Eighteen unions last week announced they would go on strike from the night of 3 July to oppose a move by the Union government to dilute a 5% stake in NLC.
On Wednesday, ahead of the planned labour action, the Madras high court ordered an interim stay on the strike planned by the labour unions. The bench posted the matter for hearing after two weeks.
NLC had moved the high court seeking a direction to the employees to stop gathering outside the company’s gates in Neyveli, Tamil Nadu, and staging an agitation.
A labour strike at NLC, a mining and power generating company, could worsen the severe electricity shortage in Tamil Nadu. Although the situation has improved in the southern state over the past three months due to generation of wind energy, if NLC shuts operations Tamil Nadu would be staring at a deficit of 900-1,000 megawatts (MW) of electricity, said Amol Kotwal, associate director of energy and power systems practice for South Asia and Middle East at Frost & Sullivan.
Neyveli Lignite officials were not immediately available for comment.
S. Rajavannian, general secretary of the NLC Labour Progressive Union, said the unions are discussing the court’s decision and he would not be able to comment on the situation immediately.
The cabinet committee on economic affairs decided to divest a 5% stake in NLC on 28 June to adhere to the market regulator’s stipulation of 10% public holding in a state-owned enterprise. Currently, the government owns 93.5% of NLC; a 5% divestment is expected to fetch it about Rs.466 crore.
The trade unions at NLC have for over a decade prevented the Union government from diluting its stake in the company by resorting to strikes and with the backing of the ruling All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party in Tamil Nadu and its rival Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam.
NLC’s general manager (human resources) M. Maheswaran, in his petition to the high court against the planned labour strike, said the organization was a public utility service and any disruption to its mining and power generation activities would affect other services. The management requested the court to restrain the 18 labour unions from preventing work by threats, intimidation or otherwise, or hindering the free movement of workers, officers and executives.
Though the right to strike is a recognized right, it is not a fundamental right, and “such right can be exercised only as per the provisions of the industrial laws”, Maheswaran said in his petition.
No comments:
Post a Comment