Reforming the Industrial Disputes Act
-
Upload
samarth-chaddha -
Category
Documents
-
view
30 -
download
1
Transcript of Reforming the Industrial Disputes Act
SOUTH ASIAN JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY REVIEW
VOL. 1 July 2016 ISS. 2
ARTICLES
REFORMING THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947
SAMARTH CHADDHA
3rd Year LLB , Jindal Global Law School
32.
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 176
POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ACT .................................................................. 177
CURRENT CHANGES AND DEBATE REGARDING REFORM ........................................ 180
THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2010 AND POSSIBLE CHANGES ...... 182
THE RIGHT TO STRIKE ............................................................................................ 185
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS ........................................................................................ 186
INTRODUCTION
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (―ID Act‖ hereafter) is an ancient piece of
legislation that was primarily a ―law and order measure.‖1 Today, the Act is a key
piece of legislation for pre-empting industrial tensions and creating a climate of
industrial goodwill,2 however somewhere the provisions have gotten lost in an
environment of employers exploiting workers in the quest to maximize profit.
Industrial peace, as outlined in the First Five Year Plan,3 is an important component of
1 122nd Law Commission of India Report on Forum For National Uniformity in Labour Adjudication, December 1987. 2 U.P. State Brassware Corpn. Ltd v. Uday Narain Pandey (2006) 1 SCC 479 3 First Five Year Plan as cited in Ibid: ―Answer to class antagonism and world conflict will arrive soon if we succeed in discovering a sound basis for human relations in industry. Economic progress is also bound up with industrial peace.‖ in 122nd Law Commission of India Report on Forum For National Uniformity in Labour Adjudication, December 1987.
July 2016] SAJLPR 177
economic progress. Industrial peace is a pressing national need, and absent a law,
order would not be present and there would be chaos.4 The precursor to the Industrial
Disputes Act, Rule 81A of the Defence of India Rules, empowered the Government to
intervene in industrial disputes by prohibiting strikes and lock-outs, especially those
that did not arise out of a genuine trade dispute.5 The idea was that strikes and
lockouts were barbaric, and the state had to display its power such that it could
compel peace between employer and employee.6 Unfortunately though, the Act has
retained this same focus and time has come now to make some changes so that the
focus shifts from maintaining, ―law and order‖ to respecting the rights of the worker.
The basic notion of being a ―worker‖ has become synonymous with unions, and being
able to strike, which has lost its status as a right in a democratic society. This paper is
an attempt to look at some of the changes the Act needs to make, and the ones that
were made in the recent 2010 Amendment, to make suggestions to ensure that
workers are not, in a Marxist sense, alienated from their value of their labour.
POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ACT
The word ―peace‖ has been mentioned, though it has not been defined in the
current Act. It would be helpful to clearly explicate what is meant by the word peace,
by the lawmakers perhaps in the Scope and Objects to the legislation. It should be
defined such that peace is positive in nature and does not mean the silencing of
dissent, or even the ―slavish subjugation imposed upon weaker sections by the more
powerful dictating in their own terms.‖7 Just like the State of Gujarat has done,8 other
states could follow too and provide for the establishment of Joint Management
4 Ibid. 5 The Government of India in January 1942 by notification added Rule 81A of Defence of India Rules, 1939 to prohibit strikes, and lockouts. Subsequent amendments followed that only made the ban against strikes tougher mentioned by Dr. H.K. Saharay, ―Textbook on Labour and Industrial Law,‖ Universal Publishing (2011). 6 H.B. Higgins, ―A New Province for Law and Order,‖ Melbourne: Govt. Printer (1921). 7 122nd Law Commission of India Report on Forum For National Uniformity in Labour Adjudication, December 1987. 8 Gujarat Amendment of Section 2 of XIV of 1947: ―Council‖ means a Joint Management Council for any industrial establishment constituted under Section 3A.
178 ARTICLES [Vol.1 Iss.2
Councils consisting of members who assist management in managing industrial
relations. As seen by Gujarat‘s own Section 3A,9 this would help build cordial
relations in what is a tense environment between employers and employees, and help
build an understanding of trust between them.10 This will have an impact on worker
productivity and management can get a better grasp of what are their
responsibilities.11 However, the Law Commission is of the opinion that such
provisions are a non-starter, and the Supreme Court has often stayed these sections
through injunctions12 – so not everyone is in agreement with every state amending
their local state laws.
A starting point for the ID Act would be to create a neutral body that aims at
bringing uniformity in awards throughout the country.13 Currently, what happens is
that the Supreme Court becomes a regular forum for appeal.14 In the garb of important
questions of law, and a violation of fundamental rights, the Supreme Court‘s
jurisdiction is invoked which only adds up to the existing build-up of cases and
increases the pendency rate for adjudication of labour law matters. A neutral body
with a pan-India jurisdiction would not just lessen this build-up, but also provide
clarity to the workers‘ who may challenge awards regarding wages, only to find out
that they have a new set of wages to follow, whilst the earlier challenge is still being
litigated at the apex court. Because the Labour Appellate Tribunal was scrapped, all
the labour courts and Industrial Tribunals enjoy the status of giving awards that are
final, and which often conflict with each other, which can threaten industrial peace
and create disharmony due to lack of uniformity.15 Creating such a body would also
be in line with the International Labour Organizations‘ suggestion that has a workman 9 Section 3A of the Gujarat Act No.21 of 1972. 10 Section 3B of Gujarat Act No.21 of 1972. 11 Ibid. 12 122nd Law Commission of India Report on Forum For National Uniformity in Labour Adjudication, December 1987. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid.
July 2016] SAJLPR 179
who has his or her service terminated must have a right of appeal to a neutral body.16
Providing quick disposal and adjudication of disputes through Industrial Relations
Commissions would reduce the potential for industrial unrest. It would also
decentralize the administration of justice and allow specialized lawyers with
knowledge of industrial relations, humanities, social science, planned economy,
targets of planning and socio-economic goals to bring their expertise to labour-law
matters.17 The Law Commission puts it poignantly: when we can have specialized
fora for taxation, patents, etc., then why not specialized lawyers who can ensure
industrial peace?18
The model for industrial adjudication needs to become more participatory,
especially in rural areas, where Lok Adalats could be of some use.19 Too often, judges
have applied the law in a very formalistic manner, or too objectively, not keeping in
mind the subjective factors that affect workmen when they are working. Many even
suffer from class bias, and need to realize historical perspectives whilst deciding
cases.20 The Act could forbid retired judges from being inducted in the Industrial and
Labour courts and tribunals, as they would continue to adjudicate matters in the same
way as civil litigation is done. Thus, they cannot see the unfairness of the matter at
16 Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1963 (No.119): Standards of General Application: A worker who feels that his employment has been unjustifiably terminated should be entitled, unless the
matter has been satisfactorily determined through such procedures within the undertaking, establishment or service, as may exist or be established consistent with this Recommendation, to appeal, within a reasonable time, against that termination with the assistance, where the worker so requests, of a person representing him to a body established under a collective agreement or to a neutral body such as a court, an arbitrator, an arbitration committee or a similar body. Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_INSTRUMENT_ID,P12100_LANG_CODE:312457,en 17 122nd Law Commission of India Report on Forum For National Uniformity in Labour Adjudication, December 1987 – The Law Commission is interested in decentralization of administration of justice with a view to reduce the burden on the High Court and the Supreme Court. 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid. 20 Ibid.
180 ARTICLES [Vol.1 Iss.2
hand from the viewpoint of a workman.21 The Act needs to re-emphasize through
amendments that the focus should be on uplifting workers from their current existence
to ―a tolerable existence.‖22 New norms of industrial relations would have to be
emphasized, and one way to do this would be to make it mandatory to have one judge
in the Industrial Relations Commission to be from the workmen itself, in order to
reduce the class bias.23 This judge could interact with one judge coming from the
employer and the other from a legally trained perspective in order to ensure the result
would be satisfactory.24 These commissions could have both original as well as
appellate jurisdiction and contain a mixture of both judges from the High Court as
well as the Supreme Court, as well as members of key unions and employees‘
organizations.25
CURRENT CHANGES AND DEBATE REGARDING REFORM
Currently, the Haryana State Government has made changes to its labour laws,
which includes changes to the ID Act such that firms with up to 300 workers can
retrench without permission from the government – as compared to the threshold
being 100 workers previously.26 Such changes have followed the Rajasthan state
government and are in line with the historical National Commission on Labour Report
in 2002 that had also made the same suggestion. The mentality of such changes is that
unionization is an evil that needs to be curbed, and this would be the ―bitter pill‖ for
the unions to swallow.27 This unfettered right to establishments to close down has
21 Ibid. 22 Report of the Labour Laws Review Committee, p.20, para 4.4 (1974). 23 122nd Law Commission of India Report on Forum For National Uniformity in Labour Adjudication, December 1987 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 The Hindu, ―RSS-affiliated trade union opposes Haryana‘s labour law amendments,‖ Accessed 16th April, 2016: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/rssaffiliated-trade-union-opposes-haryanas-labour-law-amendments/article8419249.ece 27 Frontline Article by T.K. Rajalakshmi, ―Loaded Against Labour‖ Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1916/19160990.htm
July 2016] SAJLPR 181
attracted sharp criticism, and as Jagdish Khatter28 puts it, it protects jobs and not the
workers. It tilts the balance heavily in the favour of the employer and we need to
instead, strive for a balance between the interests of the workmen and the employer.29
What is worse is that the rise of contract labour has only ensured that we have created
classes between workers because the Commission‘s report suggests that contract
workers will not be a part of core activities of production.30 Even D Raja,31 agreed
with Khatters‘ suggestions and insists that reform must be pro-labour and should not
give absolute independence to hire-and-fire people. The counter-argument to such
changes is that we need to restore the flexibility back to the employers, because we
have lost out in manufacturing to countries such as Bangladesh and Vietnam. Sudha
Pillai,32 is of the opinion that it is the laws that need change, as many of them pre-date
independence and actually make it difficult for firms to fire workers. When
permission to retrench workers is seldom given, it denies the employers the flexibility
to change their workforce to adapt to market needs. Kaushik Basu, puts it aptly, most
of India‘s labour laws were designed with a ―scant respect for market conditions.‖33 If
anything seemed bad, there simply had to be a law striking it down.34 The idea of
―reform‖ also needs to be clearly explicated by the Labour Ministry, as it has become
synonymous with ―right-wing reform.‖35 Pillai defends the Haryana and Rajasthan
amendments as a way to address and prevent the abuse of contract labour.36
28 Former Managing Director of Maruti Udyog Limited, in TV Debate called Macros with Mythili, Debating Labour Market Reforms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6mp5_Ug8E 29 Ibid. 30 Report of the Second National Commission on Labour (2002), Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/1237548159/NLCII-report.pdf 31 D Raja, National Secretary, Congress Party of India, in TV Debate called Macros with Mythili, Debating Labour Market Reforms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6mp5_Ug8E 32 Former Member Secretary, Planning Commission for the Government of India in TV Debate called Macros with Mythili, Debating Labour Market Reforms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6mp5_Ug8E 33 Kaushik Basu, ―Why India‘s labour laws are a problem,‖ BBC Article Accessed 16th April, 2016: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4984256.stm 34 Ibid. 35 TV Debate called Macros with Mythili, Debating Labour Market Reforms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6mp5_Ug8E 36 Ibid.
182 ARTICLES [Vol.1 Iss.2
Perhaps all contract labour isn‘t bad, as it does give employers the flexibility
to change their workforce as per the demands of the industry, as to how volatile it gets
as per a particular time of the year e.g. seasonal industries such as textiles hiring
workers only for two months of the year. However, in the name of giving more
―flexibility‖ to employers, there is a decreasing focus on the needs of the worker. In
fact, the question to be asked, as D Raja does is, whether trade unions were consulted
by the Rajasthan and Haryana state legislatures before they proposed these laws?37
Khatter believes that distinctions should be avoided and we need to accept that
workers will be protected no matter what happens with a living wage.38 Once we get
these, then we can amend the laws, he believes.39 However, the current Act does not
allow for free contracting because it prescribes in advance how and when workers
may or may not be retrenched – thus we do not see such contracts.40 It also acts as
disincentive for future hiring, because firms do not hire extra workers, for fear that
they will not be able to offload them easily.41Till the time any changes are not made,
perhaps the ID Act would be as Basu puts it, ―a good example of a well-meaning
policy that is founded on antiquated economics and a handsome misunderstanding of
the way markets function.‖42
THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2010 AND POSSIBLE
CHANGES
The Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2010 was passed on the 15th of
September, 2010 making certain changes to the qualifications required for being part
37 D Raja, National Secretary, Congress Party of India, in TV Debate called Macros with Mythili, Debating Labour Market Reforms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6mp5_Ug8E 38 Former Managing Director of Maruti Udyog Limited, in TV Debate called Macros with Mythili, Debating Labour Market Reforms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV6mp5_Ug8E 39 Ibid. 40 Kaushik Basu, ―Why India needs labour law reform,‖ BBC Article Accessed 16th April, 2016: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4103554.stm 41 Ibid. 42 Ibid.
July 2016] SAJLPR 183
of the tribunal, as well as mandating a grievance redressal machinery for every
industrial establishment employing more than twenty or more workmen.43 Many of
the changes that were made stem from the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Bill,
2009. While the changes are laudable, there is room for some further changes to be
made in the future.
The first would be with respect to the grievance redressal machinery. The Act
prescribes that only establishments with over 20 workers would need to constitute this
committee. But, this threshold should be abandoned, as in smaller establishments,
employers would have an incentive to keep only 19 workers and not have to constitute
the committee. In fact, the smaller the setup is, the more likelihood there are of
grievances which need neutral mediation, as the proximity between the employer and
employee is quite high – where there would be room for everyday friction. In
addition, the Bill had suggested adequate representation for women,44 but the Act puts
an element of discretion with the use of the word ―may‖ for increasing the number of
women-members. It says that if the number of members are more than two, the
number of women members ―may‖ be increased proportionately. This element of
discretion can be very harmful, since if there are 6 members, 4 could be men and only
2 could be women, and if one of the women is loyal to the organization, then a sexual
harassment or other wrongful termination issue could end up being judged in a very
biased way. This ―may‖ should be re-drafted to become a ―shall‖ where the committee
shall have equal members between men and women. If the Amendment says one
woman must be there if there are two members (keeping a 1:1 ratio),45 then that same
ratio should be kept throughout without an element of discretion.
43 Section 9C of Chapter IIB of the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act, 2010. 44 Avinash Celestine, ―The Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Bill, 2009,‖ PRS Legislative Research, Accessed 16th April, 2016: http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/1237548159/Legislative%20Brief-ID%20Amendment%202009-final.pdf 45 9C (4) of the Amendment: The total number of members of the Grievance Redressal Committee shall not exceed more than six: Provided that there shall be, as far as practicable, one woman member if the Grievance Redressal Committee has two members and in case the number of members are more than two, the number of women members may be increased proportionately.
184 ARTICLES [Vol.1 Iss.2
Some critics of the changes, such as the President of the Indian National Trade
Union Congress (INTUC),46 believe that the country‘s industrial tribunals already
follow civil court procedure rules, and the delays are extraordinary. Instead of giving
the labour courts the same powers as civil courts, it would be better that the country
could establish fast-track criminal courts so that awards and fines can be enforced
immediately.47 Deepak Gupta, executive director of tax and regulatory services at
PriceWaterhouseCoopers, also believes that pushing everything to the labour courts
can be counter-productive.48 It is good to have alternative forums for disputes, but the
high pendency and vacancy levels in labour courts can defeat the government‘s plans
in expediting settlements.49 Many disputes are solved through the conciliation
process, and pushing everything to courts undermines that mechanism.
Also, if we look at the changes to make advocates eligible to man tribunals –
these impose a work experience requirement, of having spent seven years in the
labour department. This experience requirement unnecessarily raises the bar for
advocates and people who may be in and out of the workforce. Thus, it has a
disproportionate impact on female advocates who may be in and out of the workforce,
as well as people within academia. Who is to say, that a labour law professor cannot
be a useful member of the Tribunal, especially somebody who may have spent a PhD
studying Industrial Organizations or Labour Relations? Thus, these requirements of
mandatory time at the labour department should be removed, and made more
diversified, where one can be selected on the basis of a variety of work-experiences.
The Law Commission of India recommends that with adequate years of practice at the
Bar, in the ―relevant legal field,‖50 advocates can be eligible for appointment as
46 G Sanjeeva Reddy, President of the INTUC‘ in an article by Vikas Dhoot, ―New labour law to solve workplace disputes faster,‖ The Economic Times, Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-05-21/news/27604035_1_labour-law-labour-courts-labour-disputes 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid. 50 Law Commission of India, Report Number 225, ―Amendment of Sections 7, 7A and 7B of Industrial
July 2016] SAJLPR 185
presiding officers of Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals. Therefore, we have to
widen the ambit of what is considered a ―relevant legal field‖ and make more people
eligible to man the tribunals.
THE RIGHT TO STRIKE
The Right to strike has been declared to be not a fundamental right.51 It would
be helpful if the ID Act declared this a fundamental right, as in a democratic society,
this is a right earned by virtue of Article 19. This would also signal the beginning of
the era of giving respect to the worker for who they are and signal the move away
from trying to see strikes as something evil, and rather a part of a peaceful mode of
protest. The working class has ―earned the right to strike as an industrial action after a
long struggle,‖ such that the legislation recognizes it as an implied right.52 Too often,
the mentality has been to neglect the worker‘s perspective and see strikes as
something to be contained, and controlled because of the loss of output they result in.
But, instead a strike is a measure of last resort for employees, who often resort to
them to challenge arbitrary changes in management policies, or wage structures that
affect their daily lives. Often, essential services (education, health, transport) are
affected, resulting in chaos and this increases the opposition for such strikes.53
But, it is important to remember that many a times all the worker has is his or
her labour, and not money or resources that they can decide to withdraw, thus he or
she chooses to withdraw the only thing they have. Whether a strike is declared, as
illegal or legal, workers are liable to lose wages for the period of the strike,54 thus it is
not in their interest to go on a strike. Also, strikes are permitted within Indian law, and
employers must understand the difference between a strike and a bandh, as it is the
bandh that is not permitted because of the ability to influence others. A strike,
Disputes Act, 1947 making Advocates Eligible to man Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals (2009). 51 Radhey Shyam Sharma v. Post Master General, Central Circle (1964) 7 SCR 403. 52 Bank of India v. T.S. Kelavala (1990) 4 SCC 744. 53 T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu and Others, (2003) 6 SCC 54 Bank of India v. T.S. Kelavala (1990) 4 SCC 744.
186 ARTICLES [Vol.1 Iss.2
however can very easily slide into what is called as a bandh, and the provisions of the
ID Act should specify when and on the basis of what factors a strike could be
regarded as a bandh.55 Withdrawing the right to strike makes the assumption that
industrial action is always done in an unruly manner, which simply is not true all the
time.
A nation-wide strike was done in 2012 where groups of employees across
different banks, protested the fact that they wanted a greater share of the government‘s
capital in public sector banks, as the government was diluting its shares in favour of
the private sector and making changes in human resource policies56 that could lead to
a loss of jobs.57 Many taxi and auto-drivers wanted the costs of fuel to be reduced or
their minimum fares to be increased, and thus were engaged in a peaceful resistance
to ensure their needs were heard.58
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Simply making changes to the ID Act will not change the problem of
industrial tensions – but they could be a useful start in trying to respect the rights of
the worker, making more lawyers and professors eligible for tribunals, and not
allowing flexibility and contract labour to be an excuse for employers to retrench at
will. As per the CAG Report,59 currently conciliation proceedings are taking up to two
years whereas they are supposed to be completed within 2 weeks. The same report
also highlights how there is a need for greater monitoring provisions, as 40% of the
55 Argument put forward by Dr. Manusinghvi in the debate on NDTV, NDTV Video, ―Trade Unions Strike: Is their cause justified?‖ Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/left-right-centre/trade-unions-strike-is-their-cause-justified/225036 56 Anil Khandelwal, ―Human Resources: The Path for Reforms in PSB‘s,‖ http://www.livemint.com/Companies/j6LliwnSgsAElexscpDWLN/Human-Resources--The-path-for-reforms-in-PSBs.html 57 NDTV Video, ―Trade Unions Strike: Is their cause justified?‖ Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/left-right-centre/trade-unions-strike-is-their-cause-justified/225036 58 Ibid. 59 CAG Report, ―Performance Audit Report on Implementation of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, Report No. 15 of 2007.
July 2016] SAJLPR 187
awards are being published more than 6 months after they are received.60 Also, a
greater emphasis should be put on social security benefits for workers, with minimum
employment limits in the organized sector.61 As the report opined, any changes in the
law should be accompanied by a social security package in order to provide minimum
benefits to everyone.62
There is a huge preponderance of informal labour in India (93% upwards in the
informal sector) and our industrial sector is mainly low technology, whereas it should
have had a greater proportion of people who are vocationally trained.63 Dr. Dipankar
Gupta, Director of the C-PACT group at the Shiv Nadar University, has criticized the
threshold-based approach of the ID Act, as he points out that size-based thresholds are
irrelevant for a country like India. Only 4.5 million workers out of 487 million
workers work in factories with more than 100 workers.64 Thus, keeping a Brahmanic
caste system wherein protection is greater as you go higher up the size hierarchy
makes little sense keeping in mind the way the Indian industry is structured. Another
more egregious threshold is that people who are working for less than a year (defined
as 240 days) are entitled to rights, but the rest are not given the same protection.65 The
entrepreneurs don‘t want to scale up their organizations because they would then have
to be bound by regulations, therefore, they try to keep their units small – and keep
flipping workers around before 240 days end.66 These thresholds do the most damage
to the understanding of labour -- and there is a need to get rid of them.67 Moving
forward, it would be important for policymakers to ensure that the ID Act does not
become a symbol for blanket approval to some of the long-standing demands of the 60 Ibid. 61 Report of the Second National Commission on Labour (2002), Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/1237548159/NLCII-report.pdf 62 Ibid. 63 C-PACT Report on Labor Policy: Rethinking the Industrial Disputes Act: Labor Relations for a new India: states that only 5% of India‘s workforce is vocationally trained, Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.thepoliticalindian.com/labor-relations-india/ 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid. 66 Ibid. 67 Ibid.
188 ARTICLES [Vol.1 Iss.2
industry such as an open hire-and-fire policy, and give employers excess freedom in
making changes without adequate notice.68 A section should be introduced to make
worker‘s councils mandatory, with a secret ballot coupled with conciliation board
with an outside President such that interests of the workers are adequately represented
to the management.69 There will be conflicts, as they are unavoidable given that both
employers and employees have different stakes in question – however the Act needs
to emphasize that there is a common stake in the success of the enterprise.70 This
would be the best way to ensure that workers are not, in a Marxist sense, alienated
from the products of their labour.
68 V Shankar & S Kumaraswamy, ―Report of the Second National Commission on Labour: An Assault on Working Class, as mentioned in Kumarjit Bannerjee & Bulbul Khaitan, ―Hire and Fire in 2nd National Commission on Labor,‖ NUJS Law Review 1 NUJS L. Rev (2008). 69 C-PACT Report on Labor Policy: Rethinking the Industrial Disputes Act: Labor Relations for a new India, Accessed 15th April, 2016: http://www.thepoliticalindian.com/labor-relations-india/ 70 Ibid.