Q.17. Describe the conciliation, arbitration and adjudication process in industrial relations. (AKTU. 2009 - 10)
Ans. Conciliation: -
The Act provides for a conciliation machinery that uses mediation to bring about a settlement between the two parties by adopting constitutional means. Since neither the management nor the employee use coercive or inhibitory tactics to reach a settlement, they are not forced into an unacceptable settlement.
Conciliation proceedings are initiated by either party when collective bargaining fails to reach a settlement.
A conciliation officer appointed by the government intervenes, investigates and settles the industrial dispute between the employer and employee. This decision is then registered in the labor department and serves as a precedent for other parties.
The conciliation machinery can take action even without either of the parties approaching it for conciliation.
Under Section 62 of the Act, the party initiating conciliation sends a written invitation to the other party outlining the basic points of the dispute and requesting conciliation. The conciliator helps the parties to reach an amicable settlement in an independent and impartial manner.
If conciliation fails to bring about a settlement between the two parties then they can seek arbitration or refer the dispute to adjudication before a labor court or a tribunal.
Voluntary Arbitration: -
In this method of conflict resolution, disputes are settled by a tribunal chosen by the parties themselves not by courts constituted by the state. The Panchayat system is based on this concept. The process of arbitration is cheaper, faster and informal and more convenient, as compared to the conventional judicial procedure as the parties can choose the time, place and procedure for carrying out the procedure of arbitration. The parties can also choose a technically qualified arbitrator of their choice incase the dispute involves technical details.
A drawback of voluntary arbitration is that even through the procedure of arbitration is equivalent to a civil suit and the dispute is settled by an independent and impartial authority, appointed by mutual consent of both parties, yet the clauses cannot be imposed on the parties.
Adjudication: -
According to the Industrial Disputes Act, the machinery provided for the adjudication method of conflict resolution consists of labor courts, industrial tribunals and national tribunals.
A dispute not settled by either negotiation, conciliation or voluntary arbitration is referred for adjudication.
Depending on the matter of the dispute, the government uses its discretion to refer it to a labor court or industrial or national Tribunal. Once an industrial dispute is referred for adjudication, the government can prohibit the continuance of any strike or lock-out which may be existing.
The government also passes an order to Industrial or National Tribunal Labor Court specifying the time limit for submitting a decision on the dispute. Normally a three month time limit is specified which is extendable only if either of the concerned parties applied for an extension or the court has reason to do so.
Decisions taken through adjudication are binding or not only the parties concerned but also their heirs, successors and employees.
The adjudication authority is empowered to enforce the attendance of any person for the purpose of their examination for thorough investigation.
The court or tribunal can set aside the management’s order of discharge or dismissal of a worker and order direct re-instatement if it thinks fit.
Adjudication is a very reliable method of conflict resolution. However, it is very time consuming and sometimes disputes are pending with courts or tribunals for years if they are appealed in high or supreme courts.
With delayed settlement of disputes, the problems sometimes become even worse due to additional conflicts and strikes that may occur during the adjudication proceedings. Red-tapism, bureaucratic delays and complicated procedures inherent In government organizations are the reasons for such delays. That is why some trade union leaders prefer to settle disputes by collective bargaining or negotiation rather than adjudication.
