ABSTRACT
Since the development of communal relationship among mankind and the invention of division of labor, the segregation of society into labor and owners, has been a topic of continuous alteration and reconstruction. But since the boom of the industrial revolution, the hierarchy became the foundation of modern society, and built the civilization brick by brick. It gave humanity many great inventions such as The Railways, The Mass Production of a variety of products such as books, cloths, food etc took place and influenced the lives of the world population in a positive manner. Hence such a flourishing hierarchy , over a period of time, had to become organized backed by the legal system of the country to thrive. One such way of protecting the rights of the working population whose hands built the country, was forming trade unions. Trade unions refers to a cluster of working population homogeneous to a same trade or heterogeneous of different trade, coming together to protect their rights from being exploited by the institution they work for. Such trade unions are common among all sectors such as public sector and private sector and are most prominent in private sector industries.
KEYWORDS: Division of labor, Hierarchy, Trade Unions, Exploitation, Public Sector and Private Sector
INTRODUCTION
The evolution of trade unions in India is a clear indication of the transformation of the socioeconomic detail of the country from a predominantly agrarian economy under colonial rule to a secondary and tertiary sector -oriented economy in the porst-independence era. In the earliest form, labour organisations emerged not merely as economic interest groups who protest for themself but as social movements, responding to the exploitative conditions of bad factory conditions and lack of implementation of proper legislative framework for the unions. Since the early part of the twentieth century, they have been at the center of the fight for just wages, better working conditions, and other benefits considering the welfare of the working population. But since the invention of automation of the industries, their function has gone beyond settling the industrial differences to affecting the policies, determining the welfare legislation, and engaging in broader political movements.
As mentioned in Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India, the right to form associations and unions, which includes trade unions as vehicles for collective bargaining, worker protection, and solidarity against exploitation. This Constitutional framework, reinforced by the recognition through the Trade Unions Act, 1926, grants them legal framework and immunities which allows them to enable lawful industrial action without undue fear of civil or criminal liability. With the growth of industrialisation and capitalism, trade unionism made its headway to assert collectively the rights of the workers.
Despite all the statutory protection and constitutional legitimacy, the Indian trade union movement has been weakened by fragmentation, political interference, and a steady decline in membership density. Instead of consolidating into unified platforms, unions have split along ideological and political lines, with rivalries between bodies like INTUC, AITUC, HMS, and CITU diluting bargaining strength. This has been compounded by the growth of the informal sector, contractualisation of labour, and employer resistance to unionisation. In this context, the dual character of trade unions becomes clear as the protectors of worker’s rights with the power to mobilise and negotiate, and as legal entities bound by statutory responsibilities and public accountability.
This topic is critically important because trade unions remain one of the few collective mechanisms for protecting labour rights in a rapidly changing economy. This research paper will examine the rights and liabilities of the trade unions. This paper will also examine whether, in an era of globalisation, and technological disruption, Indian trade unions can adapt to represent an increasingly diverse workforce, from factory workers to gig economy participants, while maintaining both their power and their responsibility in the 21st century industrial relations framework.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This paper uses Doctrinal research to identify, analyze and elucidate on the topic of rights and liabilities of registered trade unions in India. This research methodology involves thorough and detailed examination and interpretation of legal documents such as statutes, case laws and prominent literary works such as journals, textbooks, articles and other reliable sources of information. The majority of the data derived for this paper was deployed from a diverse exhibit of News reports, scholarly literary works, significant research papers and Precedents available to the public from Supreme courts, High courts and other resources. The primary document may also include Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, Trade Union Act, 1926 and few relevant provisions from the Indian Constitution.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- K.D. Srivastava’s Law Relating to Trade Unions and Unfair Labour Practices in India (4th ed., Eastern Book Company, Lucknow) provides a comprehensive and authoritative account of the statutory structure, constitutional foundations, and judicial approach to trade union, rights and liabilities in India. The book authoritatively examines the Trade Unions Act, 1926, unfair labour practices in the Industrial Disputes Act, and state legislations, with a close interaction with seminal cases that determine the scope of Article 19(1)(c) and industrial action lawfulness. Srivastava successfully criticizes the issues raised by political allegiance, multiplicity of trade unions, and tension between statutory immunities and liabilities resulting from tortious conduct in industrial disputes.
- Tamanna Kapoor, in The Origin and Growth of Trade Unions in India, Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, Vol. V, Issue I, provides the historical path of Indian trade unionism from its pre independence to its post independence institutionalisation. The article quotes the emergence of the unions in the socio-economic context of colonial industrialisation, highlighting the double-edged role they played in opposing exploitative working conditions and supporting the nationalist movement. Kapoor reviews legislative benchmarks like the Trade Unions Act, 1926, and reviews how political affiliations and ideologicals have moulded, and typically splintered, the trade union scene. Through connecting historical evolution with contemporary challenges, the article emphasizes the ongoing importance of grasping the origins of unionism in responding to challenges of declining membership, the informalisation of work, and the erosion of bargaining power. The historical context is essential to the current research since it offers the continuity framework for examining the current balance between union rights and duties.
- K.R. Shyam Sundar, “Trade Unions and the New Challenges: One Step Forward and Two Steps Backward,” The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Vol. 49, No. 4 (2006), analyzes how liberalisation, globalisation, and technological change have changed the Indian trade union’s power despite legislatory recognition. Political fragmentation, the expansion of informal employment, and ineffective organising strategies are cited as reasons for declining union density and bargaining power. This study is pertinent to this study because it identifies the critical necessity for unions to evolve strategies that balance constitutional rights with legal and organisational obligations in an evolving industrial environment.
- Incorporating a policy perspective, the National Commission on Labour Report (1969) gave an initial overview of India’s labour legislation and industrial relations, suggesting recognition of unions, elimination of multiplicity, and more effective collective bargaining mechanisms to enhance industrial democracy. Over three decades after this, the National Commission on Labour Report (2002) looked at these questions again in the light of economic liberalisation, calling for union consolidation, extension of rights to informal workers, and labour law simplification to enhance efficiency and equity.
- The National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS) also underlined the vulnerabilities of workers in the informal sector and suggested legal protection, social security provisions, and inclusion into collective bargaining systems. Its proposals are important for the current study because they stress the necessity of bringing informal workers within the fold of mainstream trade union organisations so as to broaden the horizon of unionism in India outside its historical industrial base.
RESEARCH PROBLEM
The law regulating trade unions in India exemplifies a remarkable duality. While it grants rights to workers under the Constitution and the Trade Unions Act to form unions and associations, it lays down several limitations through statutory controls, judicial interventions, and laws like the Industrial Disputes Act. Such limitations tend to undermine the freedom and efficacy of trade unions. The issue is compounded by fragmentation in the trade union movement through multiplicity of unions, political meddling, and weakened collective bargaining strength, especially in the unorganised sector where most of India’s workforce is found. Added to this is India’s reluctance to ratify ILO Conventions 87 and 98 that support freedom of association and collective bargaining, which indicates a disconnection between international labour standards and national labour policy. Such inconsistency poses a fundamental research issue: whether Indian trade union legislation truly harmonizes worker empowerment and industrial peace or whether it, de facto, weakens the force and efficacy of trade unions, particularly for unorganised workers?
HISTORICAL GROWTH OF TRADE UNIONS
The main elements in the development of trade unions of workers (unions) in every country have been more or less the same. The growth of trade unions in India was closely connected to the ongoing development of industries, the setting up of large scale industries, and the focus of workers in specific sectors. These improvements brought about a reliance on wages for livelihood, and under the existing laissez-faire system. Due to this the individual workers lacked bargaining power to negotiate about their fair and just conditions or wages. As a result, joint protest became the only means to protect their interests, demand better treatment, and symbolise their right to organise. Early examples of trade unions in India include the Bombay Millhand’s Association, 1890 led by N.M. Joshi, the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants of India and Burma established in 1897, the Kamgar Hitwardhak Sabha of Bombay in 1910, the Madras Labour Union in 1918 founded by B.P. Wadia, a Printer’s Union in Calcutta in 1950, and the Bombay Postal Union in 1970. The post World War era (1919-1923) witnessed the growth in the establishment of permanent trade unions throughout the nation, including in railways, postal and telegraph services, and even in textiles. The need for united action resulted in the growth of central and provincial federation, with the All India Trade Union Congress (1920), the Bengal Trade Union Federation being instrumental in them. In spite of this, employers tended to resist unionisation, branding leaders as outsiders, and enemies. Even notable leaders such as M.K. Gandhi fought for workers’rights within organised industries.
In response to the increasing militancy and political involvement, the colonial authorities passed the Trade Unions Act, 1926, which accorded trade unions formal legal recognition. There was a subsequent rise in union memberships by 1947, more than 2,700 unions were registered with over 1.66 million members. After Independence, trade unions consolidated their position in India’s socio-economic order. The nation witnessed the formation of political aligned central federations such as the Indian National Trade Union Congress (1947), the Hind Mazdoor Sabha (1948), and the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (1970) influenced the trade union movement over decades – INTUC through negotiation and moderation, HMS through pragmatic socialism, and CITU through conversion to systemic change via class struggle platforms. This political diversity manifested and enhanced wider political disputes in the post-independence industrial era.
RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF TRADE UNIONS UNDER INDIAN LAW
The law of trade unions in India manifests a delicate balance between empowering workers and placing obligations upon them for the maintenance of industrial peace.
- CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Trade unions are constitutionally legitimate through Article 19(1)(c), which guarantees the freedom to form associations or unions, but even this is not absolute. In All India Bank Employee’s Association v. National Industrial Tribunal, the Supreme Court held that even though the right to form associations or unions are fundamental, there are few reasonable restrictions which are imposed by the state. Likewise, in Kameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar, the court acknowledged peaceful protest rather than violent protest under Article 19. Therefore, the constitutional environment offers a basis for union activity, but is subject to limitation under Article 19(4) for the interest of sovereignty and public order.
Beyond fundamental rights, the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) strengthen the legitimacy of trade unions by requiring the state to provide social justice and eliminate inequalities as mentioned in Article 38, ensure adequate livelihood, social security, and fair pay for work as mentioned in Article 41, and ensuring living wages and decent conditions for work as mentioned in Article 43. Specially, in Article 43 A, added by the 42nd Amendment (1976), directly commands the State to facilitate worker’s involvement in the management of industries. Additionally, Fundamental Duties under Article 51A(j) remind citizens to work towards excellence in common effort, which the courts have sometimes used to remind that trade union action must remain within the bounds of industrial harmony and the national interest.
- TRADE UNIONS ACT, 1926
The Trade Unions Act, 1926, furthermore strengthens the Constitutional guarantees by granting the statutory rights. As specified in Section 13 every registered trade union shall be a body corporate with name, a common seal, perpetual succession, property and other legal rights. The principle relating to body corporates are the same as in the case of companies under the Companies Act. An association, though registered under a statute, cannot maintain a writ petition in respect of some personal and individual grievances of some of its members. Section 15 specifies on the objects on which general funds may be spent such as legal proceedings, administrative expenses, and welfare benefits. Courts have repeatedly demanded financial discipline, as in JK Jute Mill Mazdoor Morha v. Juggilal Kamlapat Jute Mills Co., where litigation by the union was held to be a valid expense. Similarly, in G.S. Dhara Singh v. E.K. Thomas, the Supreme Court held that payments made by an employer to a trade union towards gratuity and accident benefits were the properties of the workers and not the union, and that a worker who was leaving the union could claim accounts and a return of his due proportion.
Section 16 specifies about “the constitution of a separate fund for political purposes,” which are made for the promotion of civic and political interests of its members as found identical in the UK case Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants v. Osborne. Section 17 and 18 are considered important because it grants great immunities for the trade unions. Section 17 protects union members from criminal conspiracy in the trade dispute. This section grants immunity to office bearers, and members of a registered trade union from punishment under sub section (2) of section 61 of the BNS, if the offence arises out of any agreement entered into between members whose purpose is to further the objects laid down under section 15 of the Trade Unions Act. No other offence is protected by the section. Further the agreement should not be an agreement to commit an offence. The parties to an agreement contemplated in Section 120-A IPC will be guilty of criminal conspiracy, though the illegal act agreed to be done has not been done. It is not an ingredient of the offence that all parties should agree to do an illegal act. The fact that some of the crimes could not be proven because of several illegal acts of the accused, the fact that some of them could not be proved has no relevance. They are all guilty of the offence of conspiracy to do illegal acts though for individual offences all of them may not be liable. In R.S. Ruikar v. Emperor, it was argued that there was a clear conflict between section 7, Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Trade Unions Act of 1926. It was contended that the precious right given to trade unions to declare a strike and their immunity from liability for criminal conspiracy or to civil suits in connexion with the furtherance of a strike was taken away if Section 7, Criminal Act Amendment Act, was held to be applicable to trade disputes. In Dalmia Cement Ltd. v. Narain Das, the court mentioned that this section does not afford immunity to a trade union or to an officer thereof for any act of deliberate trespass.
Section 18 of the Act shields unions from civil liability in specific circumstances. The immunity extends mainly to the acts done in pursuance of a trade dispute (for example, to induce members to strike). This section is explicitly for both the officials and members which protects them from being sued for the act which may include a breach of contract of employment. Although this shield is not absolute, it excludes acts which involve violence and defamation. This act aims to balance the rights of workers to protest and to organise with the need to prevent illegal conduct. As mentioned in the case, Dalmia Cement Ltd. v. Narain Das Anandji Biehar, this section does not afford immunity to the unions for the act of deliberate trespass.
Additionally, Section 19 acknowledges the union’s right to make contracts in restraint of trade, which otherwise would be video under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Furthermore, unions have the right to alter their name under Section 23, the right to merge with a registered trade union under Section 24, and the right to seek dissolution under Section 27, hence enabling the continuity in organisational forms. Besides this trade union also has statutory responsibilities which may include ensuring general funds that are used only for the purposes allowed under Section 15. Under Section 20, unions are obliged to have books of accounts ready for inspection to make them transparent. In like manner, Section 25 requires them to inform the registrar in instances of name change, amalgamation, or even dissolution, whereas section 28 requires filing of yearly returns and general statements for regulatory monitoring. These requirements underscore that although unions are conferred substantial immunities and privileges, they need to operate within the scope of accountability, legality, and fiscal prudence.
- INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947
To supplement the Trade Unions Act, the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, acknowledges the right to strike with limitations. Section 22 prohibits the strike and lockouts in public utility services (such as railways, postal, transport, water supply) without giving notice prior six weeks to the employer, no strike can start within 14 days of notice, and no strike can take place during the conciliation period or 7 days after the conclusion of such proceedings. In Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd v. Petroleum Employees Union, the court has strictly mentioned that strike during the conciliation in a public utility service is unlawful under section 22. Under Section 23, it prohibits strikes and lockouts to any industries. Section 24 explicitly mentions that any strike or lockout in violation to sections 22 or 23 is illegal. There was another contradiction, whether wages can be given during the strike period. The Court in the case Syndicate Bank v. K. Umesh Nayak, mentioned that in order to succeed in claiming wages for the strike period, then the strike must be conducted legally and in a justified manner. Whether it is legal and justified is a question of fact. In the case T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court held that the employees have no fundamental right to resort to strike. In Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. Rohtas Industries Staff Union, the Supreme Court of India ruled that losses stemming from a legitimate strike are to be addressed through the Industrial Disputes act and not through tort claims.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The examination of rights and liabilities of trade unions in India reveals both their potential and recurring weakness. As much as unions are rooted in constitutional and statutory legitimacy, their influence has been governed by development, political influence, procedural barriers and increased informal and gig work. To restore their salience and counteract the twin nature of power and responsibility, recommendations include:
- RECOGNITION OF MULTIPLE UNIONS INTO SINGLE UNION
The multiple unions in a single establishment has so far resulted in inter union competition, eroding collective bargaining and causing huge fragmentation. So, the introduction of a new statutory framework is compulsory recognition of a single representative union on an enterprise basis on a majority membership. This would consolidate negotiations and decrease conflict.
- DEPOLITICISATION
Adequate political affiliation of unions has shifted focus away from labor welfare and towards partisan interests, compro mising the credibility. Here, Implementation of stronger regulations to limit the direct political contributions and party influence over trade unions while promoting internal democratic elections. Autonomous monitoring might best ensure that unions serve primarily in the interests of workers, not political convenience.
- TRANSPARENCY AND WORKER PARTICIPATION
Trade Unions need to be held accountable by way of compulsory auditing, fund usage disclosure with compliance under section 20 and 28 of the Trade Unions Act. A centralized code of conduct would facilitate greater trust by workers and employers.
CONCLUSION
The motto of trade unions is “Strength in Unity”, and hence the whispers of hundreds are easier to hear than the shout of one. The trade unions provide a platform for the working population to address their queries which acts as a speaker to represent such problems with the institution and when the institution refuses to address such queries, the trade unions acts as the motivating factors for the institutions to address the problems immediately either in form of strikes, lockout or other legal actions. Hence this institution must be viewed as a pillar supporting the society as India is still a country primarily dependent on its working population in all three sectors namely Primary, Secondary and Tertiary. Therefore it is necessary to recognize the rights of liabilities of such a capable organization to keep the wheel of manufacturing lubricated in a country heavily dependent on its working population.
AUTHOR
Joshini Aksharha G
4th Year, B.A. LL.B (hons)
School of Excellence in Law, TNDALU