VOLTAS EMPLOYEES UNION Vs. VOLTAS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint of unfair labour practices was filed by the Petitioner Union under Items 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The dispute in the present case related to a notice issued by First Respondent on 4th December 2001 as a result of which four workmen who had been engaged as drivers were informed that the pattern that was earlier followed by the management of giving weekly offs on Saturdays and Sundays was being altered. Thereafter, on 5th December 2001, the management set down a schedule for the month of December 2001 and informed the four drivers that for January 2002, a schedule would be announced in the last week of December 2001. The schedule which was notified for the month of December 2001 provided that two of the four drivers would have both Saturdays and Sundays as holidays. One of the other two drivers was however, required to work on Sundays and he was given weekly holidays on Fridays and Saturdays while the fourth driver who was required to report for duty on Saturdays was given holidays on Sunday and the ensuing Monday.

(2.) The Union instituted a Complaint contending that the Head Office of the Company has been observing a five day working week since 1960 with Saturdays and Sundays as days of weekly off for all categories of employees, save and except for the security staff. The contention of the Union was that the management had unilaterally altered the weekly off without complying with the requirement of Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It may be noted at this stage that Item 4 of the Fourth Schedule is entitled "hours of work and rest intervals", whereas Item 5 deals with "leave with wages and holidays". The four workmen whose conditions of service form the subject matter of the complaint had initially been engaged at the Head Office of the management at Ballard Estate until 21st December 2001. The complaint was instituted on 18th December 2001, after which upon the closure of the Ballard Estate establishment, the four drivers came to be transferred to the establishment at Chinchpokli. The management had, at the material time, a factory governed by the Factories Act, 1948 at Chinchpokli, but it is common ground between the parties before this Court that the present workmen were not governed by the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 inasmuch as being workmen attached to the Head Office, their service conditions were governed by the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.

(3.) Evidence was adduced on behalf of the Union and the management. The evidence of the workmen was to the effect that since 1962, Saturdays and Sundays had been observed as weekly off days for all categories of workmen in the Head Office, save and except for the Security Department. A copy of the settlement between the management and the workmen dated 8th November 1982 was produced and marked in evidence as Exh.U-2. The evidence of the workmen shows that though the four drivers were given a weekly off on Saturdays and Sundays, they were allowed overtime wages in the event that they were called upon to work on either of the two days. On the part of the management, the Chief General Manager incharge of administration stepped into the witness box. The witness for the management specifically accepted that Saturdays and Sundays had been observed as weekly offs for a long period of time in respect of the Ballard Estate office to which the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948, applies. The management's witness also admitted that earlier the management was paying overtime wages to drivers if they were working on Saturdays and Sundays. However, the management's witness deposed that there was a change in the market situation as a result of which the presence of drivers was required on Saturdays and Sundays.