You are on page 1of 4

Collective bargaining has been defined by different experts in different ways.

N
evertheless, it is treated as a method by which problem of wages and conditions
of employment are resolved peacefully and voluntarily between labour and managem
ent. However, the term collective bargaining is opposed to individual bargaining
1.
Sometimes, it is described as a process of accommodation between two conflicting
interests Here, power stands against power.
The I.L.O. defines collective bargaining:
"As negotiations about working conditions and terms of employment between an emp
loyer, or a group of employers, or one or more employers' organisations, on the
one hand, and one or more representative workers' organisation on the other with
a view to reaching agreement."
This definition confines the term collective bargaining as a means of improving
conditions of employment. But in fact, collective bargaining serves something mo
re.
Perlman aptly stated,"Collective bargaining is not just a means of raising wages
and improving conditions of employment. Nor is it merely democratic government
in industry. It is above all technique, collective bargaining as a technique of
the rise of a new class is quite different ...... from the desire to displace or
abolish" the "old ruling class"... ... to gain equal rights as a class ... ...
to acquire an excessive jurisdiction in that sphere where the most immediate int
erests, both material and spiritual, are determined, and a shared jurisdiction w
ith the older class or classes in all other spheres.2
COLLECTIVE BARGANING in India has been the subject matter of industrial adjudica
tion since long and has been defined by our Law Courts. In Karol Leather Karamch
ari Sangathan v. Liberty Footwear Company3 the Supreme Court observed that, Collec
tive bargaining is a technique by which dispute as to conditions of employment i
s resolved amicably by agreement rather than coercion."
According to the Court, the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeks to achieve socia
l justice on the basis of collective bargaining. In an earlier judgment in Titag
arh Jute Co. Ltd. v. Sriram Tiwari , the Calcutta High Court clarified that this
policy of the legislature is also implicit in the definition of industrial dispu
te'.
In Ram Prasad Viswakarma v. Industrial Tribunal 4the Court observed that, "It i
s well known how before the days of collective bargaining', labour was at a great
disadvantage in obtaining reasonable terms for contracts of service from its em
ployer. As trade unions developed in the country and Collective bargaining becam
e the rule, the employers found it necessary and convenient to deal with the rep
resentatives of workmen, instead of individual workmen, not only for the making
or modification of contracts but in the matter of taking disciplinary action aga
inst one or more workmen and as regards of other disputes."
In Bharat Iron Works v. Bhagubhai Balubhai Patel 5, it was held that Collective
bargaining, being the order of the day in the democratic ,social welfare State,
legitimate trade union activities, which must shun all kinds of physical threats
, coercion or violence, must march with a spirit of tolerance, understanding and
grace in dealings on the part of the employer. Such activities can flow in heal
thy channel only on mutual cooperation between the employer and the employees an
d cannot be considered as irksome by the management in the best interests of its
business.
Dialogue with representatives of a union help striking a delicate balance in adj
ustments and settlement of various contentious claims and issues."
These definitions only bring out the basic element in the concept i.e., civilize
d confrontation between employers and employees and the whole process is regulat
ed by statutory provisions.
POSITION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN INDIA
Collective Bargaining machinery essentially is a reflection of a particular soci
al and political climate. The history of the trade union movement shows that uni
on are affiliated to one or the other political parties. As a result most of the
trade unions are controlled by outsiders. Critic says that the presence of outs
iders, is one of the important reasons for the failure of collective bargaining
in India.6
Outsiders in the Process of Collective bargaining:-
The Trade Unions Act, 1926, permits outsiders to be the office bearers of a unio
n to the extent of half the total number of office bearers. So, it permits one t
o be the leader of the union who does not actually work in the industry. Sometim
es a dismissed employee working as a union leader may create difficulties in the
relationship
between the union and the employer. Nevertheless, experience shows that outsider
s who have little knowledge of the background of labour problems, history of lab
our movement, fundamentals of trade unionism and the technique of the industry a
nd with even little general education assume the charge of labour union and beco
me the self-appointed custodian of the welfare of workers. The employers, theref
ore, have been reluctant to discuss and negotiate industrial matters with outsid
ers, who have no personal or direct knowledge of day to day affairs of the indus
try.
Accordingly employees refuse recognition to the unions which are either contro
lled by the politicians or affiliated to a particular political party or control
led by a particular individual. Government cannot morally compel employers to ac
cord recognition to unions without driving out the politicians from them. The St
ate must outright ban "outsiders" from the trade union body. Further, provision
for political funds by trade unions should be eliminated, since it invariably en
courages the politicians to prey upon them. The National Commission on Labour ha
s overlooked this aspect. The Commission does not favour a legal ban on non-empl
oyees for holding the union office. It says that without creating conditions for
building up the internal leadership, a complete banning of outsiders would only
make unions weaker. The Commission hopes that Internal leadership would develop
through their education and training. Accordingly the Commission suggests propo
rtion of the outsiders and the workers in a union executive. On realising the pr
oblems of outsiders in the Union, the Industrial Relations Bill, 1988 proposes t
o reduce the number of outsiders to two only.
Politicization of Trade-Union Movement in India:-
It is well known that the trade-union movement in India is divided on political
lines and exists on patronage of various political Parties. Most of the trade-u
nion organizations have aligned themselves with a political party with whom they
find themselves philosophically close. It is because of this that the Indian Na
tional Trade Union Congress is considered to be the labour wing of congress, whe
reas H.M.S. is considered to be the labour wing of Socialist party. Bhartiya Maj
door Sangh pledges its allegiance to B.J.P. and C.I.T.U. has the support of C.P.
I. (M). It is also the case with the AITUC which had started as a national organ
ization of workers but subsequently came to be controlled by the Communist Party
of India and is now it's official labour wing. Political patronage of trade-uni
ons has given a new direction to the movement whose centre of gravity is no long
er the employees or workmen. The centre has shifted towards it leadership whose
effectiveness is determined by the extent of political patronage and the consequ
ent capacity to obtain the benefit. This shifting centre of power is the necessa
ry consequence of political parties search for workers votes, which they seek by
conferring benefits on them. Since the public sector which is really the instru
mentality of the State, has emerged as the biggest employer in this country, the
collective bargaining -between the union patronized by the party-in-power and t
he employer has become an important methodology. It is because of this process t
hat agreements conferring benefits are signed even in those units where financia
l losses are mounting. It is also our experience that in spite of wage increase
end improved conditions of service, there has been no corresponding improvement
in production or the productivity. Also,most of the losses are being passed on t
o the consumers by increasing prices of the products. It is in this context that
Justice Gupta has, in his, 'Our Industrial Jurisprudence" made the following ob
servations: If our experience is any guide, it reveals that Ievel of increase in w
ages etc., ( in public sector undertaking )is now decided by the Bureau of Publi
c Enterprises which takes into consideration only the Political impact and 'Cons
umer resistence' as two dominant factors. This is the reason why the prices of a
lmost all products of necessity like coal, iron and steel, cement, sugar etc. ha
ve been constantly increasing. A survey of pending and decided industrial disput
es of the last 10 years reveals that there was virtually no industrial dispute r
egarding wage structure or bonus in any industry of some significance.
There are also not many collective bargaining agreements which have tried to li
nk wages with productivity. Clearly,therefore, the basic idea of sharing the pros
perity' which developed because of our commitment to the cause of 'social justic
e' is no longer current and the expected end product of the process of ' social
justice ' is no longer expected. "7
The process of collective bargaining is not likely to succeed unless the threat
of strike/lockout is there in the back-ground. Strike and lock-out are the weap
ons used by both the parties daring the collective bargaining process. Without h
aving these weapons at hands, neither of the party to the dispute can defeat the
claim of the other. The peculiar feature of our country while compared to the a
dvanced nations of the world is that the economic conditions of the workers is v
ery poor and as a result they can not afford a long-standing strike.
Critical Evaluation:-
In Indian labour arena we see, multiplicity of unions and Inter-union rivalry. S
tatutory provisions for recognizing unions as bargaining agents are absent. It i
s believed that the institution of collective bargaining is still in its prelimi
nary and organisational stage. State, therefore, must play a progressive and pos
itive role in removing the pitfalls which have stood in the way of mutual, amica
ble and voluntary settlement of labour disputes. The labour policy must reflect
a new approach.Hitherto the State has been playing a dominant role in controllin
g and guiding labour-management relation through its lopsided adjudication machi
nery. The role of the industrial adjudicator virtually differs from that of a ju
dge of ordinary civil court. The judge of a civil court has to apply the law to
the case before him and decide rights and liabilities according to its establish
ed laws, whereas industrial adjudicator has to adjust and reconcile the conflict
ing claims of disputants and evolve socially desirable" rights and obligations of
the disputants. In deciding industrial disputes the adjudicator is free to app
ly the principle of equity and good conscience.
However, it is said that the impact of the romantic attitude of the judiciary t
owards workers has not proved conducive to the peaceful industrial relations. It
is accepted that the end of judicial proceeding is pain and penalties. It canno
t solve the problems of industries.Accordingly it is said that,"While statutes,
rules, regulations, pains and penaltieshave their place in the ordering of indus
try, they do not touch the core of the problems of industrial relations."8
Moreover, advocates of adjudication contend that as the collective bargaining pr
ocedure might end in a strike or lockout, which implies a great loss to the part
ies concerned and the country, so for the sake of industrial peace, the adjudica
tion becomes necessary.
Industrial peace can be established by the adjudication for the time being. But
the conflicts are driven deeper and it will retard industrial production. In the
absence of effective collective bargaining the anti productivity tendencies are b
ound to appear.
Suggestions:-
For an effective Collective Bargaining in India the following suggestions are m
ade :
Ø Recognition of trade union has to be determined through verification of fee memb
ership method. The union having more membership should be recognised as the effe
ctive bargaining agent.
Ø The State should enact suitable legislation providing for compulsory recognition
of trade union by employers.
Ø Section 22 of the Trade Unions Act, 1926 should be amended.
Ø The provision for political fund by trade unions has to be done away with-since
it unvariably encourages the politicians to prey upon the union.
Ø State has to play a progressive role in removing the pitfalls which stand in th
e way of mutual, amicable and voluntary settlement of labour disputes.
Citations
1. N.S. Chandrasekharan & P.P. Paul, "Collective Bargaining and IndustrialRelat
ions in the private sector in India," 6, C.U.L.R,160 (1982).
2. Eugene V. Schneider, Industrial Sociology, London, Mc Graw-Hill, (1971), P. 3
44.
3. AIR 1990 SC 247
4. (1961) I LLJ. 504
5. (1976) Lab. 1.C:.4 [S.C.]
6. S.N. Dhyani, Trade Union and the Right to Strike,S. Chand & Co. (Pvt.) Ltd ,
New Delhi, PP. 374-380.
7. Justice Gulab Gupta, Our Industrial Jurisprudence, 1987, p. 133.
8. Kir Kaldy, The spirit of Industrial Relations (1974) P. 58,cited in S.N. Dhy
ani's np. cit., P. 396.

Read more: http://www.articlesbase.com/organizational-articles/collective-bargai


ning-process-in-india-a-critique-539870.html#ixzz1E2kbO71t
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

You might also like