ABSTRACT
The major problem in the Nigeria Labour System has been and still remains the incessant strikes by workers. Strike as distasteful as it is, performs various useful functions, for example when it is properly used, it can force management to concede to the demands of the workers. In spite of its usefulness in the employer-employee’s relationship, it imposes costs on the two sides and on the economy as a whole.
How has the government responded to the problem of industrial action which has adversely affected the economy of the country? In 1976, the Trade Dispute Act was promulgated to manage and regulate trade dispute matters in Nigeria. The aim of the Act was to promote industrial peace and harmony in the country. Unfortunately, the incidence of trade disputes in Nigeria is still alarming. This problem brings to fore the question whether the Trade Dispute Act has been able to meet up to expectations.This work therefore desires to find out the positive law relating to trade disputes and settlement processes.
The paper examines the Trade Dispute Act, 1976 and its provisions for trade dispute settlement. It also finds out whether the Trade Dispute (Amendment) Decree No 47 of 1992, has made things easier.It also examines the jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court and the new provision under the National Industrial Court Act, 2006.All these are the issues that are pertinent and are discussed in the course of this work.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER PAGECERTIFICATION PAGEABSTRACTTABLE OF CONTENTSDEDICATIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTTABLE OF CASESTABLE OF STATUTESLIST OF ABBRREVIATIONSCHAPTER 1GENERAL INTRODUCTION1.0.0: INTRODUCTION1.1.0: BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY1.2.0: OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY1.3.0:DEFINITION OF TERM1.4.0: SCOPE OF THE STUDY1.5.0LITERATURE REVIEW1.6.0:METHODOLOGY1.7.0: CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 2NATURE, DEFINATION AND HISTORY OF TRADE DISPUTES IN NIGERIA2.0.0: INTRODUCTION2.1.0: MEANING AND NATURE OF TRADE DISPUTE2.1.1: SUBJECT MATTER OF TRADE DISPUTE2.1.2: PARTIES TO A TRADE DISPUTE2.1.3: PURPOSE OF TRADE DISPUTE2.2.0: HISTORY OF TRADE DISPUTE2.3.0: THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES UNDER THE TRADE DISPUTE ACT, CAP 432 LFN 19902.3.1: RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES2.4.0: INHERENT DEFECTS IN THE TRADE DISPUTE LAWS2.4.1: DEFECTS IN THE 1941-1969 LAWS2.4.2: DEFECTS IN THE PROCEDURES FOR TRADE DISPUTE REDOLUTION UNDER THE TRADE DISPUTE ACT 19902.5.0: CONCLUSIONCHAPTER 3MECHANISM FOR TRADE DISPUTE RESOLUTION3.0.0: INTRODUCTION3.1.0: SELF
HELP3.2.0:MEDIATION3.3.0:CONCILIATION3.4.0:INDUSTRIAL ARBITRATION PANEL3.5.0:NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT3.6.0:BOARD OF
INQUIRY3.7.0:CONCLUSIONCHAPTER 4AN APPRAISAL OF NEW LEGISLATION AND ROLE OF COURTS4.0.0: INTRODUCTION4.1.0: THE TRADE DISPUTE (AMENDMENT) DECREE OF 19924.2.0: THE EFFECT OF 1999 CONSTITUTION4.3.0: THE POSITIONS OF THE COURT4.3.1: THE JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL
INDUSTRIAL COURTON LABOUR MATTERS – WHETHER EXCLUSIVE4.3.2: THE TRADE DISPUTE ACT, CAP 432 LFN, 19904.3.3: THE TRADE DISPUTE (AMENDMENT) DECREE, NO 47, 19924.3.4:WHAT IS THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION GIVEN TO THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT UNDER THE TRADE DISPUTE ACT AS AMENDED BYDECREE 47 OF 1992?4.3.5: THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT ACT, 20064.4.0:COURT JURISDICTION, POWERS AND
LIMITATIONS4.4.1:ORIGINAL JURISDICTION4.4.2: APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT4.3.0: CONCLUSIONCHAPTER 5CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION5.0.0: CONCLUSION5.1.0: RECOMMENDATIONBIBLOGRAPHY