Industrial inquiry fairness and wage entitlement after reinstatement in suspension and go-slow misconduct disputes settlement

A suspension settlement was read as covering past suspension and lay-off only, so it did not bar wages for later reinstatement after inquiry; domestic inquiries were defective where witness statements were not supplied in advance and cross-examination followed immediately without proper examination-in-chief. The charge of inciting co-workers to slow down work was upheld on the substance of the evidence despite a variation in wording, so the dismissals were maintained. Reinstated workmen were entitled to full wages from the relevant suspension date, while the tribunal's limited compensation for the remaining workmen was substantially maintained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the suspension agreement barred wages for the period after the agreement in respect of workmen reinstated after inquiry. (ii) Whether the domestic inquiries were vitiated for breach of natural justice. (iii) Whether workmen charged with inciting co-workers to slow down work could be validly found guilty and dismissed despite some variation in the wording of the tribunal's conclusion. (iv) Whether reinstated workmen were entitled to full wages from the date of suspension and whether the dismissed workmen were entitled only to the limited compensation awarded by the tribunal.

Issue (i): Whether the suspension agreement barred wages for the period after the agreement in respect of workmen reinstated after inquiry.

Analysis: The agreement was read as covering past suspension and lay-off up to the date of the settlement, not as prospectively depriving workmen of wages if they were later reinstated after inquiry under the continued suspension clause. The clause preventing claims for suspension period did not displace the normal consequence that a workman fully exonerated or reinstated after disciplinary proceedings would be entitled to wages for the suspension period, unless the agreement clearly said so.

Conclusion: The clause did not bar wages for the post-agreement period in the case of workmen who were reinstated.

Issue (ii): Whether the domestic inquiries were vitiated for breach of natural justice.

Analysis: In a domestic industrial inquiry, the charged workman must have an adequate opportunity to meet the evidence. Reading prepared statements to witnesses and then immediately requiring cross-examination, without supplying statements in advance and without oral examination-in-chief in the workman's presence, was held to fall short of the minimum requirements of fair procedure in the industrial setting.

Conclusion: The inquiries were vitiated for non-compliance with the principles of natural justice.

Issue (iii): Whether workmen charged with inciting co-workers to slow down work could be validly found guilty and dismissed despite some variation in the wording of the tribunal's conclusion.

Analysis: The evidence and the discussion before the tribunal showed that the substance of the charge was incitement of co-workers to reduce production, and the tribunal had accepted that evidence. The fact that the final words used by the tribunal referred to go-slow tactics by the charged workmen themselves did not undermine the substance of the finding, because the tribunal had in fact treated the proved incitement as misconduct warranting dismissal under the standing orders.

Conclusion: The dismissals of those workmen were upheld.

Issue (iv): Whether reinstated workmen were entitled to full wages from the date of suspension and whether the dismissed workmen were entitled only to the limited compensation awarded by the tribunal.

Analysis: Where reinstatement followed and the suspension was under a clause contemplating inquiry and disciplinary action, the workman was entitled to full wages from the relevant suspension date. For the workmen whose dismissals were permitted, the absence of an inquiry and the operation of the governing industrial precedent entitled them to wages up to the date the award permitting dismissal became enforceable. The separate category of workmen whose termination was upheld on the facts did not warrant interference with the compensation fixed by the tribunal.

Conclusion: Full wages were awarded to the reinstated workmen from the relevant suspension date, while the dismissal-related reliefs were maintained with the stated modifications.

Final Conclusion: The tribunal's award was affirmed subject to modification of the monetary reliefs, resulting in dismissal of the management's appeal and partial success for the workmen's appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: In an industrial disciplinary setting, a suspended or reinstated workman is entitled to wages according to the true scope of the settlement and the legal consequences of inquiry and reinstatement, while a domestic inquiry must afford a real and effective opportunity of defence consistent with natural justice.

---