1.

INTRODUCTION:

Industrial relations is that part of human resource management which studies the formal relationship of
the workers with the administration and the employers and ensuring a proper mechanism to manage
the industrial disputes and conflicts. In the present scenario, the relationship between the employer and
the employees have changed to a great extent what it used to be in the 1900s. The industries today are
becoming more of technology-oriented, which has generated the need for skilled and educated
personnel in the organizations. Different scholars and experts have given various views in the context of
industrial relations which are followed as.

Systems Approach

John Dunlop gave the systems theory of industrial relations.

The industrial relations system was based on three sets of different variables:

Actors: By actors here we mean that the individuals or parties involved in the process of developing
sound industrial relations. This variable is denoted by ‘A’.

Contexts: The contexts refer to the setup in which the actors perform the given tasks. It includes the
industry markets (M), technologies (T) and the power distribution in the organization and labor
unions(P).

Ideology: The similar ideas, mentality or beliefs shared by the actors helps to blend the system. It can be
expressed by the initial (I)

Based on these variables, the following formula was derived by Dunlop: R = f(A,T,MP,I)

Unitary Approach

As the name suggests, the unitary approach can be seen as a method of bringing together the
teamwork, common objective, individual strategy and mutual efforts of the individuals.

This theory believes that the conflicts are non-permanent malformations, which are a result of improper
management in the organization.

The other aims of the unitary approach are as follows:

 To create a productive, effective and harmonious work environment;

 To develops a trustworthy, open, fair and transparent work culture;
 To create a cordial work environment;
 To restrict the role of the tribunals and other government associations like the trade unions and
initiates direct negotiation between the management and the employees.

Pluralist Approach

The pluralist theory also called the ‘Oxford Approach’, was proposed by Flanders. This approach
explained that the management and the trade unions are the different and robust sub-groups which
unanimously form an organization. Following are some of the highlights of this approach:
  The organization should appoint personnel experts and industrial relations specialists to act as
mediators between the management and trade unions.
 The organization should ensure that the trade unions get recognized and the union leaders or
representatives can perform their duties freely.
 In the case of industrial disputes, the organization can avail the services of the external agent for
settlement of such issues.
 The managers should resolve to a collective bargaining agreement when there is a need for
negotiation and settlement with the trade unions.

The following formula denotes the Flanders pluralist theory: R = f(b), R = f(c)

Marxist Approach

Lenin came up with the concept of a Marxist approach. The assumptions of this approach are as follows:

 Industrial relations are a significant and never-ending source of conflicts under capitalism which
cannot be avoided. However, cases of open disputes are quite unusual.
 Understanding the conceptions of capitalized society, capital accumulation process and the
pertaining social relations, give a better overview of the industrial relations.
 The Marxist theory assumed that the survival of the employees without any work is more crucial
than the survival of the employer without the labours.

Sociological Approach

The industries comprise of different human beings who need to communicate with the individuals of
other organizations.

Due to the difference in their attitude, skills, perception, personality, interests, likes and dislikes, needs,
they are usually involved in one or the other conflict. Even the social mobility and other aspects
including transfer, default, group dynamics, stress, norms, regulations and status of the workers
influence their output and the industrial relations.

Gandhian Approach

Following are the various features of the trusteeship or Gandhian theory:

 Gandhi Ji was not against strikes; instead, he gave the following conditions to carry out a
favourable strike.
 Though Gandhi Ji was not against carrying out strikes, he believed that it should be the last
option to which the labour should resort to, after the failure of all the constitutional and
peaceful ways of resolving conflicts and negotiating with the employer.
 Thus, such nature’s gift belongs to the whole society and cannot be considered as of personal
possession by anyone.
 The objective of this theory is to adopt non-violent ways to bring in economic parity and
material enhancement in a capitalist society.
 Gandhi Ji perceived that every organization is a joint venture, and the labour should be treated
as associates or co-partners with the shareholders.

Psychological Approach
The psychologists perceived the problem of the industrial relations as a result of the varying perception
and mindset of the key participants, i.e., the employees and the management.

The ‘thematic application test’ was conducted by Mason Harie to understand the behaviour, mindset
and perception of the two significant workgroups, i.e., executive and the union leaders, in a particular
situation.

Human Relations Approach

The person behind the concept of the human relations approach is Keith Davis. Some of the primary
objectives of the human relations approach are as follows:

 To ensure cooperation by promoting the mutual interest of the organization;

 To enhance the productivity of the individuals;
 To satisfy the psychological, social and economic needs of the employees.
 This theory focused on enhancing the level of efficiency, worker’s morale and job satisfaction by
applying specific techniques or tools and policies.

2.

INTRODUCTION:

The labour movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and
progress. Out of its bold struggles, economic and social reform gave birth to unemployment insurance,
old-age pensions, government relief for the destitute and, above all, new wage levels that meant not
mere survival but a tolerable life. The captains of industry did not lead this transformation; they resisted
it until they were overcome. When in the thirties the wave of union organization crested over the
nation, it carried to secure shores not only itself but the whole society.

CONCEPT AND APPLICATION:

Trade Unionism in India

Trade union movement in India, like any other industrially-developed country in the world, has a long
history. However, we shall not go to trace the detailed history but confine only to major developments
so as to arrive at the present scenario. Trade union activities started in India with the formation of
Bombay Mill Hands Association in 1890.

This was followed by formation of some other trade unions at places like Kolkata and Chennai. All these
unions aimed at promoting welfare activities for workers, spreading literacy among them, and
redressing their grievances by legal methods. The leadership to these unions was provided mostly by
social reformers and politicians.

After the independence, the growth of trade unions followed the pattern of development of political
parties. Thus, Congress Party formed the Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC) in 1947; Praja
Socialist Party formed Hind Mazdoor Sabha in 1948. Meanwhile Communist Party of India took over the
control of AITUC. With the proliferation of political parties, the trade unions also proliferated.
Presently, the more active central trade unions are as follows:

1. Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC) — Congress Party

2. All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) — Communist Party
3. Centre of Indian Trade Union (CITU) — Communist (Marxists)
4. Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) — Bharatiya Janata Party
5. Hind Mazdoor Sangh (HMS) — Former Praja Socialist Party

Period Post 1947

One major lacuna with the 1926 Act was that though it provided for voluntary registration of Trade
Unions it did not provide for compulsory recognition of the Trade Unions by the employers and because
it was not compulsory for the employers to recognize the Trade Unions, obviously did not recognize
them. This again put a halt to the development of Trade unions.

Trade Unionism in India from 1950 to 1970

Independence of India was beneficial to Trade Unions in India in a huge way as the forefathers adopted
the principles of equality for all, justice and freedom including the freedom of expression. The
Constitution of India also recognized Freedom of Association as a Fundamental Right.

Trade Unionism in India from 1970 to 1990

From the mid of 1960, the economic situation of India had started to deteriorate mainly because of
famines and wars witnessed by India in its preceding years. The rate of inflation rose and prices of food
and grains soared. Industries were also affected by the structural changes in the economy. There were
more protests, strikes and lockouts organized by the trade unions during this period.

Trade Unionism in the 21st Century

With difficulties faced by NEP, the trade unions had to face a barrage of problems but the silver lining is
the growth in the number of trade unions, better organization and functioning. As per data of Labour
Bureau, there are around 11,556 registered labour unions in India with average membership at 1283
members per union.

Measures to Strengthen Trade Union Movement in India:

The following are some of the measures to minimize trade union problem and to strengthen the Trade
Union Movement in India:

1. It should be the constant endeavour of policy makers to aim at the unity of trade union
Organizations, so that they may be brought together on the basis of a common programme.
There should be legal provision for the recognition of the representative union. Due recognition
should be given to trade unions as the legitimate bargaining agents of workers.
2. Outside political leadership has been developed due to the absence of internal leadership.
Outside leadership is the main cause for the multiple problems of the trade union. The problems
can be eradicated through the development of leadership talents from within. Management
should encourage internal workers to lead their own movement. Management and trade union
should provide educational and training facilities for the development of internal leadership.
 3. The functions of trade unions should be widened and broadened. In addition to safeguarding
the economic interests of their members, they should be encouraged to assume social
responsibilities. As far as possible, trade unions should be drawn into participation in the
development programme of the country.
4. The Trade Union Act of 1956 should be amended and the number of members required to a
trade union should be increased from 7 per cent to 50 per cent of the employees of the
organization. Similarly, the scope for outside leadership should be reduced from 50 per cent to
10 per cent.
5. Trade union should not unnecessarily involve in the management decision, where their
interference reduces the organizational effectiveness.
6. Trade union should form a labour party and trade union in the country should be affiliated to it.
It gives adequate strength to the trade unions both in the industry and in the Parliament.
7. Paid union officials should be employed, so that they may devote their whole time to union
work.

CONCLUSION:

Trade Unionism in India has come a long way. Initially from having no legal backing to illegalizing
“strikes” by the unions to granting them registration procedure and compulsory recognition and now
having full-fledged legislations and special courts, trade unions in India have attained remarkable
status/standing in the labour movement. However, there are still few impediments that the trade
unions face such as lack of financial resources and governmental support. Hence, there is still scope for
the development of Trade Unionism in India.

3. a.

AITUC:

All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) was founded in 1920 with Lala Lajpat Rai as its first president.
Upto 1945 Congressmen, Socialists, Communists worked in the AITUC which was the central trade union
organisation of workers of India. Subsequently the trade union movement got split on political lines.The
membership of the AITUC is 3.6 million. The unions affiliated to AITUC are from textile, engineering,
coal, steel, road transport, electricity board and of unorganised sector such as beedi, construction and
head-load workers, anganwadi, local bodies and handloom. Recently a number of agriculture workers’
unions have affiliated themselves to AITUC.

The first session of the AITUC was held under the presidentship of Lala Lajpat Rai. In his presidential
address, he exhorted the workers:

“Indian labour should lose no time to organize itself on a national scale. Capital is organized on a world-
wide basis. It is backed up by financial and political strength, beyond conception. In order to meet the
danger, Indian labour will have to join hands with labour outside India also, but its first duty is to
organize itself at home”.
“At present, our greatest need is to organize, agitate and educate. We must organize our workers, make
them class-conscious and educate them in the ways and interests of common weal.”

The General Secretary of the AITUC is Gurudas Dasgupta, a prominent policitical leader and leader of the
Communist Party of Indiaand presently Member of Pariament (Lok Sabha). The AITUC is a member of
the World Federation of Trade Unions.(WFTU) which has large membership world over About WFTU
there will be separate page under International Trade Union Organisations.

INTUC:

Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC) is a national trade union in India. It was founded on 3
May 1947 and is affiliated with the International Trade Union Confederation. According to provisional
statistics from the Ministry of Labour, INTUC had a membership of 33.95 million in 2013, making it the
largest Trade Union in India.

The workers in India are only a section of the people and not a class apart. The culture and their
tradition form part of the common heritage of the people of India. In organizing them and seeking the
redressal of their grievances, ways and means have to be evolved in consonance with our condition. No
more grafting or transplantation of a foreign ideology or method however suited to the condition
elsewhere, is likely to yield healthy results here. What is required is an indigenous movement having its
roots in the Indian and soll. Such a movement has for long been in existence and has attained a
remarkable center. A new organization, that would give the correct lead to the working class and strives
to established social justice, peace and security with a constitution and working. Which would be
essentially democratic giving every one of its constituent units ample scope for free expression of views
and action has become Imperative.

Number of Unions gathered at conference, held at the Constitution Club, New Delhi on May 3 and
4.1947, determined to form a new trade union centre which could voice the genuine demands for
realizing the aspirations of the working class in the country, at the same time keeping the national
interest foremost in view. The unions represented at the same conference was 200 with a total
membership of over 5,65,000.

3. b.

BMS:

The Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh (translation: Indian Workers’ Union) is a trade union in India. It was
founded by Dattopant Thengadi on 23 July 1955. The BMS itself claims to have more than 10 million
members. According to provisional statistics from the Ministry of Labour, the BMS had a membership of
6,215,797 in 2002.The BMS is not affiliated to any International Trade Union Confederation. It is the
labour wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and forms part of the Sangh Parivar.
BMS protested against the anti-labour policies of the Narasimha Rao Government of the Congress,
leftists supported Deve Gowda Government and Gujral Government. During the tenure of the NDA
Government also which had “friends” of BMS in it, BMS had to oppose the anti-labour policies. Now in
Modi Government tenure, called for nationwide movement on 10 June 2020 to protest privatization in
PSUs.

BMS is today not only the largest central trade union in India, but also the largest independent national
trade union of the world. Even though China has a larger and sole trade union, it is under government
control and is not independent. Both the Communist and Congress oriented Trade Union Historians in
India have not given a real picture or the reasons regarding the growth and fall of different Trade Unions
in India. That is squarely the main reason for their failure to give a proper analysis of the miraculous
growth of B.M.S., which had entered the fray very late or probably, as the last one. The ideological pre
conceptions and study methods of the said Historians are not sufficient to analyse the growth of BMS. It
is a paradox that none of the documents about the recent History of Trade Union Movement have the
details about the growth of BMS to the number one position.

Growth of BMS in recent Trade Union Movement can be correctly understood only if we go through the
previous history of the trade union movement, the success and failure of different Unions, political splits
and the reasons that led to the formation of BMS. BMS had hitherto adopted a different methodology,
which had proved to be successful in spite of the absence of an array of projected leaders.

HMS:

The Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS) was formed by the Socialists in 1948 but has little real connection with
the Socialist Party. It is one of the least political and most pragmatic trade-union federations in India.
The HMS is affiliated with the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.

Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS) has its origin as a historical imperative. In the wake of India’s independence
after nearly two centuries of foreign subjugation, the few national trade unions centres were functioning
as the labour wings of different political parties that gave rise to the growing realisatition among the
workers of the imperative need for the country’s working class movement to be free from the misuse by
the political parties for getting their narrow party ends served. It was this realisation that made the 600
delegates participating in the founding conference on December 24, 25 and 26, 1948, with the mandate
of over 600,000 workers organised under 427 trade unions, to take the historic decision to form an
independent and democratic labour organisation under the banner of Hind Mazdoor Sabha.

Since then HMS has been functioning as an independent and democratic trade union centre free from
the pulls and pressure of the political parties, employers and the government. HMS, however, is not to
be construed as being apolitical. It stands for industrial democracy, workers’ education, cooperative
movement and for building the trade union movement as an effective instrument of the country’s socio-
economic transformation with social justice. The national centre is inalienably committed to the values
of democracy as it believes that the economic gains at the cost of liberty and democracy are in the long
run counter-productive. At the same time, the survival of democracy is dependent on the betterment of
the working and living conditions of the millions of economically active people who are the real
producers of the nations wealth. HMS is against the concept of a market-driven economy and
privatisation as the panacea for all the ills of human resource surplus developing economy like India with
acute economic and social disparities and formidable poverty and unemployment. The free market is
solely profit oriented and has no social concerns. For a country’s balanced development with equity, the
State should play a regulatory role.