58 SOCIAL SCIENTIST the law courts on the other ["save on a complaint made by or under the authority of the appropriate government"—Clause 21(1)], ensures that the employee is delivered, bound hand and foot, before the Grievance Settlement machinery provided for in the Bill. The repressive character of the Bill is concretely evident in the heavy punishment awaiting "workmen" found guilty of violating its provisions—upto six months' imprisonment and/or Rs.5,000 fine [Clause 20(2)]. The 'impartiality' claimed by the framers of the Bill in advocating the same punishment for the employers is farcical. Apart from the fact that few employers would require to violate the clauses of such a handy Bill, the fine is a miniscule sum for an employer, while Clauses 21 and 22 provide sufficient opportunity for implicating managerial and supervisory staff as scapegoats. [Although such staff are paid employees, they are distinguished from "workmen" both by the nature of their function and by their being in the salary bracket of Rs. 1,600 and above per mensem [Clause 3(0)iii and iv]. 1^ however it can be proved by the implicated official that "the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence" [Clause 22 (1)], he would not be liable for punishment. The final protection for erring employers and the administrators is provided by Clause 25 which states that "no suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done in pursuance of this Act." No such leniency for inadvertent violation of the Bill or opportunity for establishing their 'good faith' is available to the 'workmen'. Nor is this omission inadvertent. Its significance emerges in the context of the withdrawal of the conventional democratic forms of protection for the 'workmen'—unionisation and the recourse to the law courts. The Grievance Settlement machinery operationalises this anti-'workman' attitude and is heavily loaded in favour of the employers. The First and Second Schedules of the Bill divide disputes into the categories of the "individual" and the "industrial" respectively. The former includes disputes with respect to termination (including dismissal, discharge and retrenchment), suspension, money or computed benefit due from the employer, terms of employment and conditions of labour. The latter deals with disputes concerning wages (period and mode of payment), compensatory and other allowances, hours of work and rest intervals, leave with pay and holidays, medical and superannuation benefits. For both categories the process is lengthy, giving ample opportunity for delaying tactics on the part of the employer who frames the regulations and procedures to be followed and whose representatives are the chairmen of the committees at all levels. Settlement of the individual disputes must first be attempted on regulations laid down by the employer, failing which they can be taken up by the Grievance Settlement Committee. Arbitration is