| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 544 1994 SLD 544 1994 PLC 119 |
Labour Appellate Tribunal, Sindh
Appeal No. KAR-476 of 1991, decision dated: 9-09-1993.
AGHA ALI HYDER, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SA. Majeed, Representative for Appellants. A. Hafiz for
Respondents.
Appeal No. KAR-476 of 1991, decision dated: 9-09-1993.
AGHA ALI HYDER, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SA. Majeed, Representative for Appellants. A. Hafiz for
Respondents.
MITSUI EMPLOYEES UNION, KARACHI
VS
M/s. MITSUI & COMPANY LTD., KARACHI through GENERAL Manager and another
Law:
Section:
Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)S. 32(1A)West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S. 1(4)Raising industrial disputeCharter of demands presented by petitioner Union which was Collective Bargaining Agent (C.B.A.) of establishment was resisted by employer on grounds that provisions of Ordinance, 1968 were not applicable to the case as number of workers in establishment was below twenty; that establishment was only a Liaison Office of a foreign company and was not involved in any profit making activities in Pakistan and that establishment was paying much better emoluments and was providing more benefits to their workers than any other commercial establishment of a similar sizeUnion failed to prove that number of workers working in the establishment was twenty or moreNothing was on record to show that establishment had made any profits or that workers in similar concerns were enjoying benefits and facilities as sought by petitionersPetition of petitioner union was rightly dismissed by Court, in circumstances. Pak Industrial and Mining Syndicate Limited v. Pak Industrial and Mining Syndicate Employees' Union 1982 PLC 250; Hyesons Electric Company Workers Union v. Hyesons Electric Company Limited 1984 PLC 623 and Zelin Limited Karachi v. Zelin Limited Employees Union 1975 PLC 431 ref. DECISION This appeal calls in question the order of the learned Labour Court No. IV at Karachi, dismissing the petitioner's application under section 32(1A) of the I.R.O., 1969. It has arisen in the following circumstances. 2. The petitioners, who are the Collective Bargaining Agents of the respondent establishment, presented a `Charter of Demands' to the respondents on 171987. There could not be an agreement on the demands which had been made, and ultimately the negotiations came to standstill with the result the notice of the strike came to be served on 2581987. 3. There were a number of meetings before the Conciliator again without any results and a Failure Certificate was issued on 2111987. It was hereafter that the petition referred to above came to be filed before the Labour Court. 4. In the Reply Statement it was…
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