Rahul (appellant) was working as a Clerk in a Nationalised Bank posted at MG Road Branch, Panipat. He joined the branch on 1st November, 2016 and was assigned the duties of cashier. As per appellant he attended the duty

CS Professional · Labour Laws and Practice · PYQS · June 2024
Rahul (appellant) was working as a Clerk in a Nationalised Bank posted at MG Road Branch, Panipat. He joined the branch on 1st November, 2016 and was assigned the duties of cashier. As per appellant he attended the duty on 10th and 11th November, 2018 and his attendance was marked on the muster roll for both days. But according to the Bank authorities the appellant absented from duties on both days without permission. The case of the Bank further was that the appellant on 10th November, 2018 entered the Bank with about 15 persons in the morning and went to the office of the Chief Manager and thereafter left the office. Again, on 11th November, 2018 he worked up to 2.30 pm and absented himself from duty thereafter. The bank deducted two days wages of appellant treating him absent from duty. As a reason of this, Appellant went on strike, later he provoked other bank employees as well and they all went on strike for first four hours on 13th November, 2018 without complying the notice period. Hence, the bank issued an administrative circular as per their Standing Orders, the employees cannot go on strike for first four hours, warning the employees that they would be committing a breach of their contract of service if they participate in the strike. By ignoring the order, they have participated in the strike from the beginning of the working hours on 13th November, 2018. The employees however, resumed work on that day after the strike hours and the bank did not prevent them from doing so. The bank had already made it clear in advance, that if they will go on strike for first four hours, they would not be entitled to the wages for the whole day and hence they need not report for work thereafter. On 16th November, 2018, the Bank issued a circular directing the managers to deduct the full day's wages of those employees who had participated in the strike. The employees requested to the Chief Manager not to make deduction from wages, but the bank deducted their wages, hence the employees referred the matter to the Labour Court. On the basis of above facts, answer the following questions: Are bank employees bound to follow the Industrial Standing Orders of the Bank or the strike notice be complied?

Answer & Explanation:

'Standing Orders' defines the conditions of recruitment, discharge, disciplinary action, holidays, leave, etc., go a long way towards minimising friction between the management and workers in industrial undertakings. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act requires employers in industrial establishments to clearly define the conditions of employment by issuing standing orders duly certified. Banking employees are bound to follow the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) over the Strike notice, as strike notice was also not legally served and they have not complied with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as mentioned under Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. As the object of the standing orders is- First to enforce uniformity in the conditions of services under the different employers in different industrial establishments. The employer once having made the conditions of employment known to his employed workmen cannot change them to their detriment or to the prejudice of their right stand interests. For maintaining industrial peace and continued productivity, the significance of the express written conditions of employment cannot be minimised or exaggerated.

Topics: Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic