Can any one explain which settlement (18(1) or 12(3)) is best for Employer as well as Union (wage settlement under ID Act'1947)

Dear Sirs,

Please explain which settlement is best for the employer and which settlement is best for the union under the Industrial Dispute Act of 1947 - either 18(1) Bipartite or 12(3) Tripartite - and why.

With regards,

AK

Dear Colleague,

A tripartite settlement involving all three parties is always preferable. It is ironclad, binding on both parties, and no disputes on the matters covered by it during the settlement period can be raised.

Regards,

Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant

Settlement under Section 18(1) will only be binding between the parties who signed the settlement.

Whereas the settlement under Section 12(3), before the Conciliation officer, will have legal binding for all the employees of the organization as mentioned in the settlement, for the period stated in the settlement. Both are legally correct. The choice of which one is required to be decided depending on the situations, conditions, and parties to the settlement.

Please refer to the link here on CiteHR. It may help.

https://www.citehr.com/439684-re-id-...-3-18-3-a.html

Dear Colleague,

In the normal course of events, a bipartite settlement is always beneficial for the industry and promotes better cohesiveness. The tripartite settlement comes into play when the bipartite settlement fails, and the matter is referred to the labor department for resolution. The agreement is signed among three parties - the Employer, the Union, and the Conciliation Officer.

Settlements under section 12(3) facilitated through the conciliation of the labor officer/commissioner are always preferable. Typically, there will be no disputes.