Dear Mr. Gurjar,
The Constitution of India prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This is guaranteed as a Fundamental Right to the Citizens of India. Article 14 and Article 15 of the Constitution specifically address this.
Article 14 of the Constitution of India states, "14. The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India."
Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India states, "15. (1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them."
Furthermore, the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution elaborate further in Article 39, which states, "The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing - (a) that the citizens, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood; .........."
You cannot have an explicitly stated policy that negatively discriminates against women being recruited into an organization.
Regards,
Raju Bhatnagar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
73The Constitution of India prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This is guaranteed as a Fundamental Right to the Citizens of India. Article 14 and Article 15 of the Constitution specifically address this.
Article 14 of the Constitution of India states, "14. The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India."
Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India states, "15. (1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them."
Furthermore, the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution elaborate further in Article 39, which states, "The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing - (a) that the citizens, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood; .........."
You cannot have an explicitly stated policy that negatively discriminates against women being recruited into an organization.
Regards,
Raju Bhatnagar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Raju, That is a right conferred by the state. Not a private agency. Please recheck the same. Reg,
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Bodhisutra,
I fully agree with you. However, your response indicates that you aren't understanding the question correctly. You are talking about ERA, which applies only if you have male and female employees. We are talking about not having any employees as a policy, not as a practice.
There are many companies that don't employ women as a practice. So, the question is slightly different. As for the cost of lawsuits, I think you need to research the cost of that before you comment.
Regards,
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I fully agree with you. However, your response indicates that you aren't understanding the question correctly. You are talking about ERA, which applies only if you have male and female employees. We are talking about not having any employees as a policy, not as a practice.
There are many companies that don't employ women as a practice. So, the question is slightly different. As for the cost of lawsuits, I think you need to research the cost of that before you comment.
Regards,
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Gurjar,
I am not sure I understand your comment about this being a right conferred by the state and not by a private agency. The Constitution applies to both state and private agencies. It is, in fact, a right that is conferred on a citizen. Maybe if you elaborate on the response you have posted, I could offer a more specific response.
Regards,
Raju Bhatnagar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am not sure I understand your comment about this being a right conferred by the state and not by a private agency. The Constitution applies to both state and private agencies. It is, in fact, a right that is conferred on a citizen. Maybe if you elaborate on the response you have posted, I could offer a more specific response.
Regards,
Raju Bhatnagar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whether policy, practice, or any other guise - you cannot make any discrimination against women during recruitment, irrespective of the existing gender mix (or lack of it) of your current workforce or the color of the walls in your office.
Reproducing Section 5 (Note that it does not exclude any policy, practice, gender mix, or whatever we can dream of):
"5. No discrimination to be made while recruiting men and women workers. -- On and from the commencement of this Act, no employer shall, while making recruitment for the same work or work of a similar nature, or in any condition of service subsequent to recruitment such as promotions, training, or transfer, make any discrimination against women except where the employment of women in such work is prohibited or restricted by or under any law for the time being in force:
Provided that the provisions of this section shall not affect any priority or reservation for scheduled castes or scheduled tribes, ex-servicemen, retrenched employees of any other class, or category of persons in the matter of recruitment to the posts in an establishment or employment."
Source: http://labour.gov.in [<link fixed>]
Let us not get into what you or I should research before posting a comment. Let us leave that to admins/mods.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Reproducing Section 5 (Note that it does not exclude any policy, practice, gender mix, or whatever we can dream of):
"5. No discrimination to be made while recruiting men and women workers. -- On and from the commencement of this Act, no employer shall, while making recruitment for the same work or work of a similar nature, or in any condition of service subsequent to recruitment such as promotions, training, or transfer, make any discrimination against women except where the employment of women in such work is prohibited or restricted by or under any law for the time being in force:
Provided that the provisions of this section shall not affect any priority or reservation for scheduled castes or scheduled tribes, ex-servicemen, retrenched employees of any other class, or category of persons in the matter of recruitment to the posts in an establishment or employment."
Source: http://labour.gov.in [<link fixed>]
Let us not get into what you or I should research before posting a comment. Let us leave that to admins/mods.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Constitution Art 14 and 15 address discrimination by the "State," meaning the government cannot discriminate. However, these articles do not specify whether private entities can discriminate or not.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear NGurjarji,
We are in the 21st century, and thoughts on women's employment seem to be stuck in the medieval period, similar to the practice of sati. The belief that if a widow lives, there will be social problems perpetuates the practice of sati.
Thank you.
From India, Bhiwani
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We are in the 21st century, and thoughts on women's employment seem to be stuck in the medieval period, similar to the practice of sati. The belief that if a widow lives, there will be social problems perpetuates the practice of sati.
Thank you.
From India, Bhiwani
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear all,
I am not an HR person or an expert on the laws in India (as I have been based in the UK for the past 4 decades). I am rather surprised that such a question was raised without giving sufficient background, and people are airing their views without asking for a specific scenario.
In the UK, discrimination based on sex, among other things, is illegal. I searched the web and have provided a couple of links:
Men only: Bristol recruitment agency in trouble for sexual discrimination | Bristol Post (Search On Cite | Search On Google)
http://equalityhumanrights.com
India is also a signatory to Human Rights Conventions, and I presume it also will legislate specific laws if it has not done so. I read an interesting case at Arati Durgaram Gavandi vs Mrs. Shakuntala A. Mudbidri For ... on 6 October, 2008 that sheds light on Sexual Discrimination at the workplace. We Indians are meek when it comes to using the law to establish our rights, which is slowly changing for the good.
Please forgive me if I have touched on anyone's sensitive nerves.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am not an HR person or an expert on the laws in India (as I have been based in the UK for the past 4 decades). I am rather surprised that such a question was raised without giving sufficient background, and people are airing their views without asking for a specific scenario.
In the UK, discrimination based on sex, among other things, is illegal. I searched the web and have provided a couple of links:
Men only: Bristol recruitment agency in trouble for sexual discrimination | Bristol Post (Search On Cite | Search On Google)
http://equalityhumanrights.com
India is also a signatory to Human Rights Conventions, and I presume it also will legislate specific laws if it has not done so. I read an interesting case at Arati Durgaram Gavandi vs Mrs. Shakuntala A. Mudbidri For ... on 6 October, 2008 that sheds light on Sexual Discrimination at the workplace. We Indians are meek when it comes to using the law to establish our rights, which is slowly changing for the good.
Please forgive me if I have touched on anyone's sensitive nerves.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friends,
I am afraid that the discussion may tend to falter due to the arguments and counter-arguments being exchanged by the Questioner and other learned members with a legal perspective on the matter, and at times among the same group of individuals with legal insight themselves. Bodhisutra, whose argument strongly relies on the provisions of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, finds Raju Bhatnagar's argument originating from the Constitution of India untenable and therefore unacceptable. The objective of the ER Act 1976, as stated in its preamble, is to ensure the payment of equal remuneration to men and women and to prevent discrimination based on sex against women in employment matters and related issues. While Bodhisutra's argument based on Section 5 of the Act is valid and commendable, unfortunately, the Central Government has not yet issued any notifications regarding the establishments or employments in which the extent of women's employment can be recommended by the Advisory Committee under Section 6(1).
Regarding Bhatnagar's argument rooted in Constitutional provisions, it is a well-known fact that no writ can be filed against a private individual not entrusted with any public duty. Therefore, the appropriate approach to the question, in my opinion, should be based on social norms. The underlying question is whether a policy explicitly stating "No female employees" for the organization would be generally acceptable. When Walt Whitman initially wrote a poem about love (apologies for forgetting the title), the line he first penned was "We, man and woman, let us love one another or die." Upon deeper contemplation of the message he intended to convey, he later revised the line to "We, man and woman, let us love one another AND die." Thus, I reiterate my previous point that such a policy is entirely undesirable even in the absence of legal restrictions.
Thank you.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am afraid that the discussion may tend to falter due to the arguments and counter-arguments being exchanged by the Questioner and other learned members with a legal perspective on the matter, and at times among the same group of individuals with legal insight themselves. Bodhisutra, whose argument strongly relies on the provisions of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, finds Raju Bhatnagar's argument originating from the Constitution of India untenable and therefore unacceptable. The objective of the ER Act 1976, as stated in its preamble, is to ensure the payment of equal remuneration to men and women and to prevent discrimination based on sex against women in employment matters and related issues. While Bodhisutra's argument based on Section 5 of the Act is valid and commendable, unfortunately, the Central Government has not yet issued any notifications regarding the establishments or employments in which the extent of women's employment can be recommended by the Advisory Committee under Section 6(1).
Regarding Bhatnagar's argument rooted in Constitutional provisions, it is a well-known fact that no writ can be filed against a private individual not entrusted with any public duty. Therefore, the appropriate approach to the question, in my opinion, should be based on social norms. The underlying question is whether a policy explicitly stating "No female employees" for the organization would be generally acceptable. When Walt Whitman initially wrote a poem about love (apologies for forgetting the title), the line he first penned was "We, man and woman, let us love one another or die." Upon deeper contemplation of the message he intended to convey, he later revised the line to "We, man and woman, let us love one another AND die." Thus, I reiterate my previous point that such a policy is entirely undesirable even in the absence of legal restrictions.
Thank you.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No sensitive nerves were touched by Simhan. It was just a legal clarification, and Umakanthan has provided the clarification. Thanks a lot.
I am not a supporter of this myself, but as a management consultant, I need to understand if my interpretation of the law is correct. Hence, the question.
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am not a supporter of this myself, but as a management consultant, I need to understand if my interpretation of the law is correct. Hence, the question.
From United States, Daphne
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Employee reference policy.doc