, 1950 and the Trade Unions Bill, 1950
introduced in the Parliament of India. Under the Labour Relations Bill, 1950, collective
bargaining was made compulsory for both employers and unions under stipulated conditions.
The Bill provided for a procedure for collective bargaining, which included the prohibition of
strikes and lock-outs until the parties had resorted to collective bargaining and obligation on
both the employers and workers to observe collective agreements. The conclusion of written
agreements to be registered with the appropriate government office was declared to be the
purpose of collective bargaining.

Mr. V.V. Giri who took over as the new labour minister in 1952 sought to completely
overhaul the existing scheme of compulsory adjudication, At the Indian Labour Conference
at Nainital, Mr. Giri tried, with moderate success to win support for shifting emphasis
towards collective bargaining. Following the resignation of Mr. Giri in 1954, Mr.
Khandubhai Desai took over as labour minister. Thus, despite attempts like the voluntary
Code of Discipline in Industry adopted by the Indian Labour Conference in 1958 obliging
management and unions not to take unilateral action and to settle all
future disputes through conciliation, negotiation and voluntary arbitration, collective
bargaining progressively took a back seat. The Code of Discipline in Industry which was
ratified by representatives of the All India organizations of employers and workers in March
1958.

After a gap of several years, the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (IDA) was amended in 1982 to
provide for unfair labour practices, which cover broadly all the categories of anti-union
discrimination to be found in articles 1 and 2 of Convention No. 98 of the ILO Broadly
speaking, interference by the employer in the trade union rights of the workmen and
victimisation on these grounds have been termed as unfair labour practice on the part of
employers. Proceeding on illegal strikes, refusal to bargain collectively in good faith on the
part of the recognised union (notwithstanding the fact that there are no provisions dealing
with recognition of trade unions under the IDA) and indulging
in violence and acts of coercion have been treated as unfair labour practice under the Act.
Committing an unfair labour practice has been made an offence for which a criminal
complaint could be filed, after seeking permission from the appropriate government, and
which can
be punished with imprisonment and fine. The amendment does not provide for any civil
remedy such as issuing a cease and desist order to the employer in the case of a continuing
unfair labour practice or empower the labour court to award damages. The 1982 amendment
to the IDA incorporating a new Chapter on Unfair Labour Practices has no doubt provided a
framework for encouraging collective bargaining by specifying certain activities as unfair
labour practices; yet it must be noted that the vexed question of the need to have recognised
unions and pre-determined recognition procedures has been side-stepped once again.
However, as already noted above, the description of what constitutes an unfair labour practice
under this Act is not confined to acts which hamper collective bargaining. Actions on the part
of the employers 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 has also been regarded as an unfair labour
practice.
However, it is not as if the IDA has recognised some form of unfair labour practices for the
first time in 1982. The IDA has, right from its enactment in 1947 afforded specific protection
against dismissals under certain conditions .t Any violation of this provision can be
challenged by the aggrieved workman filing an application before the authority where the
dispute is pending.? The IDA was amended by the Industrial Disputes (Amendment and
Miscellaneous) Provisions Act, 1956 to provide protection to 'protected workmen', who were
given additional protection against arbitrary dismissals. l'' One per cent of the total number of
workmen employed in an establishment, subject to a minimum of five and a maximum of one
hundred, are to be recognised as protected workmen. The Rules framed under the IDA
provide for the distribution ofsuch protected workmen among the various trade unions
connected with the establishment roughly in proportion to the membership figures of the
unions. I I It must be noted that the limitation of these provisions, including those relating to
unfair labour practices under this Act, is that it is available only when the dismissal has
actually taken place and not when it is anticipated or feared by the concerned workman.
Thus, in practice, a charge sheeted employee fearing his dismissal is unable to make use of
Chapter V-C of IDA.

Apart from section 33, an industrial dispute can be raised regarding the dismissal of any
workmen under the IDA. 14 Till 1964 any such dispute had to be espoused by a trade union
or a substantial number of workmen to be treated as an industrial dispute under the IDA.
Following an amendment in 1964, the IDA permits an individual who is aggrieved over his
dismissal or termination to raise an industrial dispute. The powers of the labour court
examining such a dispute have been considerately widened in 1971 to allow it to re-appraise
all the evidence on the basis of which the employer decided to terminate the services of a
workman and to independently decide on the adequacy of reasons for the termination. The
Supreme Court of India has in a number of cases laid down that the management must act in
good faith, without mala fides nor victimise the workmen. Termination of employees on the
ground of "loss of confidence in the workman" so that it be treated as a case of
termination simpliciter and not as dismissal for a misconduct is not permitted. The courts
have "lifted the veil" in such cases to find out the true reason for the termination. The courts
have held that termination of services on the ground of loss of confidence is stigmatic and it
calls for a domestic enquiry or the leading of evidence before the labour court in order to
justify the dismissal. Termination in such cases is mala fide and is definitely not in good faith
but is a colourable exercise of the employer's right to terminate the services of their
workmen. The labour court can order reinstatement of the worker with back wages in such
cases. These principles have been valuable in reducing the arbitrariness in the termination of
workmen, inter alia, for their trade union activities.

State-level Initiatives

What the Parliament had hesitated long in doing, some states had achieved by providing for
protection guaranteed to workmen and trade unions against anti-union discrimination. The
Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 specifically provides that no employee shall
be victimised by reason of the circumstances that he is an office bearer of any union or that
he has taken part in any trade union activity or has gone on strike which is not illegal or has
appeared or intends to appear as a witness in any preceeding.P Similar provisions are to be
found in the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (BIRA).19 The Maharashtra
Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971
(MRTUPULPA) provides for detailed protection against antiunion discrimination. As already
noted above, some of the unfair labour practices pertain to matters wider than merely
ensuring the success of collective bargaining procedures. In the MRTUPULPA just as in the
IDA there are provisions making the appointment of badlis or temporary workers for long
years with a view to denying them their benefits, an unfair labour practice. We have already
adverted to the wider meaning given to unfair labour practices in the Indian context. Going
by the case law generated under the MRTUPULPA, we note several cases which relate to the
demand for regularisation of workmen or the absorption of contract labour by the principal
employer.
However, the real point of departure from the central law is with respect to the power of the
courts to give relief. The industrial court has the civil power to issue a cease and desist order
to the employer to prevent them from continuing to commit an unfair labour practice and in
the case of a dismissal to reinstate the workman forthwith in his original position with
continuity of service and full back wages in a proceeding relating to unfair labour practice.?
The labour court under the MRTUPULPA has the power to try offences relating to unfair
labour practices
It is ironic that when the IDA was amended in 1982 the wider powers
of providing a civil remedy for an unfair labour practice were not
provided. Further, since the amendment did not provide for recognition
of trade unions, the provision under the Maharashtra law that permitted
only a recognised union to raise a complaint relating to an unfair labour
practice was not provided.U
The rich body of case law that has developed under the Maharashtra
law stands testimony to the fact that that law is frequently used to curb
unfair labour practices, in contrast to the virtually non-existent litigation
of a similar nature under the IDA. The need to suitably modify the
central law in order that it can be of greater utility appears all the more
relevant in the present context when sea changes are taking place in the
economy and labour market in India following the process of
liberalisation and de-regulation. Greater casualisation of the work force
even in the organised sectors and a diminished role of trade unions has
set the stage for an increased incidence of unfair labour practices. The
need to increase the access and scope of the remedies under the central
law appears to be an urgent necessity.

UNFAIR CONDUCT RELATING TO PROMOTION, DEMOTION,

TRAINING OR BENEFITS
This usually involves cases where the employer deviates from its own promotion or training
policy or where the employee alleges that the promotion, demotion or training is in itself
unfair. If it is alleged that the failure to promote is a result of discrimination, this dispute must
be referred to the Employment Equity Commission as such a dispute (see information sheet:
Discrimination). If all employees pass a test and all except one or a few are promoted, the
employer may be guilty of unfair conduct against that / those employees. An example of
unfair conduct based on benefits would be when all employees are given transport
allowances, but one is discriminated against and not given this allowance. This may
constitute an unfair labour practice. An example of unfair conduct relating to training would
be if all employees were given training but for one or two, for no apparent /fair reason (i.e.
that they already have the skills); this may constitute an unfair labour practice.

UNFAIR SANCTION OR DISCIPLINARY ACTION

Usually an employee would refer a dispute relating to the unfairness of disciplinary measures
taken, based on the merits of their innocence in the alleged wrongdoing. Suspension as a
disciplinary sanction is the only instance where suspension can be unpaid. Whilst on
suspension pending a disciplinary enquiry, an employee must be paid. Non-payment must be
referred to the Department of Labour as a non-payment of salary dispute. It is not regarded as
an unfair labour practice dispute as this definition relates only to benefits and not salary. A
dispute regarding the unfair suspension may be referred as an unfair labour practice if the
employee is on suspension for an unreasonably long period and where there is no plausible
reason for the delay in finalising the enquiry. An example of unfair suspension would be
where an employee and her supervisor argue and the employer suspends only the employee,
even though it was the supervisor who was to blame.

REFUSAL BY AN EMPLOYER TO REINSTATE FORMER EMPLOYEE IN TERMS OF

ANY AGREEMENT
This type of unfair labour practice requires an agreement to have been in existence (verbal,
written, individual or collective). Usually these disputes arise in retrenchments situations. If
there is no agreement, then the dispute may be referred as an unfair dismissal based on
operational requirements. An example will be when there was an agreement between the
employer and a retrenched employee to the effect that the employee will be re-employed
when a vacancy becomes available and the employer does not re-employ that employee, the
conduct on the part of the employer may constitute an unfair labour practice.
UNFAIR TREATMENT CREATING AN OCCUPATIONAL
DETRIMENT FOR AN EMPLOYEE WHO MADE A PROTECTED
DISCLOSURE
If an employee makes a protected disclosure as set out in that Act e.g. makes a disclosure
regarding the conduct of an employer as he/she has reason to believe that the information
shows that the employer is committing a criminal offence, and is thereafter prejudiced for
making such disclosure by being demoted, such conduct of the employer would constitute an
unfair labour practice.

DISPUTE ABOUT UNFAIR TREATMENT

All the disputes about forms of unfair treatment may be referred firstly to conciliation
conducted either by a bargaining council, and if there is no council, by the CCMA. If the
dispute remains unresolved, it can be referred to arbitration.

WHEN TO REFER AN UNFAIR LABOUR PRACTICE DISPUTE

Section 191 states that the employee has 90 days from the date of the act or omission which
allegedly constitutes an unfair labour practice or, if it is a later date, within 90 days of the
date which the employee became aware of the act occurrence.

Evolution of Labour Legislation in India

The regulation in the case of labour and employment is often referred to as Industrial
legislation in India. The historical past of labour legislation in India is interwoven with the
history of British colonialism. The commercial/labour legislations enacted by the British
hadbeen notably supposed to shield the pursuits of the British employers. Considerations of
British political economy were naturally paramount in shaping a few of these early legal
guidelines. Thus, came the Factories Act. Its good identified that Indian textile items
furnished stiff competition to British textiles within the export market and therefore as a way
to make India labour costlier the Factories Act wasonce first presented in 1883 for the reason
that of the strain brought on the Britishparliament by the fabric magnates of Manchester and
Lancashire. For this reason, India obtained the first stipulation of eight hours of labour, the
abolition of little one labour, and the limit of ladies in night employment, and the introduction
of extratime wages for work past eight hours. Even as the impact of this measure was once
obviously welfare the true motivation was without doubt protectionist. The earliest Indian
statute to regulate the connection between employer and his workmen was the trade Dispute
Act, 1929 (Act 7 of 1929). Provisions had been made in this Act for restraining the rights of
strike and lock out but no equipment used to be supplied to handle disputes. The customary
colonial laws underwent enormous changes in the post-colonial generation considering
unbiased India referred to as for a clearpartnership between labour and capital. The content
material of this partnership used to be unanimously approved in a tripartite convention in
December 1947 wherein it used to be
agreed that labour would be given a reasonable wage and reasonable working conditio
ns and in return capital would receive the fullest co-
operation of labour for uninterrupted production and bigger productivity as a part of the
approach for countrywide fiscal progress and that all concerned would
realize a truce interval of three years free from strikes and lockouts. Finally, the
Industrial Disputes Act (the Act) brought into force on 1.04.1947 repealing the exchange
Disputes Act 1929 has due to the fact remained on statute book.

Labour Inspection
Labour inspection is a public carry out of labour administration that ensures the utility of
labour law in the office. Its primary position is to convince the social partners of the should
examine the rules on the workplace and their mutual curiosity in this regard, by way of
preventive, academic and, the place crucial, enforcement measures. In the global era of
labour, labour inspection is the most required tool of state presence and intervention to
layout, stimulate, and contribute to the progress of a tradition of prevention masking all
points potentially underneath its purview: business family members, wages everyday
conditions of work, occupational safety and properly-being, and issues regarding employment
and social security. In the meantime, labour inspectorates take part in their responsibilities in
a difficult surroundings involving vital changes in the monetary and social context, in
business developments; in the business enterprise of labour and employment dating; within
the social and political expectations, and in technological know-how and within the nature of work
dangers. An effective and outstanding labour inspectorate ought to be well funded, exact staffed,
and nicely organised. The need to guide inspection systems has emerged as more obvious in current
years. Labour inspection offers a complete approach to a huge type of the issues that have arisen in
keeping with globalisation. An effective characteristic for labour administration, combined with
socially responsible corporations and sound commercial members of the own family could be a win-
win process for promoting sustainable progress.

To at ease the enforcement of the legal provisions in terms of stipulations of labour and
defence of employees, the Conventions furnish, inter alia, that the approach of labour
inspection shall have the mission of supplying technical expertise and advice to employers
and staff. Whilst such advice and expertise can only motivate compliance with authorized
provisions, it will have to nevertheless be accompanied by an enforcement mechanism
enabling these guilty of violations reported by labour inspectors to be prosecuted.

Violations could also be the effect of failure to understand the phrases or scope of the
relevant laws or rules. For that reason, the labour inspectors have got to normally have
discretion to select to not impose penalties as a means of enforcing legal provisions.

Endeavor of Freedom of Organization and Right to

Collective Bargaining
Labour inspection officers often undergo obligations in the subject of industrial relations,
with regards to the pastime of trade union rights and defence of exchange union individuals.
One such assignment is the registration of alternate unions, ordinarily accompanied by using
verification of the legality of them via-laws.

The position assigned to labour inspectors in the area of commercial members of the
organization tends to take the type of close supervision of the jobs of trade unions and
employers in corporations to ensure that they do not exceed the limits laid down via
authorized provisions, their own interior rules and their by-laws. The Committee can handiest
express its reservations when immoderate use is manufactured from such supervision to the
extent that it takes the form of acts of interference in these organizations reliable events. It
remembers that the labour inspectorate should only act in fine circumstances similar to offences
or violations of the regulation denounced by means of a large number of members. On this regard,
the Committee noted with pleasure the repeal of detailed provisions of legislation authorizing labour
inspectors to interfere in alternate union’s interior affairs.

Labour inspectors may just contribute to the system of revising collective agreements; they
register and supervise such agreements. In contrast, a contemporary Ministerial Ordinance
established that the labour inspection would not revise the provisions of collective
agreements registered with the aid of the Labour Ministry.

Power of Labor Inspectors –

 Make such examination and inquiry as he cerebrates fit in order to ascertain whether
the rules made there under are observed

 Enter, inspect and probe any premises of factory or industrial establishment at any
plausible time for the purport of carrying out the objectives. They have power to take
any assistance which they cerebrate indispensable.

 Supervise the persons employed in any factory or industrial establishment

 He can take on the spot or otherwise verbal expression of any person for carrying out
the purposes of work.

 Seize or take facsimiles of registers or documents or portions thereof as he may

consider germane in reverence of any offence which he has reason to believe has been
committed by an employer

 Exercise such other powers as may be described.

Labor Inspectors Ought To:

 Seek advice from technical colleagues and test relevant felony texts, tips and
publications to make sure that tips proposed or commands given are correct;

 Consult the notes taken at some stage in the inspection visit and the troubles raised on
the remaining assembly;

 Re-observe the issues recognized and confirm, via non-public mirrored image, that

they are, in reality, the concern ones;

 Determine what movement to tackle every hassle. This can rely on an evaluation of its
seriousness, the inspector’s powers under the regulation and, most importantly, what
is likely to improve the administrative centre scenario in a sustainable manner.

The inspector should determine to confine motion to advising on how great to comply with
the regulation or, if the problem isn’t always, or not totally, covered via prison provisions,
advising on how to rectify the scenario. Where a problem pertains to certain sections of the
regulation or guidelines, the sections should be stated in any notification to the corporation.
Wherein advice or a recommendation is based totally on a trendy or technical norm no longer
designated by regulation, the difference should be made clean.

Appeals Against the Order of Certifying Officer:

Section 6 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 deals with appeals
against the order of the Certifying officer to certify the Standing Orders under subsection (2)
of Section 5. According to Section 6 of the Act, any employer, workmen, Trade Coalescence
or other prescribed representatives of the workmen aggrieved by the order of the Certifying
officer may prefer an appeal to the appellate ascendancy within thirty days from the date on
which copies are send under subsection (3) of Section 5. The decision of the appellate
ascendancy shall be final.

The appellate ascendancy shall within seven days of its orders under subsection (1) of Section
6, send copies to the certifying officer, to the employer or trade accumulation or any other
prescribed representatives of workmen, accompanied, unless it has been attested without any
amendment that the standing orders as certified by the Certifying Officer and authenticated in
the manner as prescribed.
There is no specific provision in the Act empowering an Appellate authority to correct
mistakes in the Standing orders finally certified by it under section 6(1) of the act, before the
expiry of six months from the date on which the Standing Order or the last modification
thereof came into operation in the manner provided in Section 10 of the Act, that is expect on
an agreement between the employer and the workmen.

When an appeal is preferred under section 6 of the Act the Standing Orders cannot be
completely cancelled, they can either be confirmed or modified.[2]In view of section 7 of the
Act, consequence of its operation certain rights and liabilities are created not only in the
employees but also in the employers. It cannot be said that such order would not bind the
workmen as the employer failed to comply with the provisions regarding translation and
Publication of Standing Orders in question. Section 5 and 6 clearly contemplate filing of
objection, hearing and decision, and then making it open to the aggrieved party to file an
appeal before the prescribed authority.

In Badrapur Power Engineers Association V. Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner and others,
the certified standing orders were despatched on 7th January 1991 and the appeal was filed
on 6th February 1991. The question was whether the appeal was filed within the prescribed
period of 30 days. It was held that in view of the provisions of Section 6 an appeal could be
filed within 30 days from the date on which copies of certified standing orders are sent. In
this case the appeal was held to be filed within 30 days because January 7 was to be excluded
in view of Section 9 (1) of the General Clause Act.

Section 13 Penalties and process: Non- submission of Draft Standing Orders via the business
enterprise inside the time limit unique in the Act is made Penal underneath part 13 of the Act.
In a similar fashion, amendment of Standing Orders or else than in keeping with the
provisions laid down in section 10 of the Act shall also be punishable. For these screw ups a
nice fine extending to Rupees five thousand may be imposed upon the organisation. In case
of carrying on with offence once more excellent fine extending to Rupees two hundred per
day after the first day throughout which the offence continues is also imposed upon the
organisation. No prosecution for an offence punishable below section three of this Act will be
instituted except with the earlier sanction of the suitable government. No court docket not as
good as that of a Metropolitan magistrate or a Judicial magistrate of the second type shall be
attempting to try out an offence beneath the Act. Any person whose right has been affected
by an order of the authorities under this Act can go to the High Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution for the enforcement of his right by means of any directions or writ in the nature
of certiorari or mandamus.

Provisions of Authorities Under Industrial Disputes Act 1947

The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is an Act which makes provision for the investigation
and agreement of commercial disputes, and for specified other purposes.

The industrial Disputes Act because it stands at present is the end result of a series of
ameliorative regulation, establishing from Bengal legislation VII of 1819. To the last change
to the reward Act in 1996. The goal of the Act is to keep workforce from exploitation or
whimsical directives of the organization, and similarly to maintain the group of workers from
the indiscipline and illegal works of the personnel and their unions.

The amazing feature of this Act is that all factories and establishment, regardless of being
registered or no longer underneath some other Act and regardless of the quantity of
employees on the rolls, will come below its purview. The Act applies to every trade,
alternate, venture, service, avocation and so forth, which is viewed as an enterprise
underneath this Act. Underneath the provisions of business Disputes Act, 1947 the next
judicial boards are constituted for resolving and adjudicating disputes.

Discriminatory Labour Practices

Chapter X of the act deals with ‘Unfair Labour Practices’. According to it no employer or
workmen or Trade Union shall commit any unfair labour practice. Further, it is an offence
under Section 25 (u). This practice has been prohibited to regulate industrial relations and to
restore industrial peace. In this regard a new Schedule-V had been added. In this Schedule,
various unfair labour practices have been defined.

Following are necessary practices that are listed as unfair and created punishable:

 Practices that interfere with workmen within the exercise of their rights to organise,
for connection or aiding a labour union or to have interaction in any involved
activities for the aim of negotiation or alternative protection.
  Threatening a lock-out or closure if a labour union is unionized.

 Discharge or dismiss of workmen by means of victimization or on false reasons or

untrue allegations.

 Practices to get rid of the work of an everyday nature

 Practices to transfer a working person malafidely from one place to a different

underneath the pretence of management policy.

6) Insisting any individual working man to execute a bond for permitting them to resume
work if they’re on a legal strike

7) Showing partiality to at least one set of employees over another set whereas disregard
less deserves.

8) Discharging the standing and privileges of permanent workmen by using badlis or

temporaries.

9) Discriminating workmen for filing charges.

10) Failure to implement award, settlement or any agreement

11) Proposing or continued embezzled opposition.

The above list of practices is not exhaustive and there is no scientific test to define the
expression ‘unfair labour practice’. Thus any practice which violates the provisions of the
constitution meant for the dignity, security, welfare and to promote living conditions for
workmen amounts to unfair labour practice.

CONCLUSION :-
In order to establish the integrity of labour review, conditions of accommodation for labour
inspectors ought to replicate gender equipollence and facilitate employment stability and
private security within the exercise of their functions, underpinned by a felicitous restrictive
framework. At last according to the above discussion, we come to the conclusion that every
kind of unfair
labour practice disturbs and leaves impact on the industrial relation which, in turn, disturbs
the industrial peace and ultimately industrial productivity is effected. It is not only connected
with the employer and employees but the community as a whole. Therefore for the sake of
the community unfair labour practices must be stopped.