SHAUKAT HUSSAIN versus FULL BENCH OF N.I.R.C., ISLAMABAD
Articles 15, 16 and 22A (8) (g) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969, provided for and financed by the convenience of telephone trade in the premises of Article 199 Workers Union and the entry of trade unions into the office and establishment premises. Will be The employer has no obligation to provide telephone and office to the applicant trade union or any such union, in terms of section 15 (c), Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969, the member or officer of the trade union There can be no discrimination between. The employer will violate the union's requests for Articles 15 and 16, Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 even though otherwise the collective bargaining agent was not in the constitutional jurisdiction because the referendum was not held for appointment. Will not be allowed to receive any kind of relief. Members of trade unions, as required by law, require collective bargaining agents to be vigilant over their condemnation activities. ntatives Trade union officials should not be allowed to join hands with the employer and to preserve personal gains by public servants who allow or allow such benefits at the expense of the state treasury to any trade union or its officials. Yes, they will be responsible for the action. The applicant for misconduct (union) was not entitled to claim office accommodation or telephone access.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
