Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 2076 1986 SLD 2076 1986 PLC 345
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Application No. l of 1985, decided on 18th February, 1985.
ABDUL, JABBAR BACHANI, PRESIDING OFFICER

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

EMPLOYEES UNION OF TRUST CERAMIC INDUSTRIES

VS

TRUST CERAMIC INDUSTRIES LABOUR UNION and another

Law:

Section:

Industrial Relatbns Ordinance (XXII at 1968)- ---Ss.22 and 34--Dispute between unions regarding determination of Collective Bargaining Agent--Within jurisdiction of Registrar--Application of Trade Union under S.34 to Labour Court hat Registrar be restrained from declaring other union eligible to take part in referendum--Not maintainable. ORDER This is an application, under section 34 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance filed by the employees union of Trust Ceramic Industries, against the Trust Ceramic Industries Labour Union and the Registrar of Trade Union, for seeking' declaration, that the Labour Union respondent No.l is not legally constituted body as laid down in section 7 (1) (d) of the I.R.O., 1969 and the Labour Union is not, competent to invoke proceedings under section E2, I.R.O. and to direct respondent No.2 from the proceeding in the matter of holding referendum pending decision of this Court. 2. Applicant claims that applicant is a registered trade union and is also Collective Bargaining Agent. 3. Applicant claims that there is also another trade union by the name and title of Trust Ceramic Industries Labour Union who has applied on 11-7-1984 for holding referendum and declaration of the Collective Bargaining Agent. 4. Applicant claims that the Registrar of Trade Union called both parties for the joint meeting to determine the Collective Bargaining Agent and the Management of Messrs Trust. Ceramic Industries on the direction of the respondent No.2 filed list of employees on 27-10-1984 which included 84 persons who had already resigned and collected their dues. The persons who had been retrenched is from 13-10-1984. 5. Applicant claims that their union when found list of employees, submitted by the Management raised the legal objections that the resigned workers and the retrenched workers are not the workmen as laid down under section 22 of I.R.O. 6. Applicant claims that the Labour Union respondent No.l is not competent to move application under section 22, I.R.O. for the determination of C.B.A. because its membership is less than 1/3rd of the total employees and that more than 25% of the office-bearers are outsiders. Consequently the referendum…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492