By Eashaan Agrawal
---
Labour laws in India have been enacted with the aim of providing some rights and benefits to the people engaged employed and in the case of violation of those legal rights, an appropriate remedy. In the post-pandemic world, there has been a relaxation of the labour laws in some states to spur economic growth[1]. It is in this situation it often becomes important to know who are the beneficiaries of such labour laws.
In India,
we have many laws to protect the rights of those employed. Such legislations
include the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the Trade Unions Act, 1926, the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, the Factories Act, 1948 among many other
laws. These legislations often have different objectives sought to be achieved.
To ensure this, these legislations define the beneficiaries, to whom the
protection of the concerned legislation will be granted and thus create a
distinction within those employed in different workplaces. Since ‘Labour’ is a
subject under the concurrent list, both the state governments and the central
government have the power to make laws. Thus, apart from the above-mentioned
central legislation, states also have enacted their respective labour laws,
including the Shops and Establishment Acts of
the relevant states.
Categorisation of Employees
According to the various labour laws, there are different categories of
people who are the employees, the workmen, the workers, and the managers.
The term ‘employee’ has been defined in the
Employees’ Provident Funds And Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952
under section 2(f) as any person who is employed
1)
For wages,
2)
In any kind of work, manual or
otherwise, in or in connection with the work of an establishment, and
3)
Gets his wages directly or
indirectly from the employer.
This is
the widest definition under the labour law and thus includes other categories
of people including the workers, the workmen, and the managers. However, for
the sake of understanding, employees in this article will have the common
meaning of a person being employed by someone.
The term ‘worker’ has been
defined in the Factories Act 1948
under Section 2(l)[2]. According to it, a person
has to meet the following conditions to be called a worker.
1)
Employed, with or without
knowledge of the principal employer,
2)
Either directly or through
a contractor or agency,
3)
For remuneration or not,
4)
Should be employed in
either manufacturing process, or in cleaning any part of the machinery or
premises used for a manufacturing process, or in any other kind of work incidental
to, or connected with, the manufacturing process, or the subject of the
manufacturing process, and
5) Should not be a part of the armed forces of the Union.
The term ‘workman’
has been defined in the Industrial
Disputes Act 1947 under section 2(s). According to it, a person will
be qualified to be a workman if he meets the following criteria:
1) The person should be employed in any industry, he might be an
apprentice;
2) The person should be engaged in any unskilled, skilled,
technical, operational, clerical or supervisory work;
3) Employment should be for the purpose of hire or reward;
4) The terms of employment can express or implied;
5) Further, to claim the benefit of this Act the person should
be in a dispute;
6) Therfore, this also includes a person who has been dismissed,
discharged, or retrenched in connection with a dispute or as a consequence of which
a dispute has arisen.
The Act specifically excludes people from the armed forces,
the police service, those employed in a managerial
or administrative capacity and those who are in supervisory capacity and drawing
wages exceeding Rs. 10,000.
The term ‘manager’
therefore refers to those people employed in an organisation who are in a
supervisory capacity or have some authority over the workers, workmen,
employees, or anyone else working in the organisation (that is, other
managers). The term is also sometimes used to refer to those people working in
an organisation who do not strictly fall under any of the other categories.
As we can see, the Acts seem to distinguish between a worker,
a workman, and a manger. In fact, the protection in most cases is granted only
to the former two and not those engaged in managerial work. Further, we can see
that while there has been some attempt at creating a distinction there still
remains uncertainty on who is a manager and there is a need for some concrete
definition of the same.
Companies often misuse this ambiguity to categorise workmen
bringing disputes, particularly related to dismissal, as managers by arguing
that they had some kind of supervisory authority or by showing that they earned
more than Rs. 10,000 (while this should ideally be based on only the basic
wage, some companies include all other elements of the total cost to the
company to reflect a higher earning). While the labour courts do conduct
investigations to prevent such misuse, the law should certainly be amended to
bring in statutory clarity. This will help avoid excessive litigation and also
bring more clarity to the employees about their rights and entitlements.
Contractual
Liability
The statutes override the contract entered into between the
parties and thus, in case of restriction of the right of the employee, the
employee can take legal actions. The contract can be written or oral; express
or implied and thus cover a vast range of employer-employee relations. Also, in
case the person is not covered by the statute, like in the case of a manager,
the terms of the contract will be considered as the authority insofar as the
rights of the employee is concerned.
Further, since the employment contracts are subject to the
statutes, the provisions beneficial to the employee are considered as implied
in the contract. Such terms include payment of wages, statutory bonuses,
gratuity payments and mandatory social security contributions.
---
Eashaan is a 2nd year law student at National Law University Delhi. A voracious reader, he loves to travel to new places and experience the culture of different places. His interests include Constitutional Law, Contracts and Law of Crimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment