Bi-partite Forums: Works Committee and Grievance Redressal Committee

Some words this chapter uses

Bi-partite means having two sides, here the employer and the workers, with nobody from outside. Contrast tri-partite, which adds the Government, and which is what the Indian Labour Conference and the ILO are.

Amity means friendly relations. It is the word section 3(3) uses.

Individual grievance is a complaint personal to one worker, as distinct from a demand made on behalf of the workforce.

Cause of action is the set of facts that gives a person the right to complain. The one-year limit in section 4(5) runs from the date it arises.

Rotational basis means the office passes in turn. Under section 4(3) the chairperson comes alternately from the employer's side and the workers' side, changing every year.

Section 3: the Works Committee

3(1): who must have one

In the case of any industrial establishment in which one hundred or more workers are employed, or have been employed on any day in the preceding twelve months, the appropriate Government may by general or special order require the employer to constitute a Works Committee, in the prescribed manner, consisting of representatives of the employer and of the workers engaged in the establishment.

A proviso requires that the number of representatives of the workers shall not be less than the number of representatives of the employer.

Three points, and each is a mark.

The threshold is one hundred, and it is measured the same generous way as the standing orders threshold: the Chapter bites if the number was reached on any day in the preceding twelve months. Note the contrast with section 28, where the standing orders threshold is three hundred. Two different thresholds in one Code, and an examiner will ask which is which.

The obligation is not automatic. The appropriate Government may require it, by a general or a special order. Absent such an order there is no Works Committee, which distinguishes section 3 sharply from section 4, where the duty falls on the employer directly.

The workers can never be outnumbered. The proviso fixes a floor, not a ceiling: the workers' representatives must be not fewer than the employer's.

3(2): who the workers' representatives are

They shall be chosen, in the prescribed manner, from among the workers engaged in the establishment and in consultation with their Trade Union, if any, registered under section 9.

Two things follow. The representatives are insiders: outsiders cannot sit on a Works Committee for the workers. And the registered union, though not itself a member of the committee, has a statutory voice in choosing them, which links this section to Chapter III.

3(3): what it does

It shall be the duty of the Works Committee to promote measures for securing and preserving amity and good relations between the employer and workers and, to that end, to comment upon matters of common interest.

Read those words carefully, because they are the limit of the body. Its function is to promote and to comment. It does not adjudicate, it does not decide grievances, and it does not bargain. A student who describes the Works Committee as a dispute-deciding body has misread section 3(3).

Why then does it matter? Because a standing forum in which both sides meet regularly is where problems surface early. It is the industrial equivalent of a residents' committee: it settles nothing by force and prevents a great deal.

Section 4: the Grievance Redressal Committee

This is the operative in-house body, and it is drafted with far more precision.

4(1): who must have one, and for what

Every industrial establishment employing twenty or more workers shall have one or more Grievance Redressal Committees for the resolution of disputes arising out of individual grievances.

Contrast section 3 at three points. The threshold is twenty, not a hundred. The duty is on the employer directly, with no Government order needed: the words are "shall have". And there may be more than one committee in an establishment.

4(2) to (4): how it is composed

4(2): equal numbers representing the employer and the workers, chosen in the prescribed manner.

4(3): the chairperson shall be selected from among the persons representing the employer and the workers alternatively on a rotational basis every year.

4(4): the total number of members shall not exceed ten. A proviso requires adequate representation of women workers, and that representation shall not be less than the proportion of women workers to the total workers employed in the establishment.

Three features are worth stating in an answer.

Equality, not a majority. Unlike the Works Committee, where the workers may outnumber the employer, the Grievance Redressal Committee is exactly balanced. That is why section 4(7) has to solve the deadlock the balance creates.

The chair rotates annually between the two sides, so neither side holds it permanently.

The women's proviso is proportional and it is a floor. If a third of the workforce is women, at least a third of the committee must be. This is one of the few places in the Code where representation is tied to the composition of the workforce.

4(5) and (6): applying, and the time limits

4(5): an application may be filed by any aggrieved worker, in the prescribed manner, within one year from the date on which the cause of action of such dispute arises.

4(6): the Committee may complete its proceedings within thirty days of receipt of the application.

Notice the word "may" in sub-section (6), and notice that sub-section (8) supplies the consequence of not doing so: the worker may take the matter to conciliation. So thirty days is not a deadline enforced by invalidity; it is the point at which the worker acquires a right to go elsewhere.

4(7): how it decides, and the deadlock rule

The decision shall be made on the basis of the majority view of the Committee, provided more than half of the members representing the workers have agreed to such decision; otherwise it shall be deemed that no decision could be arrived at by the Committee.

This is the cleverest provision in the section and it is regularly asked. The committee is evenly balanced, so a bare majority is impossible without a crossing of sides. The sub-section therefore adds a double requirement: a majority of the whole committee and the agreement of more than half of the workers' representatives.

Why the double lock? Because without it the employer's side plus one worker representative could carry a decision against the other worker representatives, and the committee would become a way of legitimising the employer's position. The sub-section makes the workers' side, as a body, a necessary part of any decision. And where that cannot be achieved, the Code does not pretend: it deems that no decision could be arrived at, which is honest and which triggers section 4(8).

4(8): where an unresolved grievance goes

A worker aggrieved by the decision, or whose grievance is not resolved within the thirty days, may within sixty days from the date of the decision or from the expiry of that period, file an application for the conciliation of the grievance to the conciliation officer, through the Trade Union of which he is a member, in the prescribed manner.

Two limitations are built into that route and both are examinable. The application goes through the Trade Union of which he is a member, so a worker who belongs to no union has a practical difficulty at exactly this step. And the period is sixty days, running either from the decision or from the expiry of the thirty days.

4(9): the deeming provision

Where any employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches, or otherwise terminates the services of an individual worker, any dispute or difference between that worker and his employer connected with, or arising out of, such discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other worker nor any Trade Union is a party to the dispute.

This says in Chapter II what the second limb of section 2(q) says in the definitions, and the repetition is deliberate: it puts the rule where a worker reading about grievances will find it.

Its effect is to remove the espousal requirement for the four listed events, so that a single dismissed worker's dispute is an industrial dispute in its own right. Under the repealed Industrial Disputes Act 1947 that result needed a separate section, inserted years after the Act was passed, because the courts had held that an individual's dispute was not an industrial dispute unless a body of workmen took it up. See ['Industrial Dispute', and the Individual Dispute].

The two committees compared

A worked example

The facts. A packaging plant in Wada employs 1,200 workers, of whom 300 are women. It has a registered union recognised as the sole negotiating union.

Must it have a Works Committee? Only if the appropriate Government requires one by general or special order under section 3(1). The threshold of one hundred is comfortably crossed, but the obligation depends on that order.

Must it have a Grievance Redressal Committee? Yes. Section 4(1) says every industrial establishment employing twenty or more workers shall have one or more, and no Government order is needed.

How is it composed? Equal numbers on each side, section 4(2); not more than ten members in total, section 4(4); and, women being 300 of 1,200, that is one quarter of the workforce, so at least a quarter of the committee must be women, section 4(4) proviso. On a committee of ten that is at least two and a half, so at least three. The chairperson comes from the employer's side one year and the workers' side the next, section 4(3).

Meera's leave application was refused on 3 March, which she says breached the standing orders. She may apply to the Committee under section 4(5) at any time within one year of that date. The Committee may complete its proceedings within thirty days, section 4(6).

The Committee has ten members, five from each side. Six vote to reject Meera's grievance: all five of the employer's representatives and one worker representative. Is that a decision? No. Section 4(7) requires both a majority of the Committee and the agreement of more than half of the members representing the workers. Only one of the five workers' representatives agreed, which is not more than half. It is therefore deemed that no decision could be arrived at.

What can Meera do? She is a worker whose grievance was not resolved. Under section 4(8) she may, within sixty days from the expiry of the thirty-day period, file an application for conciliation to the conciliation officer, through the Trade Union of which she is a member.

Change it: Meera is not a member of any union. She faces the difficulty section 4(8) creates, because the route it gives runs through a union she does not belong to. That is a real limitation of the section and is worth saying so in an answer.

Change it again: instead of a leave refusal, Meera is dismissed. Now section 4(9) applies of its own force: her dispute with the employer connected with the dismissal is deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other worker and no Trade Union is a party. She is not confined to the grievance machinery at all.

What this does NOT mean

It does not mean the Works Committee decides disputes. Its duty under section 3(3) is to promote amity and good relations and to comment upon matters of common interest.

It does not mean the two committees have the same threshold. One hundred for the Works Committee, twenty for the Grievance Redressal Committee, and three hundred for standing orders under section 28. Three different numbers.

It does not mean an employer must constitute a Works Committee on his own initiative. Section 3(1) operates through a general or special order of the appropriate Government.

It does not mean a bare majority carries a grievance decision. Section 4(7) requires the majority of the Committee and the agreement of more than half of the workers' representatives, failing which no decision is deemed to have been arrived at.

It does not mean thirty days is a jurisdictional deadline. Section 4(6) says the Committee may complete its proceedings within thirty days; the consequence of not doing so is the worker's right under section 4(8) to go to conciliation.

It does not mean these bodies replace the Tribunal. They are the first rung. Conciliation, arbitration and adjudication follow, and are the subject of the next chapters.

Limits, criticism and amendments

The Works Committee has been criticised since long before the Code, and the criticism survives it: a body that may only promote and comment has no power to make anything happen, and its usefulness depends entirely on whether the employer takes it seriously. Making its very existence depend on a Government order weakens it further.

Section 4(8) requires the worker to go through his Trade Union, which is a strange requirement in a provision designed for individual grievances. A worker who is not a union member, which describes a great many workers in a plant of twenty, is left without the route the section provides.

The thirty-day period in section 4(6) is permissive, so a committee that simply does not meet delays a worker by thirty days before he can move on.

And the twenty-worker threshold, though low, is still a threshold. Below it the Code provides no in-house grievance machinery at all.

Against that, section 4 is a genuine advance. The repealed Act had no equivalent of a statutory grievance committee with a composition, a chairperson, a time limit and a decision rule; the women's proportional representation proviso has no ancestor at all; and the double lock in section 4(7) is a careful piece of drafting that keeps an evenly balanced body from being captured by one side.

Quick revision

• Section 3, Works Committee: 100 workers, employed or employed on any day in the preceding twelve months; constituted when the appropriate Government so requires by general or special order; workers' representatives not fewer than the employer's; chosen from among the workers in consultation with their registered Trade Union; duty to promote amity and good relations and to comment on matters of common interest. It decides nothing.
• Section 4, Grievance Redressal Committee: 20 workers; shall have one or more; equal representation; chair rotates annually between the sides; not more than ten members; women's representation not less than their proportion in the workforce.
• 4(5) application by any aggrieved worker within one year of the cause of action. 4(6) proceedings may be completed within thirty days.
• 4(7): decision by majority of the Committee AND agreement of more than half of the workers' representatives; otherwise deemed that no decision could be arrived at.
• 4(8): aggrieved, or unresolved in thirty days, then within sixty days apply for conciliation, through the Trade Union of which he is a member.
• 4(9): a dispute about an individual worker's discharge, dismissal, retrenchment or termination is deemed an industrial dispute, notwithstanding that no other worker and no Trade Union is a party.

Test yourself

1. Compare the Works Committee with the Grievance Redressal Committee. The Works Committee, section 3, is constituted where one hundred or more workers are employed, or were employed on any day in the preceding twelve months, and only when the appropriate Government so requires by general or special order; it consists of representatives of the employer and the workers, the workers' representatives being not fewer than the employer's and chosen from among the workers in consultation with their registered union; and its duty is to promote measures for securing and preserving amity and good relations and to comment upon matters of common interest. It decides nothing. The Grievance Redressal Committee, section 4, must be constituted by the employer himself in every establishment employing twenty or more workers, and there may be more than one; it has equal numbers from each side, not more than ten members in all, women represented at not less than their proportion in the workforce, and a chairperson rotating annually between the sides; and it decides individual grievances on application, within time limits, by the voting rule in section 4(7).

2. State the decision rule in section 4(7) and explain why it is drawn that way. The decision shall be made on the basis of the majority view of the Committee, provided more than half of the members representing the workers have agreed to it; otherwise it shall be deemed that no decision could be arrived at. The double requirement exists because the Committee is evenly balanced between the two sides. Without it, the employer's representatives together with a single worker representative could carry a decision against the rest of the workers' side, and the Committee would become a means of legitimising the employer's position. Requiring the workers' side, as a body, to agree makes that impossible, and where agreement cannot be reached the Code declares the deadlock rather than concealing it, which triggers the worker's right to go to conciliation under section 4(8).

3. A worker's grievance is not decided within thirty days. What are his options? Under section 4(8) he may, within sixty days from the expiry of the period specified in section 4(6), file an application for the conciliation of the grievance to the conciliation officer, through the Trade Union of which he is a member, in the prescribed manner. The same right is available to a worker who is aggrieved by a decision that was made, running from the date of the decision.

4. What is the effect of section 4(9)? Where an employer discharges, dismisses, retrenches or otherwise terminates the services of an individual worker, any dispute or difference between that worker and his employer connected with, or arising out of, that event is deemed to be an industrial dispute notwithstanding that no other worker and no Trade Union is a party to it. It removes the need for espousal in those four cases, and it repeats in Chapter II what the second limb of section 2(q) provides in the definitions.

5. What must the composition of a Grievance Redressal Committee be in an establishment where 400 of 1,000 workers are women? Equal numbers representing the employer and the workers, section 4(2); a chairperson selected alternately from the two sides on a rotational basis every year, section 4(3); not more than ten members in total, section 4(4); and, by the proviso to section 4(4), adequate representation of women workers, which shall not be less than the proportion of women workers to the total workers, that is not less than two-fifths. On a committee of ten, at least four members must be women.

6. "The Works Committee is the first forum for deciding an industrial dispute." Comment. The statement is wrong on its central point. Section 3(3) confines the Works Committee's duty to promoting measures for securing and preserving amity and good relations between the employer and workers and, to that end, commenting upon matters of common interest. It has no power to decide anything. The in-house body that decides is the Grievance Redressal Committee under section 4, and even that is confined to disputes arising out of individual grievances. It is also inaccurate to call the Works Committee the first forum in every case, since its constitution depends on the appropriate Government requiring it by general or special order, whereas the Grievance Redressal Committee must be constituted by the employer in every establishment employing twenty or more workers.