1

2012- 2017 LABOUR LAW II COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY :Dr. S.C ROY RAVI SHEKHAR VARSHIASSOCIAT PROFESSORLAW ROLL 783 5th SEM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am highly elated to work on my project topic COLLECTIVE BARGAING under the guidelines of my teacher Dr. S.C. Roy .I am very grateful to him for his proper guidance. I would like to enlighten my readers with my efforts and just hope that I have tried my best for bringing luminosity to this topic.I would also like to thank all my friends and my seniors and apart from all these I would like to give special regard to the librarian of my university who made a relevant effort regarding to provide the materials to my topic and also assisting me.And finally and most importantly I would like to thank my parents for providing me financial and mental support and providing me necessary and important tips whenever need so. I would like to thank my room-mate for every little help of his.

THANKING YOU,RAVI SHEKHAR VARSHI

TABILE OF CONTENTS

1) INTRODUCTION2) DEFINATION OF COLLECTIVE BARGANING3) COLLECTIVE BARGANING PROCESS4) COLLECTIVE BARGANING IN INDIA5) PROBLEMS RELATING TO COLLECTIVE BARGANING IN INDIA6) CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONSBIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

The conflict between the management and the employee is inherent in an industrial society. One argues for more investment and profits while the other argues for better standard of living. These two conflicting interests can be adjusted temporarily through the principle of "give and take"[footnoteRef:1], The principle of give and take has been infused in the principle of collective bargaining. The phrase "collective bargaining" was coined by British labor reformers Sidney and Beatrice Webb of Great Britain which was the home of collective bargaining in the 1890s[footnoteRef:2]. The idea of collective bargaining emerged as a result of industrial conflict and growth of trade union movement and was first given currency in the United States by Samuel Crompers. In India the first collective bargaining agreement was conducted in 1920 at the instance of Mahatma Gandhi to regulate labour management relation between a group of employers and their workers in the textile industry in Ahmadabad[footnoteRef:3]. Advocates of collective bargaining in the early decades of the twentieth century thought it essential for three reasons. First and foremost, a system of peaceful and routine bargaining would eliminate industrial strife and violence. Second, collective bargaining stood for "industrial democracy," and finally, collective bargaining promised to make capitalism work.In any industrial establishment the friction between employer and the workmen is inevitable. There are demands by the workmen and if those demands are resisted by the employer, industrial dispute arises resulting in industrial tension and disturbing the peace and harmony in the industry. Collective Bargaining is one of the methods wherein the employer and the employees can settle their disputes. [1: Otto Kahn-Freund, Laboar aad the Law, L mdon, Stevens & Sons, (1977\ .). 49] [2: Webb, Sydney and Beatrice, Industrial Democracy,1902,p.185] [3: Report of Royal Commission on Labour in India, 1931; p. 336-337]

There was always a need of a legislation which could ensure industrial justice pre-empt the industrial tensions and provide the mechanics of dispute resolution. When Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was passed in India, it was passed to provide machinery and form for the investigation of industrial disputes and for the settlement thereof and for the purposes analogous and incidental thereto. As is evident from the Act itself that it is piece of legislation which mainly provides for investigation and settlement of Industrial disputes.In the words of Justice Desai the emergence of the concept of welfare state implies an end to exploitation of workmen and as a corollary to that collective bargaining came into its own and lest the conflicting interests of the workmen and the employer disturb the industrial peace and harmony, a machinery for adjustment of such conflicting interests became the need of the time. The Act therefore was enacted to provide machinery and Forum for adjustment of such conflicting and seemingly irreconcilable interests without disturbing the peace and harmony in the industry assuring the industrial growth which was the prerequisite of for a welfare state. Collective bargaining is one of the methods wherein the employer and the employees can settle their disputes. This method of settling disputes was adopted with the emergence and stabilization of the trade union Government. Before the adoption of the collective bargaining the labour was at a great disadvantage in obtaining reasonable terms for contract of service from its employer. With the development of the trade unions in the country and the collective bargaining becoming the rule it was equally found by the employers that instead of dealing with individual workmen it is convenient and necessary to deal with the representatives of the workmen not only for the making or modification contracts but also in the matter of taking disciplinary action against the workmen and regarding other disputes. So, collective bargaining has come to stay having regard to modern conditions of the society where capital and labour have organized themselves into groups for the purpose of fighting and settling their disputes.

DEFINITION OF COLECTIVE BARGAININGThere is no precise definition of Collective bargaining. In fact keeping in view the change in the society with its fast changing social norms the scope and content of collective also varies from country to country. Nevertheless, Collective bargaining has been defined by different experts in different ways. It is treated as a method by which problem of wages and conditions of employment are resolved peacefully and voluntarily between labour and management.[footnoteRef:4]This chapter deals with the various definitions of collective bargaining which will be helpful in understanding the concept of collective bargaining, its ambit and scope as has been coined by various writers. [4: I.L., Labour Law and Labour Relations, N.M. Tripathi (Pvt) Ltd., Bombay, (1968), P.29:]

According to K. AlexanderCollective bargaining is a process of bargaining between the employers and their workers by which they settle their disputes among themselves relating to employment or non-employment or terms of employment or conditions of labour of the workmen, on the strength of the sanctions available to each side. Occasionally such bargaining results in amicable settlement arrived at voluntarily and peaceful between the parties. But quite often the workers and the employers have to apply sanctions by resorting to the weapons of strikes and lock-outs to pressurize one another which makes both the sides aware of the strength of one another and that finally forces each to arrive at a settlement in the mutual interests. It is thus the strength of the parties which determines the issues rather than the wordy duals which are largely put on for show as any element of strength in one party is by the same token an element of weakness in another.Convention 154 of International Labour Organization (ILO) under Article 2 says: For the purpose of this Convention the term collective bargaining extends to all negotiations which take place between an employer, a group of employers or one or more employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or more workers' organizations, on the other, for

(a) determining working conditions and terms of employment; and/or(b) regulating relations between employers and workers; and/or(c) regulating relations between employers or their organizations and a workers' organization

ILO has defined collective bargaining asnegotiation about working conditions and terms of employment between an employer and a group of employees or one or more employees organizations with a view to reaching an agreement wherein the terms serve as a code of defining the rights and obligations of each party in their employment/industrial relations with one another. This definition however confines the term collective bargaining as a means of improving conditions of employment. But in fact, collective bargaining serves something more.

COLLECTIVE BARGANING PROCESSThe collective bargaining process begins when the majority of workers of an organization vote to be represented by a specific union. The National Labor Relations Board (see Labor Unions) then certifies the union. At this point, the management of the organization must recognize the union as the collective bargaining agent for all the employees of that organization. Once this part of the process is completed, collective bargaining can begin. Bargaining always takes place between labor and management, but negotiations can include more than one group of workers and more than one employer. Single-plant, single-employer agreements are the most common. However, if an employer has more than one plant or work site, Multiplan, single-employer agreements can be bargained. Several different union groups representing the workers of the same employer can use coalition bargaining. Industry wide bargaining involves one national union bargaining with several employers of a specific industry.Many different negotiation styles can be used when union and labor representatives sit down at the bargaining table. The two basic modes of bargaining are traditional bargaining and partnership bargaining, though there are many variations of each style.The traditional style of bargaining has been used since collective bargaining began between management and the early labor unions. It is an adversarial style of negotiating, putting one side against the other with little or no understanding of, or education about, the other on the part of either party. Each side places its demands and proposals on the table, and the other side responds to them with counterproposals. The process is negative and involves a struggle of give-and-take on most issues. Even with its negative connotations, however, the traditional style of negotiating is still used effectively in bargaining many union contracts.The partnership style of bargaining is the more modern approach to negotiations. It strives for mutual understanding and common education on the part of both labor and management, and it focuses on goals and concerns common to both parties. Because of its emphasis on each side's being aware of the issues concerning the other side, partnership-style bargaining is also known as interest-based bargaining. In this process, labor and management each list and explain their needs, and the ensuing discussion revolves around ways to meet those needs that will be not only acceptable but also beneficial to both parties. This style of bargaining is very positive and imparts a much more congenial atmosphere to the negotiating process. Many modern union-management contracts are bargained very successfully using the partnership style.

A blending of the traditional and partnership styles is widely used in labor-management negotiations. The combination approach is used for many reasons, including the fact that many union and management leaders are more familiar with the traditional style. However, with today's more participatory relationship between labor and management in the workplace, the partnership style is becoming more accepted and is being used more frequently. The negotiating process may also include both styles of bargaining because of the variety of issues being negotiated. The partnership style may be used to negotiate certain issues, while the traditional style may be invoked when bargaining other terms.Collective Bargaining Issues Labor unions were formed to help workers achieve common goals in the areas of wages, hours, working conditions, and job security. These issues still are the focus of the collective bargaining process, though some new concepts have become the subjects of negotiations.

The Settlement Process Union contracts are usually bargained to remain in effect for two to three years but may cover longer or shorter periods of time. The process of negotiating a union contract, however, may take an extended period of time. Once the management and union members of the negotiating team come to agreement on the terms of the contract, the union members must accept or reject the agreement by a majority vote. If the agreement is accepted, the contract is ratified and becomes a legally binding agreement remaining in effect for the specified period of time.If the union membership rejects the terms of the agreement, the negotiating teams from labor and management return to the bargaining table and continue to negotiate. This cycle can be repeated several times. If no agreement can be reached between the two teams, negotiations are said to have "broken down," and several options become available.Mediation is usually the first alternative when negotiations are at a stalemate. The two parties agree voluntarily to have an impartial third party listen to the proposals of both sides. It is the mediator's job to get the two sides to agree to a settlement. Once the mediator understands where each side stands, he or she makes recommendations for settling their differences. The mediator merely makes suggestions, gives advice, and tries to get labor and management to compromise on a solution. Agreement is still voluntary at this point. The mediator has no power to force either of the parties to settle the contract, though often labor and management do come to agreement by using mediation.If mediation fails to bring about a settlement, the next step can be arbitration, which can be either compulsory or voluntary. Compulsory arbitration is not often used in labor-management negotiations in the United States. Occasionally, however, the federal government requires union and management to submit to compulsory arbitration. In voluntary arbitration, both sides agree to use the arbitration process and agree that it will be binding. As in mediation, an impartial third party serves in the arbitration process. The arbitrator acts as a judge, listening to both sides and then making a decision on the terms of the settlement, which becomes legally binding on labor and management. Ninety percent of all union contracts use arbitration if the union and management can't come to agreement (Boone and Kurtz, 1999).Sources of Power If the collective bargaining process is not working as a way to settle the differences between labor and management, both sides have weapons they can use to bolster their positions. One of the most effective union tactics is the strike or lockout. While on strike, employees do not report to work and, of course, are not paid. Strikes usually shut down operations, thus pressuring management to give in to the union's demands. Some employees, even though allowed to belong to unions, are not allowed to strike. Federal employees fall into this category. The law also prohibits some state and municipal employees from striking.During a strike, workers often picket at the entrance to their place of employment. This involves marching, carrying signs, and talking to the media about their demands. The right to picket is protected by the U.S. Constitution as long as it does not involve violence or intimidation. Problems sometimes arise during strikes and picketing when management hires replacement workers, called scabs or strikebreakers, who need to cross the picket line in order to do the jobs of the striking workers.The boycott is another union strategy to put pressure on management to give in to the union's demands. During a primary boycott, not only union members but also members of the general public are encouraged to refuse to conduct business with the firm in dispute with the union.Though it is rarely done, management may use the lockout as a tactic to obtain its bargaining objectives. In this situation, management closes down the business, thus keeping union members away from working. This puts pressure on the union to settle the contract so employees can get back to their jobs and receive their wages.Management sometimes uses the injunction as a strategy to put pressure on the union to give in to its demands. An injunction is a court order prohibiting something from being done, such as picketing, or requiring something to be done, such as workers being ordered to return to work.

Grievance ProceduresOnce a collective bargaining agreement is settled and a union contract is signed, it is binding on both the union and management. However, disagreements with contract implementation can arise and violations of the contract terms can occur. In these cases, a grievance, or complaint, can be filed. The differences that must be resolved are usually handled through a step-by-step process that is outlined in the collective bargaining agreement. The grievance procedure begins with a complaint to the worker's immediate supervisor and, if unresolved at that level, moves upward, step by step, to higher levels of management. If no resolution is found at any of these levels, the two parties can agree to have the grievance submitted to an impartial outside arbitrator for a decision binding to the union and management.Collective bargaining is a successful way for workers to reach their goals concerning acceptable wages, hours, and working conditions. It allows workers to bargain as a team to satisfy their needs. Collective bargaining also allows management to negotiate efficiently with workers by bargaining with them as a group instead of each one individually. Though traditional bargaining can be negative and adversarial, it does produce collective bargaining agreements between labor and management. Partnership bargaining can lead to increased understanding and trust between labor and management. It is a positive, cooperative approach to collective bargaining that also culminates in contracts between labor and management.

Levels of Collective BargainingCollective bargaining operates at three levels:1. National level2. Sector or industry level3. Company/enterprise level

Economy-wide (national) bargaining is a bipartite or tripartite form of negotiation between union confederations, central employer associations and government agencies. It aims at providing a floor for lower-level bargaining on the terms of employment, often taking into account macroeconomic goalsSectoral bargaining, which aims at the standardization of the terms of employment in one industry, includes a range of bargaining patterns. Bargaining may be either broadly or narrowly defined in terms of the industrial activities covered and may be either split up according to territorial subunits or conducted nationally.Company/enterprise level, this bargaining level involves the company and/or establishment. As a supplementary type of bargaining, it emphasizes the point that bargaining levels need not be mutually exclusive.

COLLECTIVE BARGANING IN INDIACollective Bargaining in India has been the subject-matter of industrial adjudication since long and has been defined by our Law Courts. In Kamal Leather Karamchari Sangathan v. LibertyFootwear Company the Supreme Court observed that, "Collective bargaining is a technique by which dispute as to conditions of employment is resolved amicably by agreement rather than coercion". According to the Court, the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeks to achieve social justice on the basis of colIective bargaining. In an earlier judgment in Titagarh Jute Co. Ltd. v. Sriram Tiwari the Calcutta High Court clarified that this policy of the legislature is also implicit in the definition of 'industrial dispute'. In Ram Prasad Viswakarma v. Industrial Tribunal the Court observed that, "it is well known how before the days of 'collective bargaining', labour was at a great disadvantage in obtaining reasonable terms for contracts of service from its employer. As trade unions developed in the country and collective bargaining became the rule, the employers found it necessary and convenient to deal with the representatives of workmen, instead of individual workmen, not only for the making or modification of contracts but in the matter of taking disciplinary action against one or more workmen and as regards all other disputes. In Bharat Iron Works v. Bhagubhai Balubbai Patel it was held that 'Collective bargaining, being the order of the day in the democratic social welfare State, legitimate trade union activities, which must shun all kinds of physical threats, coercion or violence, must march with a spirit of tolerance, understanding and grace in dealings on the part of the employer. Such activities can flow in healthy channel only on mutual cooperation between the employer and the employees and cannot be considered as irksome by the management in the best interests of its business. Dialogue with representatives of a union help striking a delicate balance in adjustments and settlement of various contentious claims and issues." These definitions only bring out the basic element in the concept i.e., civilized confrontation between employers and employees and the whole process is regulated by statutory provisions.

Types of Collective Bargaining Agreements in India Collective bargaining as it is practiced in India can be divided into three classes. First is, the bipartite agreement drawn up in voluntary negotiation between management and union. The second type is known as a settlement, while the third type of collective agreement is consent award. These are discussed below: 1.Bipartite Agreements: These are most important types of collective agreements because they represent a dynamic relationship that is evolving in establishment concerned without any pressure from outside. The bipartite agreements are drawn up in voluntary negotiation between management and union. Usually the agreement reached by the bipartite voluntarily has the same binding force as settlement reached in conciliation proceedings. The implementations of these types of agreements are also not a problem because both the parties feel confident of their ability to reach the agreement. 2.Settlements: It is tripartite in nature because usually it is reached by conciliation, i.e. it arises out of dispute referred to the appropriate labour department and the conciliation officer plays an important role in bringing about conciliation of the differing view points of the parties. And if during the process of conciliation, the conciliation officer feels that there is possibility of reaching a settlement, he withdraws himself from the scene. Then the parties are to finalise the terms of the agreement and should report back to conciliation officer within a specified time. But the forms of settlement are more limited in nature than bipartite voluntary agreements, because they strictly relate to the issues referred to the conciliation officer. 3.Consent Award: Here the negotiation takes place between the parties when the dispute is actually pending before one of the compulsory ad judicatory authorities and the agreement is incorporated to the authorities, award. Thus though the agreement is reached voluntarily between the parties, it becomes part of the binding award pronounced by an authority constituted for the purpose. The idea of national or industry-wide agreements and that too on a particular pattern may appear to be a more ideal system to active industrial relation through collective bargaining, but the experience of various countries shows that it is not possible to be dogmatic about the ideal type of collective bargaining, because it largely depends upon the background, traditions and local factors of a particular region or country. LAWS RELATING TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING IN INDIAAs discussed earlier, collective bargaining is a technique by which disputes of employment are resolved amicably, peacefully and voluntarily by settlement between labour unions and managements. The method of collective bargaining in resolving the Industrial dispute, while maintaining industrial peace has been recognized as the bed rock of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Under the provision of the Act, the settlement arrived at by process of collective bargaining with the employer has been given a statutory recognition under Section 18 of the Act. Under the Act two types of settlement have been recognised:

1. Settlement arrived in the course of conciliation proceeding before the authority. Such settlements not only bind the member of the signatory union but also non-members as well as all the present and future employees of the management.2. Settlement not arrived in the course of conciliation proceedings but signed independently by the parties to the settlement, binds only such members who are signatory or party to the settlement.

Section 19 of the Act prescribes the period of operation inter alia of such a settlement and envisage the continuation of the validity of such a settlement unless the same is not replaced by another set of settlement, while Section 29 prescribes the penalty for the breach of such a settlement. The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 provides for the appointment of Conciliation Officers, charged with the duty of mediation in promoting the settlement of industrial disputes. On a reference to the Conciliation Officer, a Conciliation Board is constituted consisting of representatives of employees and employer with the conciliation officer as the chairman. The memorandum of settlement duly signed by the conciliation officer is to go from one camp to the other and find out greatest common measure of agreement, to investigate the dispute and to do all such things as he thinks fit to arrive at a fair and amicable settlement of the dispute.[footnoteRef:5] [5: Royal Calcutta Golf Club Mazadoor Union v. State of west Bengal, AIR 1956 Cal 550.]

A settlement arrived at by agreement between the employer and the workmen otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceedings shall be binding on the parties to the agreement. A settlement comes into operation on such date as is binding on the parties to the agreement, and for such period as has been agreed upon. Dealing with the binding nature of settlement Chagla, J has observed that; Industrial Law takes no notice of any private settlement or agreement arrived at between parties in the course of industrial dispute. Such a private agreement belongs to the realm of contract, it may give rise to contractual rights; it has no sanctions in industrial law and industrial dispute does not end until a settlement is arrived at which has been given a binding effect under the provision of S.19 (2) and such settlement can be only arrived at when conciliation proceedings are held under S.12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.[footnoteRef:6] From this observation, it would be wrong to infer that a private settlement in respect of an industrial dispute does not end an industrial dispute. In this respect the following observation of chief Justice Chagala are relevant, But when parties do arrive at a settlement, the law gives to it a greater sanctity than it gives to an award and therefore , the industrial law does not contemplate any interference with the finality of a settlement and it compels the settlement to run on for the period mentioned in the settlement itself and neither party is permitted to challenge that settlement during its duration.[footnoteRef:7] [6: Poona Mazdoor Sabha v. G.K.Dhuta, AIR b1956. Bom. 743.] [7: Ibid]

PROBLEMS RELATING TO COLLECTIVE BARBAINING IN INDIAThe collective bargaining scene in India is not very encouraging. The major emphasis of both union and employers is to settle the disputes through adjudication rather than sorting out the issues among themselves. Whatever bargaining takes place, it is limited to large plants only. Smaller organizations generally do not prefer this form of handling the issues. As discussed in the previous chapter, several factors are responsible for this state of affairs. These are listed below: I. Due to the dominance of outsiders in trade unionism in the country, there is multiplicity of unions which are weak and unstable, and do not represent majority of the employees. Moreover, there are inter-union rivalries, which further hinder the process of collective bargaining between the labour and the management. II. Since most of the trade unions are having political affiliations, they continue to be dominated by politicians, who use the unions and their members to meet their political ends. III. There is a lack of definite procedure to determine which union is to be recognised to serve as a bargaining agent on behalf of the workers IV. In India, the law provides an easy access to adjudication. Under the Industrial Disputes Act, the parties to the dispute may request the Government to refer the matter to adjudication and the Government will constitute the adjudication machinery, i.e., labour court or industrial tribunal. Thus, the faith in the collective bargaining process is discouraged. V. There has been very close association between the trade unions and political parties. As a result, trade union movement has leaned towards political orientations rather than collective bargaining.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION The collective bargaining scene in India is not very encouraging. The major emphasis of both union and employers is to settle the disputes through adjudication rather than sorting out the issues among themselves. Whatever bargaining takes place, it is limited to large plants only. Smaller organizations generally do not prefer this form of handling the issues. As discussed in the previous chapter, several factors are responsible for this state of affairs. These are listed below: I. Due to the dominance of outsiders in trade unionism in the country, there is multiplicity of unions which are weak and unstable, and do not represent majority of the employees. Moreover, there are inter-union rivalries, which further hinder the process of collective bargaining between the labour and the management. II. Since most of the trade unions are having political affiliations, they continue to be dominated by politicians, who use the unions and their members to meet their political ends. III. There is a lack of definite procedure to determine which union is to be recognized to serve as a bargaining agent on behalf of the workers IV. In India, the law provides an easy access to adjudication. Under the Industrial Disputes Act, the parties to the dispute may request the Government to refer the matter to adjudication and the Government will constitute the adjudication machinery, i.e., labour court or industrial tribunal. Thus, the faith in the collective bargaining process is discouraged. V. There has been very close association between the trade unions and political parties. As a result, trade union movement has leaned towards political orientations rather than collective bargaining.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Books referred..1. Bhagoliwal, T.N., Economics of Labour& Industrial Relations, 1989, Sahitya Bhawan, Agra.1. Goswami, V.G., Labour and Industrial Law, 2004 Central Law Agency, Allahabad.1. Teller Ludwig, Labour Disputes and Collective Bargaining, Vol I, 1940 Barker Voorhis& co. INC New York.1. Coutinho,V.B, Strike in Industrial Conflict: A Critical and Comparitive Study,1993, 5th edn.1. Fred Witney et al; Labour Relations Law, 7th edn 1990.6) Boone, Louis E., and Kurtz, David L. (1999). Contemporary Business. Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.7)Davey, Harold W. (1972). Contemporary Collective Bargaining. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.8)Miernyk, William H. (1965). The Economics of Labor and Collective Bargaining. Boston: Heath.9)Voos, Paula B., ed. (1994). Contemporary Collective Bargaining in the Private Sector. Madison, WI: Industrial Relations Research Association.9)Wray, Ralph D., Luft, Roger L., and Highland, Patrick J. (1996). Fundamentals of Human Relations. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Educational Publishing.[Article by: PAULA DEA LEE]

Articles referred.1. Right to Strike : An Analysis, B.P.Rath and B.B.Das, IJIR 1999,pg 248-259.1. Perspectives On Collective Bargaining In India, LLJ, Vol 1, 2005 p.21-34 1. Strikes and Lock outs, Pankaj and Dharamveer Singh, Lab&IC, Vol 1,2005 pg12-21.Websites.http://www.tradeunionindia.org/miscellaneous/public_rights.htm.http://echo.ilo.org/pls/declaris/DECLARATIONWEB.DOWNLOAD_BLOB?Var_DocumentID=1655. http://www.unccr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/E.C.12.2002.12.En?Opendocument.(ILO )http //www.google.co.in/ www.indialaw.com www.lawsofindia.comBOOKS/JOURNALSInternational Labour Review, Vol. 139 (2000), No.1.G. B. Pai , Labour Law in India, Vol. I.Indian Bar Review, Vol.29, (2002),pp 1-4Labour Law Journal, Vol I (2005).