<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>DSpace Collection:</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3307</link>
    <description />
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 10:30:47 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:date>2026-04-22T10:30:47Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Minutes of Conciliation Meeting</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3315</link>
      <description>Title: Minutes of Conciliation Meeting
Authors: Alternate Law Forum
Abstract: Details of the Dispute.
Description: Details of the Dispute.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3315</guid>
      <dc:date>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Statement of Objections from Sri Udyog Enterprise for Garment and Textile Workers Union</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3312</link>
      <description>Title: Statement of Objections from Sri Udyog Enterprise for Garment and Textile Workers Union
Authors: Alternate Law Forum
Abstract: The management concluded that the union did not provide any evidence for their claim and it should not be forwarded.
Description: There were no claims for Sri Udyog Enterprises and union is not registered. There were no jural relationship of employer and employee.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3312</guid>
      <dc:date>2018-03-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Statement of Objections from Adecco India before the Deputy Labour Commissioner and Conciliation Officer</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3311</link>
      <description>Title: Statement of Objections from Adecco India before the Deputy Labour Commissioner and Conciliation Officer
Authors: Alternate Law Forum
Abstract: They argued that they are responsible for supplying workers and Avery Dennison was responsible for fixing contracts. They denied union's demands.
Description: Wages of the workers were on par with the other establishments of that area. The union could not cite any specific or relevant judgements.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3311</guid>
      <dc:date>2018-02-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Rejoinder by the Union after Avery Dennison's Reply before the Deputy Labour Commissioner</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3310</link>
      <description>Title: Rejoinder by the Union after Avery Dennison's Reply before the Deputy Labour Commissioner
Authors: Alternate Law Forum
Abstract: Union rejected management's objections and demanded that the workers' service should be regularised and issue was discussed in conciliation.
Description: Union argued that the workers were working as much as regular employees and eligible for regularization of their services.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3310</guid>
      <dc:date>2018-01-16T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

