Labour Law MCQs for Judiciary, Page 6

Correct answer: B. Section 25G embodies the 'last come, first go' principle, requiring that, in the absence of any agreement between the employer and the workman to the contrary, the employer shall ordinarily retrench the workman who was the last person to be employed in that particular category, unless reasons are recorded for departing from this seniority-based principle

In U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. v. Uday Narain Pandey (2006) 1 SCC 479, the Supreme Court examined Section 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which codifies the 'last come, first go' principle in the context of retrenchment. Under this provision, in the absence of a contrary agreement, an employer must ordinarily retrench the workman within a particular category of employees who was employed last (i.e., has the least seniority), departing from this principle only for recorded reasons, which the employer must be prepared to justify. This principle aims to ensure fairness and prevent arbitrary selection of employees for retrenchment, protecting senior employees from being unfairly targeted ahead of more recently hired workers within the same category.

Source note: Section 25G, Industrial Disputes Act 1947; U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. v. Uday Narain Pandey (2006) 1 SCC 479

Correct answer: B. That when termination of employment is found to be illegal, the workman is ordinarily entitled to full back wages for the period of unemployment caused by the illegal termination, as a natural consequence of reinstatement, since the workman has been kept out of employment due to the employer's wrongful action; the burden generally falls on the employer to establish that the workman was gainfully employed elsewhere during the relevant period if the employer seeks to reduce or deny back wages

In Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya, the Supreme Court reaffirmed and clarified the general principle that where termination is found to be illegal and reinstatement is ordered, the workman is ordinarily entitled to full back wages for the period of unemployment, since this loss directly flows from the employer's wrongful termination. The Court emphasised that the burden typically shifts to the employer to demonstrate that the workman secured gainful alternative employment during the relevant period if the employer wishes to argue for reduction or denial of back wages, reinforcing the protective and restitutionary purpose of reinstatement with back wages as a remedy for illegal termination of employment.

Source note: Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya

Correct answer: B. Fifty per cent of the total of the basic wages and dearness allowance that would have been payable to him had he not been laid off, subject to certain conditions and limitations including provisions restricting the total compensable period in a calendar year and specific disqualifying circumstances

Section 25C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 entitles a workman with not less than one year of continuous service, who is laid off (except for certain disqualifying circumstances such as the lay-off arising from a strike or slowing down of production by workmen in another part of the establishment), to lay-off compensation equal to fifty per cent of the total of the basic wages and dearness allowance that would have been payable had the workman not been laid off. This provision balances the employer's operational difficulties that necessitate lay-off with the need to provide the affected workman some measure of income security during the period of involuntary unemployment, subject to statutory limitations on the total compensable period.

Source note: Section 25C, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Chapter vb applies to industrial establishments (factories, mines, and plantations as defined) employing not less than the statutorily prescribed minimum number of workmen (historically 100, though states have varied this threshold through amendments) on average per working day in the preceding twelve months, and requires such establishments to obtain prior permission from the appropriate government before effecting lay-off, retrenchment, or closure, rather than merely providing notice and compensation as under Chapter va

Chapter VB of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 imposes more stringent requirements on larger industrial establishments (factories, mines, and plantations) employing not less than the prescribed statutory minimum number of workmen, historically set at 100 workmen on average per working day during the preceding twelve months, though several states have amended this threshold for their jurisdictions. Unlike the general provisions under Chapter VA (which require notice and compensation), Chapter VB mandates that covered establishments must obtain prior permission from the appropriate government before they can effect lay-off, retrenchment, or closure, reflecting a policy choice to subject larger establishments to a more rigorous regulatory check given the potentially significant impact of their employment decisions on larger numbers of workers and the broader economy.

Source note: Chapter VB, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Give notice to the workmen likely to be affected by the proposed change, in the prescribed manner, of the nature of the change proposed, and the change cannot be effected within twenty-one days of giving such notice, or without the previous consent of the workmen affected, in case the establishment is one to which Chapter vb applies

Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 requires an employer proposing to effect a change in conditions of service in respect of matters specified in the Fourth Schedule (which includes matters such as wages, allowances, hours of work, leave, and other significant service conditions) to give advance notice in the prescribed manner to the workmen likely to be affected, and the change cannot be implemented within twenty-one days of the notice. This provision aims to prevent employers from unilaterally and abruptly altering significant service conditions without giving workmen adequate notice and an opportunity to respond, register objections, or raise an industrial dispute if necessary, reflecting the Act's broader objective of ensuring fair and transparent industrial relations practices.

Source note: Section 9A, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. The employer must apply at least ninety days before the date on which the intended closure is to become effective; if the appropriate government does not communicate its order granting or refusing permission within the prescribed time, the permission is generally deemed to have been granted on the expiry of that period, subject to the specific statutory scheme

Section 25-O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 requires employers of establishments covered under Chapter VB to apply for permission to close down at least ninety days before the intended date of closure, stating clearly the reasons for the intended closure. The statutory scheme provides for a mechanism whereby, if the appropriate government fails to communicate its decision within the prescribed period, the permission applied for is deemed to have been granted, subject to specific statutory provisions, though this default mechanism has evolved through various amendments and judicial interpretation regarding its precise operation and any exceptions.

Source note: Section 25-O, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. To a Board for promoting settlement, a Court of Inquiry, a Labour Court, an Industrial Tribunal, or a National Tribunal, depending on the nature of the matters in dispute, as specified under the various schedules to the Act

Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 empowers the appropriate government to refer an existing or apprehended industrial dispute to various adjudicatory and conciliatory bodies established under the Act: a Board (for promoting settlement), a Court of Inquiry (for inquiring into matters connected with the dispute), a Labour Court (for matters specified in the Second Schedule), an Industrial Tribunal (for matters in the Second or Third Schedule), or a National Tribunal (for disputes of national importance or affecting establishments in more than one state). The choice of forum depends on the nature and complexity of the matters in dispute as classified under the Act's schedules.

Source note: Section 10, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. The conciliation officer must send to the appropriate government a full report setting forth the steps taken for ascertaining the facts and circumstances relating to the dispute and for bringing about a settlement, together with a full statement of facts and circumstances, and the reasons on account of which a settlement could not be arrived at, and the government may then decide whether to refer the dispute for adjudication

Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 outlines the duties of conciliation officers, requiring them to investigate the dispute and endeavour to bring about a settlement. Where the conciliation officer is unable to achieve a settlement, Section 12(4) requires the officer to send a full report to the appropriate government, detailing the steps taken, the facts and circumstances of the dispute, and the reasons settlement could not be reached. Based on this report, the appropriate government then has discretion under Section 12(5) to decide whether the dispute warrants reference to a Board, Court of Inquiry, Labour Court, Tribunal, or National Tribunal for formal adjudication.

Source note: Section 12, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Where the Tribunal finds that the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified, it may, in addition to the relief of reinstatement, also award any lesser punishment in lieu of discharge or dismissal, giving the Tribunal discretion to substitute a different, lesser punishment instead of merely either upholding or completely setting aside the order of the employer

Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 significantly expanded the adjudicatory power of Labour Courts, Tribunals, and National Tribunals in cases involving discharge or dismissal of a workman. Before this provision, the adjudicating authority's power was generally understood to be limited to either upholding the employer's order of punishment or setting it aside entirely (with consequential reinstatement). Section 11A empowers the Tribunal, where it finds the discharge or dismissal not justified, to substitute a lesser punishment in place of the original order, giving the adjudicating authority considerably greater flexibility and discretion to reach a proportionate outcome based on the facts and circumstances of the case, rather than being confined to a binary choice.

Source note: Section 11A, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Obtain the express prior permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending, for any action that would alter the conditions of service applicable to the workman immediately before the commencement of the proceeding, to his prejudice, or for discharge or punishment of that workman, in matters connected with the dispute; for matters not connected with the dispute, different provisions under Section 33(2) apply, generally requiring payment of wages for one month and an application for approval

Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 places important restrictions on an employer's ability to alter service conditions or take disciplinary action against workmen during the pendency of conciliation or adjudication proceedings, in order to protect workmen from retaliatory or prejudicial action connected with the ongoing dispute and to preserve the status quo during the proceedings. For matters connected with the dispute, prior express permission of the authority before which proceedings are pending is required under Section 33(1). For matters not connected with the pending dispute, Section 33(2) lays down a different procedure, typically requiring payment of wages for one month and seeking approval of the action, reflecting a more relaxed standard for unconnected matters compared to matters directly connected with the dispute in question.

Source note: Section 33, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Section 25T prohibits the commission of any unfair labour practice as specified in the Fifth Schedule to the Act (which lists unfair practices by employers, workmen, and trade unions), and Section 25U prescribes a penalty of imprisonment or fine, or both, for committing such unfair labour practices; the Fifth Schedule lists practices such as interference with the right of workmen to organise, victimisation, unfair dismissal connected with trade union activity, and similar conduct by both employers and unions/workmen

Sections 25T and 25U of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 introduced the concept of 'unfair labour practices' into Indian industrial law, with Section 25T prohibiting the commission of practices specified in the Fifth Schedule and Section 25U prescribing penal consequences (imprisonment, fine, or both) for violations. The Fifth Schedule enumerates specific unfair labour practices by employers (such as interfering with workers' rights to organise, victimising workers for union activity, and unfair discharge or dismissal connected with legitimate trade union activities) as well as unfair practices that can be committed by workmen or trade unions, reflecting a balanced statutory framework that recognises that both sides of the employment relationship can engage in conduct that undermines fair and orderly industrial relations.

Source note: Sections 25T-25U, Fifth Schedule, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. To require employers in industrial establishments to formally define, with sufficient precision, the conditions of employment under them and to make these conditions known to workmen employed in such establishments, by requiring the certification of 'standing orders' covering specified matters relating to conditions of employment, such as classification of workmen, hours of work, leave, termination of employment, and disciplinary procedure

The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 was enacted to address the historical problem of uncertainty and arbitrariness in conditions of employment in industrial establishments, by requiring employers to formally define and have certified 'standing orders', which are essentially codified rules governing specified matters of employment such as classification of workmen, manner of intimating working hours, holidays, paydays, wage rates, shift working, leave, termination of employment, and disciplinary procedures including suspension and dismissal for misconduct. Once certified by the appropriate certifying officer, these standing orders become binding terms governing the employment relationship, providing certainty and transparency to both employers and workmen regarding the conditions of service applicable in the establishment.

Source note: Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946

Correct answer: B. Industrial establishments employing one hundred or more workmen (the threshold may be reduced by appropriate government notification in certain states to a lower number, such as fifty), though appropriate governments retain power to apply the Act to establishments employing fewer workmen by notification

The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 in its original form applies to industrial establishments employing one hundred or more workmen, though various state amendments have reduced this threshold in their respective jurisdictions (for instance, to fifty workmen in some states), reflecting differing state-level policy approaches to extending the Act's protective coverage. The appropriate government also retains the power under the Act to extend its application to industrial establishments employing fewer workmen than the standard threshold by issuing an appropriate notification, allowing for flexible expansion of coverage where circumstances warrant.

Source note: Section 1, Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946

Correct answer: B. The model standing orders prescribed by the appropriate government under the Act apply to the establishment, providing a default statutory framework for conditions of employment until the employer's own certified standing orders take effect

The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 provides for 'model standing orders' prescribed by the appropriate government, which serve as a default statutory framework governing conditions of employment in establishments to which the Act applies, pending the certification of the employer's own draft standing orders, or where the employer has not submitted draft standing orders for certification at all. This ensures that workmen are not left without any defined conditions of employment merely because an employer has been slow or has failed to formulate and submit its own standing orders, reinforcing the Act's protective purpose of ensuring clarity and certainty in employment conditions.

Source note: Section 12A, Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946

Correct answer: B. Once a service is declared essential under esma and a prohibition order is issued, a strike in that service becomes illegal, and persons commencing, continuing, otherwise acting in furtherance of, or instigating, inciting, or otherwise acting in the furtherance of such an illegal strike are liable to penal consequences including imprisonment and fine; esma reflects a policy balancing the right to collective action against the public interest in maintaining continuity of essential services

The Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981 empowers the appropriate government to declare certain services as 'essential' and to prohibit strikes in such services for a specified period through an order. Once such a prohibition order is in force, a strike in the affected essential service becomes illegal, and Section 5 of the Act prescribes penal consequences, including imprisonment and fine, for persons who commence, continue, or otherwise participate in, instigate, incite, or further such an illegal strike. ESMA represents a legislative mechanism balancing the collective bargaining and strike-related rights of workers against the broader public interest in ensuring uninterrupted provision of services considered essential to the community, such as certain utilities, transport, or health services, similar in underlying rationale to the restrictions on strikes in public utility services under Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act.

Source note: Essential Services Maintenance Act 1981

Correct answer: B. That the Trade Unions Act, 1926 does not itself impose a statutory obligation on employers to recognise a registered trade union for purposes of collective bargaining, since the Act primarily provides a framework for the registration, regulation, and legal protection of trade unions, but does not by itself create a free-standing right to compulsory recognition by the employer, which remains a matter often addressed through separate mechanisms, voluntary agreements, or specific state legislation where such legislation exists

In Food Corporation of India Staff Union v. Food Corporation of India & Ors. (AIR 1995 SC 1344), the Supreme Court clarified that the Trade Unions Act, 1926 itself does not impose a statutory obligation on employers to grant recognition to a registered trade union for purposes of collective bargaining. The Act's primary function is to provide a legal and regulatory framework for the registration of trade unions and to confer certain legal protections and immunities (such as those under Sections 17 and 18) upon registered unions and their members, but it does not establish a freestanding right compelling employer recognition, a gap that has led to recognition issues in Indian industrial relations being addressed through separate mechanisms such as voluntary recognition agreements, the Code of Discipline, or specific state-level recognition legislation in some jurisdictions, rather than a uniform central statutory mandate.

Source note: Food Corporation of India Staff Union v. Food Corporation of India & Ors. AIR 1995 SC 1344

Correct answer: B. That the process of registration and regulation of trade unions under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 involves an examination of compliance with the statutory definition and requirements, illustrating the broader theme found across early trade union case law regarding the appropriate balance between facilitating worker organisation and ensuring genuine compliance with the statutory framework governing trade unions

In Re Inland Steam Navigation Workers' Union (AIR 1936 Cal 59) is one of the early judicial decisions interpreting the Trade Unions Act, 1926, contributing to the developing body of case law examining the registration process and the criteria that registering authorities and courts apply in determining compliance with the statutory framework for trade unions. Such early cases collectively helped establish the jurisprudential principles, later more fully developed in cases like Rangaswami, regarding the appropriate scope of scrutiny that registering authorities exercise to ensure that organisations seeking registration genuinely satisfy the statutory definition and requirements under the Act, balancing the facilitative purpose of the legislation with the need for genuine compliance.

Source note: In Re Inland Steam Navigation Workers' Union AIR 1936 Cal 59

Correct answer: B. The Rohtas Industries litigation addressed important questions concerning voluntary arbitration of industrial disputes and related principles, including questions about the binding nature and finality of arbitration awards in the industrial relations context, illustrating how disputes between management and staff/workers' unions in industrial establishments can be channeled through arbitration mechanisms as an alternative to or alongside the statutory adjudication machinery under the Industrial Disputes Act

The Rohtas Industries litigation (including the Patna High Court decision and the subsequent Supreme Court decision in Rohtas Industries v. Its Union, AIR 1976 SC 425) addressed significant questions concerning the role and effect of voluntary arbitration in resolving industrial disputes, an important alternative or complementary mechanism to the formal statutory machinery under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 involving conciliation officers, Labour Courts, and Tribunals. The litigation examined questions regarding the binding nature of arbitration awards reached through voluntarily agreed processes between employers and trade unions or staff associations, contributing to the broader jurisprudence on dispute resolution mechanisms available in Indian industrial relations.

Source note: Rohtas Industries Staff Union v. State of Bihar AIR 1963 Pat 170; Rohtas Industries v. Its Union AIR 1976 SC 425

Correct answer: B. The case clarified aspects of how Section 2A operates in deeming individual disputes connected with discharge, dismissal, retrenchment, or termination as industrial disputes, even without collective espousal, further refining the practical application and scope of this provision in the context of individual workmen seeking redress for termination-related grievances

In J.H. Jadhav v. Forbes Gokak Ltd. (2005) 3 SCC 202, the Supreme Court further examined and clarified aspects of the application and scope of Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which deems disputes connected with the discharge, dismissal, retrenchment, or termination of service of an individual workman to be an industrial dispute, even in the absence of any other workman or trade union espousing the cause. This case, following earlier foundational decisions like Dimakuchi Tea Estate that examined the requirements for collective disputes more generally, contributed to the developing jurisprudence on the practical scope and application of the special statutory provision facilitating individual workmen's access to the dispute resolution machinery for the specific categories of grievance covered by Section 2A.

Source note: Section 2A, Industrial Disputes Act 1947; J.H. Jadhav v. Forbes Gokak Ltd. (2005) 3 SCC 202

Correct answer: B. That when an employer's disciplinary action (such as dismissal) following a domestic inquiry is challenged before a Labour Court or Tribunal, the adjudicating authority examines whether the inquiry was conducted in accordance with principles of natural justice (such as adequate notice of charges, opportunity to present a defence, and an unbiased inquiry officer), and a finding that the inquiry was vitiated by a denial of natural justice can lead to the disciplinary action being set aside or to the Tribunal independently examining the merits of the charges based on evidence led before it

Essorpe Mills Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court (2008) 7 SCC 594 addresses the important area of judicial scrutiny over domestic inquiries, which are inquiries conducted internally by employers to investigate allegations of misconduct before imposing disciplinary action such as dismissal. Indian labour jurisprudence consistently emphasises that such domestic inquiries must comply with principles of natural justice, including adequate notice of the charges against the workman, a fair opportunity for the workman to present his defence and cross-examine witnesses, and an inquiry conducted by an impartial officer. Where a Labour Court or Tribunal finds that the domestic inquiry was vitiated by a denial of natural justice, established jurisprudence permits the adjudicating authority to either set aside the disciplinary action or to independently examine the merits of the case based on evidence presented before it, ensuring that workmen are not subjected to arbitrary or procedurally unfair disciplinary processes.

Source note: Essorpe Mills Ltd. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court (2008) 7 SCC 594

Correct answer: B. The employer must give an opportunity to retrenched workmen who offer themselves for re-employment, providing them with preference over other persons seeking employment, in the manner prescribed, reflecting the legislative intent to protect retrenched workers' interests by giving them priority consideration if the employer's workforce requirements subsequently increase

Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides that where an employer proposes to take into employment any person after having retrenched workmen, the employer must, in the prescribed manner, give an opportunity to the retrenched workmen who offer themselves for re-employment, giving them preference over other persons seeking employment for the relevant positions. This provision reflects the legislature's recognition that retrenchment, while sometimes economically necessary for the employer, should not permanently disadvantage retrenched workers if the employer's circumstances subsequently change and additional workforce is required, ensuring that previously retrenched workers are given priority consideration for re-employment opportunities that may arise.

Source note: Section 25H, Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Collective bargaining in India operates through a combination of registered trade unions exercising rights under the Trade Unions Act, 1926 (including the legal protections for collective activity under Sections 17 and 18), the dispute resolution and settlement framework under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (including provisions for settlements reached through conciliation that bind all parties under Section 18), and voluntary agreements between employers and recognised unions, given the absence of a single comprehensive central statute mandating compulsory recognition and bargaining procedures uniformly across India

Indian labour law's framework for collective bargaining operates through an interlocking combination of statutory mechanisms rather than a single comprehensive code mandating uniform recognition and bargaining procedures. The Trade Unions Act, 1926 provides the foundational framework for the registration and legal protection of trade unions (including criminal and civil immunities under Sections 17 and 18) that engage in collective action. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides machinery for conciliation, and importantly, Section 18 of that Act renders settlements reached during conciliation proceedings binding not only on the parties to the dispute but, in certain circumstances, on all persons in the establishment. Beyond this statutory scaffolding, much of actual collective bargaining in India proceeds through voluntary negotiation and agreement between employers and recognised unions, reflecting the absence of a unified national framework mandating compulsory recognition akin to systems in some other countries.

Source note: Trade Unions Act 1926; Industrial Disputes Act 1947 - Collective Bargaining Framework

Correct answer: B. In the course of conciliation proceedings, or a written agreement between the employer and workmen arrived at otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceedings, where such agreement has been signed by the parties in the prescribed manner

Section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 defines a 'settlement' to include both settlements arrived at in the course of conciliation proceedings (which, importantly, are binding under Section 18(3) on all parties to the industrial dispute, and in certain circumstances on the wider body of workmen in the establishment) and written agreements between the employer and workmen reached outside the course of conciliation proceedings, provided such agreements are signed by the parties in the manner prescribed by the rules. This dual pathway for settlement recognises both the formal conciliation route and voluntary, direct negotiated agreements as legitimate mechanisms for resolving industrial disputes, with appropriate formalities required to ensure clarity and certainty regarding the terms agreed.

Source note: Section 2(p), Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. All parties to the industrial dispute; all other parties summoned to appear in the proceedings as parties to the dispute (unless the Board, Arbitrator, Labour Court, Tribunal, or National Tribunal records that they were not properly summoned); where the parties referred to are employers and workmen, all persons who were employed in the establishment or part of the establishment on the date of the dispute, and all persons who subsequently become employed in that establishment or part

Section 18(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides for the wide binding effect of a settlement arrived at in the course of conciliation proceedings or an enforceable arbitration award. Such a settlement binds not merely the immediate signatories but extends to all parties to the industrial dispute, all parties summoned to appear as parties to the proceedings (subject to a specific exception where it is found they were not properly summoned), and, importantly, where the dispute involves employers and workmen, all persons employed in the establishment (or relevant part) on the date of the dispute, as well as persons who subsequently become employed in that establishment or part after the settlement, ensuring uniform application of negotiated terms across the workforce and preventing the settlement's benefits or obligations from being selectively applied only to the specific individuals who participated in the conciliation process.

Source note: Section 18(3), Industrial Disputes Act 1947

Correct answer: B. Kahn-Freund's analysis emphasised labour law as fundamentally concerned with the regulation of power, recognising the inherent inequality of bargaining power between an individual employee and an employer, and viewing the function of labour law (including the facilitation of collective organisation through trade unions) as a counterweight or corrective mechanism to redress this structural imbalance, situating labour law within a broader understanding of law and power relations in society

Otto Kahn-Freund, whose work (including reflections in his Hamlyn Lecture Series, 'Labour and Law') is foundational to the academic study of labour law, including in the Delhi University LB-403 curriculum, emphasised an understanding of labour law centred on the regulation of power within the employment relationship. His analysis recognised the structural inequality of bargaining power that typically exists between an individual employee, who is economically dependent on continued employment, and an employer, who typically possesses greater economic resources and organisational power. Kahn-Freund's framework views the development of labour law, including legal protections for collective organisation through trade unions and statutory minimum standards, as a societal and legal response designed to counterbalance this inherent power imbalance, situating labour law within a broader jurisprudential and sociological understanding of law's relationship to power and inequality, an important theoretical foundation for understanding the philosophical underpinnings of protective labour legislation.

Source note: Kahn-Freund, Labour and Law (Hamlyn Lecture Series), 1983