BIPARTITE AGREEMENT &

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
DR. ARIFA ZAHRA
LAW302
AMITY UNIVERSITY DUBAI
 REVISION…….
• Collective bargaining
• ADR(s)
• Arbitration
• Conciliation
• Negotiation
• Mediation
 Bipartite Agreement & Enforcement
• Section 18 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
• Persons on whom settlements and awards are binding
• (1) A settlement arrived at by agreement between the employer and workman
otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceeding shall be binding on the
parties to the agreement.
• (2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), an arbitration award] which has
become enforceable shall be binding on the parties to the agreement who referred
the dispute to arbitration.]
• (3) A settlement arrived at in the course of conciliation proceedings under this Act
[or an arbitration award in a case where a notification has been issued under sub-
section (3A) of section 10A] or [an award[of a Labor Court, Tribunal or National
Tribunal] which has become enforceable] shall be binding on
• (a) all parties to the industrial dispute;
• (b) all other parties summoned to appear in the proceedings as parties
to the dispute, unless the Board, [arbitrator,] [Labour Court, Tribunal
or National Tribunal], as the case may be, records the opinion that they
were so summoned without proper cause;
• (c) where a party referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) is an employer,
his heirs, successors or assigns in respect of the establishment to
which the dispute relates;
• (d) where a party referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) is composed of
workmen, all persons who were employed in the establishment or part
of the establishment, as the case may be, to which the dispute relates
on the date of the dispute and all persons who subsequently become
employed in that establishment or part.
• Section 19 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
• Period of operation of settlements and awards.
• (1) A settlement shall come into operation on such date as is agreed upon
by the parties to the dispute, and if no date is agreed upon, on the date on
which the memorandum of the settlement is signed by the parties to the
dispute.
• (2) Such settlement shall be binding for such period as is agreed upon by
the parties, and if no such period is agreed upon, for a period of six months
[from the date on which the memorandum of settlement is signed by the
parties to the dispute], and shall continue to be binding on the parties after
the expiry of the period aforesaid, until the expiry of two months from the
date on which a notice in writing of an intention to terminate the settlement
is given by one of the parties to the other party or parties to the settlement.
• [(3) An award shall, subject to the provisions of this section, remain in
operation for a period of one year [from the date on which the award
becomes enforceable under section 17A]:
• Provided that the appropriate Government may reduce the said period
and fix such period as it thinks fit:
• Provided further that the appropriate Government may, before the
expiry of the said period, extend the period of operation by any period
not exceeding one year at a time as it thinks fit so, however, that the
total period of operation of any award does not exceed three years
from the date on which it came into operation.
• (4) Where the appropriate Government, whether of its own motion or on
the application of any party bound by the award, considers that since the
award was made, there has been a material change in the circumstances
on which it was based, the appropriate Government may refer the award
or a part of it [to a Labor Court, if the award was that of a Labor Court
or to a Tribunal, if the award was that of a Tribunal or of a National
Tribunal] for decision whether the period of operation should not, by
reason of such change, be shortened and the decision of [Labor Court or
the Tribunal, as the case may be] on such reference shall, be final.
• (5) Nothing contained in sub-section (3) shall apply to any award
which by its nature, terms or other circumstances does not impose,
after it has been given effect to, any continuing obligation on the
parties bound by the award.
• (6) Notwithstanding the expiry of the period of operation under sub-
section (3), the award shall continue to be binding on the parties until
a period of two months has elapsed from the date on which notice is
given by any party bound by the award to the other party or parties
intimating its intention to terminate the award.
• (7) No notice given under sub-section (2) or sub-section (6) shall have
effect, unless it is given by a party representing the majority of persons
bound by the settlement or award, as the case may be.]
 Prohibition of Strikes and Lock-outs.
• Section 22 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
• (1) No person employed in a public utility service shall go on strike in
breach of contract:
• (a) without giving to the employer notice of strike, as hereinafter
provided, within six weeks before striking; or
• (b) within fourteen days of giving such notice; or
• (c) before the expiry of the date of strike specified in any such notice
as aforesaid; or
• (d) during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings before a
conciliation officer and seven days after the conclusion of such
proceedings.
• (2) No employer carrying on any public utility service shall lock-out
any of his workmen
• (a) without giving them notice of lock-out as hereinafter provided,
within six weeks before locking out; or
• (b) within fourteen days of giving such notice; or
• (c) before the expiry the date of lock-out specified in any such notice
as aforesaid; or
• (d) during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings before a
conciliation officer and seven days after the conclusion of such
proceedings.
• (3) The notice of lock-out or strike under this section shall not be necessary where
there is already in existence a strike or, as the case may be, lock-out in the public
utility service, but the employer shall send intimation of such lock-out or strike on
the day on which it is declared, to such authority as may be specified by the
appropriate Government either generally or for a particular area or for a particular
class of public utility services.
• (4) The notice of strike referred to in sub-section (1) shall be given by such number
of persons to such person or persons and in such manner as may be prescribed.
• (5) The notice of lock-out referred to in sub-section (2) shall be given in such manner
as may be prescribed.
• (6) If on any day an employer receives from any persons employed by him any such
notices as are referred to in sub-section (1) or gives to any persons employed by him
any such notices as are referred to in sub-section (2), he shall within five days
thereof report to the appropriate Government or to such authority as that Government
may prescribe the number of such notices received or given on that day.
• Section 23 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
• General prohibition of strikes and lock-outs.
• No workman who is employed in any industrial establishment shall go on strike in
breach of contract and no employer of any such workman shall declare a lock-out
• (a) during the pendency of conciliation proceedings before a Board and seven
days after the conclusion of such proceedings;
• (b) during the pendency of proceedings before [a Labour Court, Tribunal or
National Tribunal] and two months after the conclusion of such proceedings;
• [(bb) during the pendency of arbitration proceedings before an arbitrator and two
months after the conclusion of such proceedings, where a notification has been
issued under sub-section (3A) of section 10A; or]
• (c) during any period in which a settlement or award is in operation, in respect of
any of the matters covered by the settlement or award.
 Illegal strikes and lock-outs.
• Section 24 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
• (1) A strike or a lock-out shall be illegal if;
• (i) it is commenced or declared in contravention of section 22 or section 23; or
• (ii) it is continued in contravention of an order made under sub-section (3) of section
10 1 [or sub-section (4A) of section 10A].
• (2) Where a strike or lock-out in pursuance of an industrial dispute has already
commenced and is in existence at the time of the reference of the dispute to a Board,
[an arbitrator, a] 2 [Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal], the continuance of
such strike or lock-out shall not be deemed to be illegal, provided that such strike or
lock-out was not at its commencement in contravention of the provisions of this Act or
the continuance thereof was not prohibited under sub-section (3) of section 10 [or sub-
section (4A) of section 10A].
• (3) A lock-out declared in consequence of an illegal strike or a strike declared in
consequence of an illegal lock-out shall not be deemed to be illegal.
 Prohibition of financial aid to illegal strikes and lock-outs

• Section 25 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

• No person shall knowingly expend or apply any money in direct
furtherance of support of any illegal strike or lock-out.
 Types of Strikes
• A general strike is a type of strike where the workers join together for
a common reason or demand and keep themselves from work,
depriving the employer of their workers to carry on their business
operations.
• A “token strike”, which is for a shorter period, for example for a few
hours, and its main aim is to draw the attention of the Management by
showing cooperation among the workers, and it is generally before the
general strike.
 Judicial approach
• In the case of Indian General Navigation and Railway Co. Ltd v. Their
Workmen, it was observed that when the blame attaches to both the parties’
i.e the employer and the workmen, then the burden of back wages that have
elapsed shall be borne half and half by the parties.
• In the case of TISCO Ltd vs Workmen, the verdict was that if the employer
replaces the weekly day-off Sunday with another day-off without notifying
the workmen in advance then such change will not be considered as a legal
change. Therefore, the refusal of workmen to work on the day-off which was
not a Sunday did not amount to strike.
• In the case of North Brook Jute Co. Ltd. vs Workmen, the verdict was that
when a scheme was introduced in contradiction to Section 33 of the Industrial
disputes Act, 1947 then the refusal to act according to that scheme would not
be considered as a strike.
• In the case of Punjab National Bank vs All India Punjab National
Bank Employees’ Federation, the verdict was that a pen-down strike
would be considered as a strike because here the workers do enter the
work or office premises but do not agree to perform their work.
• In the case of T.K. Rangarajan vs Government of Tamil Nadu, the
verdict was that the right to strike is not a fundamental right. In
addition, it is also neither legal nor a statutory right. A similar thing
was recognised in the case of B.R. Singh vs Union of India.
 Lock Out(s)
• Lockout is the opposite of a strike. Strike is a tool in the hands of the
workmen to compel the management to agree to their demands.
• Similarly, lockout is a tool in the hands of the management to force the
workmen to further negotiate on their demands which are related to
the terms and conditions of the workers’ employment.
• As per the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Lock-out means the
temporary closing of a place of employment, or the suspension of
work, or the refusal by an employer to continue to employ any number
of persons employed by him.
 ESSENTIALS
• This definition consists of the following three components of a
lockout:
1.Temporary closing of a place of employment; or
2.Suspension of work, or
3.Refusal to continue to employ any number of persons employed by
the employer.
• When a lockout takes place, the workers are asked by the management
to stay away from work, and therefore, they are not obliged to attend
work.
 JUDICIAL APPROACH
• In the case of Shri Ramchandra Spinning Mills vs State of Madras, it was
seen that if the employer closes his place of business as a means of reprisal or as
an instrument of coercion or as a mode of exerting pressure on employees or
generally speaking when his act is what may be called an act of belligerency
there will be a lock-out.
• In the case of Lord Krishna Sugar Mills Limited Saharanpur vs State of UP,
the verdict was that a lock-out may sometimes be not at all connected with
economic demands; it may be resorted to as a security measure.
• In the case of Lakshmi Devi Sugar Mills Limited vs Ram Sarup, the verdict
was that in the case of lockout there is neither alteration to the prejudice of
workmen of the conditions of the service application to them nor a discharge or
punishment whether by dismissal or otherwise.
 CRUX…
• Strike is a vital part of the collective bargaining process because it evaluates
the economic bargaining power of each party involved and compels both
parties to understand, realize, and evaluate the necessity it has for each other’s
contribution.
• As the strike continues, both the parties bear losses- the savings of the
employees involved in the strike continue to reduce, while the organization
also bears huge losses due to the stoppage of production which affects the
bottom line.
• Lockout is exactly the opposite of strike. Strike is a weapon that is in the
hands of the workers to force the employer to agree on their demands.
Similarly, a lockout is a weapon in the hands of the management to compel
the workers to further negotiate on their demands relating to the conditions of
employment, in the favor of the employer.