Trade Union

2024 PLC 11 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 2(xxxii), 12, 24 & 43Industrial Relations Act (X of 2012), Ss.9 & 10Constitution of Pakistan, Art.143Constitutional petitionTrade unionRegistrationTrans-provincial establishmentEffect

Petitioner / trans-provincial establishment was aggrieved of registration of respondent trade union by Provincial authorities on the plea that the workers who formed respondent trade union were out sourced work force and were employees of third party contractors

Contention of respondent trade union was that registration had already been made by Provincial authorities and petitioner had an alternate remedy under S. 43 of Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013

Validity

By virtue of Art. 143 of the Constitution, provincial industrial relations law would be overridden

Even if registration of respondent trade union under Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, was lawful at the relevant time, if it was subsequently established that the petitioner was a trans-provincial establishment, the registration of respondent trade union under Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, would be overridden and then, all other grounds raised for challenging such registration recede to the background, and the question whether S. 43 of Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, had provided an alternate remedy to petitioner also did not arise

Petitioner was a trans-provincial establishment, which fact had already been established by way of registration certificate issued under Ss. 9 & 10 of Industrial Relations Act, 2012 to trade union of the workers of petitioner's establishment, and certificate of CBA issued to the same trade union under S.19 of the Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Such certificates were not disputed by respondents and manifested that petitioner was recognized as a trans-provincial establishment by Registrar Trade Unions under Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Registration certificate issued to respondent trade union under Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, stood overridden or superseded by subsequent certificate issued under Ss. 9 & 10 of Industrial Relations Act, 2012 and the former certificate was of no further legal effect

Proceedings under S. 24 of Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, pending before Registrar to determine CBA in relation to petitioner's establishment stood abated

High Court directed Registrar of trade unions under Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, to amend his register accordingly

Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.

2018 PLCN 17 LABOUR-APPELLANT-TRIBUNAL-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 2(ix), (xxx), 12(1) & 48Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance (VI of 1968), S.2(b)(f)Trade unionCancellation of registration

Appellant had alleged that Registrar, Trade Unions, had wrongfully registered another workers union inspite of the fact that its members were employees of other companies

Registrar Trade Unions had issued certificate of Collective Bargaining Agent in favour of said union illegally

Labour Court without an application issued notice to the said union, treated the employer as trans-provincial establishment and returned the application to the appellant on the ground of lack of jurisdiction

Validity

Appellant had not mentioned in the application filed before the Labour Court that employer was a trans-provincial establishment, it was, therefore, not proper for the Labour Court to treat the establishment as a trans-provincial establishment without making factual inquiry

Section 12 of the Sindh Industrial Relations Act, 2013, provided that Labour Court was authorized to direct cancellation of registration of a trade Union only on complaint of the Registrar of Trade Unions and not on application of any opposing worker, trade union or employer

Application of the appellant in circumstances was not maintainable and the relief claimed by the appellant could not be granted

Appeal was disposed of and the application filed before the Labour Court was dismissed in circumstances.

2015 PLC 68 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 19(11), proviso & 19(9)(e)Constitution of Pakistan, Art.185(3)Trade unionMembership of more than 5000 members and presence in more than one ProvinceEntitled to function as Collective Bargaining Agent ("CBA") for a term of 3 yearsProcedure to be adopted by such trade union for seeking benefit of 3 years

In terms of proviso to S. 19(11) of Industrial Relations Act, 2012, a trade union claiming membership of more than 5000 and having presence in more than one province was required to provide details before holding of the Referendum and once such details were available, the Registrar, in law, was required to extend the term of such trade union to act as CBA for three years by issuance of a certificate, as contemplated in S.19(9)(e) of the Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Such trade union, however, shall not automatically get the term of three years to act as CBA

Trade union claiming three years term must approach the Registrar with an application within reasonable time, in case the Registrar did not issue the requisite certificate for the term of three years.

2014 SCMR 1605 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 19(11), proviso & 19(9)(e)Trade unionBenefit of functioning as Collective Bargaining Agent ("CBA") for a term of 3 yearsDelay in approaching Registrar for availing such benefitEffect

Trade union in question claimed that it had a membership of more than 5000 and had presence in more than one Province, thus it was entitled to function as CBA for a term of three years in terms of proviso to S. 19(11) of Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Validity

Trade union in question won the Referendum but did not approach the Registrar to avail benefit of acting as CBA for 3 years in terms of proviso to S. 19(11) of Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Trade union remained mum on this issue and only approached the Registrar when its term to act as CBA had expired

Additionally on the date of Referendum, the Registrar had examined the number of members of the trade union which was not more than 5000 so as to grant it the benefit of a 3 years term to act as CBA

Issue of number of members claimed by the trade union ought to have been agitated before the relevant forum, the moment the trade union was declared as CBA, but the same was not done for more than 20 months and the Registrar had already announced the date of (next) Referendum

Trade union in question could not avail the benefit of proviso to S. 19(11) of Industrial Relations Act, 2012, in such circumstances

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed accordingly and leave was refused.

2014 SCMR 1605 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 19(11), proviso & 19(9)(e)Constitution of Pakistan, Art.185(3)Trade unionMembership of more than 5000 members and presence in more than one ProvinceEntitled to function as Collective Bargaining Agent ("CBA") for a term of 3 yearsProcedure to be adopted by such trade union for seeking benefit of 3 years

In terms of proviso to S. 19(11) of Industrial Relations Act, 2012, a trade union claiming membership of more than 5000 and having presence in more than one province was required to provide details before holding of the Referendum and once such details were available, the Registrar, in law, was required to extend the term of such trade union to act as CBA for three years by issuance of a certificate, as contemplated in S.19(9)(e) of the Industrial Relations Act, 2012

Such trade union, however, shall not automatically get the term of three years to act as CBA

Trade union claiming three years term must approach the Registrar with an application within reasonable time, in case the Registrar did not issue the requisite certificate for the term of three years.

2014 PLC 297 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 6(d)Trade unionConstitutionMinimum percentage of persons from workmen forming the executive of a trade unionOver 80% workmen holding executive posts in trade unionsLegality

Section 6(d) of Punjab Industrial Relations Act, 2010 provided that "the number of persons forming the executive which shall not exceed the prescribed limit and shall include not less than eighty percent from amongst the workmen actually engaged or employed in the establishment or group of establishments or the industry for which the trade union has been formed"

Said section gave only (80% as) minimum number of workmen in the executive of a trade union; it did not debar holding of more than 80% posts of the executive by the workmen.

2009 SCMR 202 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 1(4)(b) & 80(2)(a)Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.17(1) & 245Trade unionArmed forces establishment

Authorities of sugar mill owned by Army Welfare Trust sought cancellation of trade union of their employees on the ground that mill in question was a project of Armed forces and provisions of Industrial Relation Ordinance, 2002, were not applicable

Validity

For claiming exemption under S.1 (4) of Industrial Relations Ordinance, 2002, functional connection with armed forces as to activities performed in establishment where a person was employed must be .established

Functions of armed forces were spelled out in Art.245 of the Constitution and, therefore, only an installation which was directly connected with such function i.e. defence of Pakistan against external aggression or to act in aid of civil power if called upon to do so must be shown

Mill in question was neither rendering services exclusively to Armed forces nor could it be treated as an installation of such forces

Order passed by High Court was set aside and that of Labour Court was restored whereby complaint of employer for cancellation of trade union registration was set aside

Appeal was allowed.