TNAG-0127-FCO40-163-Illegal-strikes-and-lockouts-ordinance-1969 — Page 43

16. It is accordingly the department's view

that for the present the provisions of Section

3 should be retained (even though they may never

be used) if the Governor on further reflection

affirms that they have a real deterrent value.

But if they are to be retained the need to

establish joint consultative and negotiating

machinery in essential services to settle

disputes and redress grievances (which is most

desirable in any case on general grounds)

becomes even more important. In the circum-

stances in which the legislation might

conceivably be used i.e. to counter a strictly

limited communist initiative in a single

essential service, we can be fairly sure that

make

the communists will have made good use of some

genuine industrial issue or grievance to cloak

their purpose. To use the legislation to

make this kind of strike illegal without

providing effective arrangements for dealing

with the genuine underlying grievance would

contribute little to industrial peace and

could greatly reduce public support for the

Government's action. In India where similar

legislation is in force (Essential Services.

Maintenance Act, 1968), there already exists

in the essential services joint consultative

machinery, in some cases compulsory arbitration,

and a firmly established tradition of trade

union representation and collective bargaining

notwithstanding this, an assurance was given by

the Government of India that modified and

improved negotiating and arbitration

machinery would be introduced by legislation.

/ Conclusions

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN