Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(x) An election, under the supervision and direction of a Court appointed officer, should therefore be held across all five successor entities to identify and recognize the majority union across the industry.

(xi) If this Court feel that there should be additionally be recognition, in terms of the Code of Discipline, in respect of each successor entity, the appellant is not averse to the same provided there is an appropriate demarcation to avoid conflict.

14. Proceeding there from, Mr. Sibal argued that once recognition of majority union is accepted as a logical necessity for giving effect to the statutory mandate , the next step is to determine the scope and extent of recognition. Here his submission was that industry wise recognition, wherever possible, is desirable which concept was even accepted by the National Commission on Labour. Mr. Sibal also referred to the Code of Discipline adopted at the 16th Session of the Indian Labour Conference held in May, 1956 and formally announced on June 01,1958 which gives priority to the industry wise recognition over establishment/pant wise recognition. Mr. Sibal also sought to draw sustenance from Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act which defines the term "industrial dispute"

31. Likewise, Code of Discipline provides as under:-

"A representative union for an industry in an area should have the right to represent the workers in all the establishments in the industry, but if a union of workers in a particular establishment has a membership of 50% or more of the workers of that establishment it should have the right to deal with matters of purely local interest, such as, for instance, the handling of grievances pertaining to its own member. All other workers who are not member of that union might either operate through the representative union for the industry or seek redress directly."