Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 316, June 1999

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 66. During its last examination of the case in November 1998 the Committee asked the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the proceedings concerning the dismissal of Mr. Malwankar, President of the Fort Aguada Beach Resort Employees' Union (FABREU) and urged the Government to take the necessary steps to have him reinstated in his post if he so desired. The Committee also requested the Government to take the appropriate steps to ensure that the management inquiries on alleged acts of misconduct of several FABREU members were dropped and to obtain the employers' recognition of FABREU for collective bargaining purposes.
2. 67. In a communication dated 22 February 1999 the Government states that the provincial Government of Goa, which is the appropriate government in this case, was informed that the adjudication proceedings in respect of Charter of Demands are still in progress. As regards the adjudication proceedings in respect of six workmen, the Industrial Tribunal had fixed the date for framing the issues on 1 December 1998. As regards the dispute on termination of services of Shri Laxman Malwankar, it was fixed by the Industrial Tribunal for evidence on preliminary issues on 14 December 1998. The matters are now adjourned to 13 January 1999 and 3 February 1999 respectively. As regards the pendency of the proceedings against other workers, inquiries are still in progress. The Government reiterates that the two basic laws governing industrial relations in India, i.e. the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, and Trade Unions Act, 1928, are enforceable throughout the territory of India including the Province of Goa but these two laws
   • do not invest the Government with any powers to compel any employer to give recognition to any trade union. However, the Code of Discipline, which is voluntary and not mandatory in nature, governs the recognition of unions. In this context, the Government supplies extracts from "Recognition of Unions Under the Code of Discipline". The Government adds that further progress will be communicated to the Committee in due course.
3. 68. The Committee takes note of this information. It recalls however that this case related to various acts of harassment and anti-union discrimination carried out against the President of FABREU, Mr. Malwankar, from 1992 to 1994 which culminated in the dismissal of this trade union leader in January 1995 and the suspension or transferral of FABREU members in April 1995 following a strike action in the hotel industry which was declared a public utility service and thus referred to the Industrial Tribunal contrary to the principles of freedom of association since the hotel industry is in no way an essential service in which strikes can be prohibited. The Committee also recalls that an agreement was signed in October 1995 with a newly formed organization called Fort Aguada Beach Resort Workers' Association thus de-recognizing FABREU, the management recognizing the association as the sole bargaining agent in the company. The Committee had concluded from the evidence at its disposal that no doubts existed that FABREU was the most representative at the Fort Aguada Beach Resort and had urged the Government to take appropriate conciliatory measures to obtain the employers' recognition of FABREU for collective bargaining purposes (see 307th Report, paras. 366-375). The Committee cannot but insist on the need to take urgent measures to restore harmonious industrial relations in the Fort Aguada Beach Resort and to keep it informed of any positive developments in this regard.