Dear Seniors,
As you know, the Labour Ministry has proposed a minimum monthly income of Rs. 10,000 for contract workers. Please give your views on - Will fixing a minimum wage for contract labor resolve labor market issues?
Regards,
Gaurav
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
4As you know, the Labour Ministry has proposed a minimum monthly income of Rs. 10,000 for contract workers. Please give your views on - Will fixing a minimum wage for contract labor resolve labor market issues?
Regards,
Gaurav
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Gaurav,
In the first place, yours is a thought-provoking question as it presupposes a firm conviction that the fixation of minimum wages exclusively for contract labour and its periodical revision alone would neither solve the problems of contract labour as a less-privileged class of labour nor eradicate the menace of contract labour as a system of indirect employment.
If any activity of business, trade, commerce, manufacture or analogous thereto is perennial in nature, it requires a labour force for hire that has the feature of regularity in terms of attendance, working hours, leave and holidays, payment of wages, methods of work, control and supervision by the employer, tenure of employment, etc., thus creating a direct and implicit nexus or a long-lasting relationship between the employer and the persons employed which is otherwise called the contract of service. In short, this is what is called the system of direct labour that is employed on the core activity of the establishment. Still, there may be certain other activities which are incidental to the main activity and last for a limited duration of time involving no skill or altogether different types of skill and hence no supervision of the employer. When some people are engaged in such activities, that is called casual employment, which is only ad hoc. However, when such incidental activities require more people and considerably last longer, in order to ensure their timely mobilization and supervision, the assignment is given to a third person simply in terms of the results to be produced by means of a time-bound agreement or contract, and the labour engaged therein is called contract labour, which is nothing but a form of indirect employment just because of the presence of an intermediary. Thus, the contract labour have two employers, i.e., the immediate employer who is the contractor and the principal employer for whom the contract labour have to work. So far so good.
But the real problem arises when the contract labour is shifted to the core activities of the establishment purely for reasons of economy, higher bargaining power of the regular workforce because of their unionization, flexibility of employment in tune with market conditions, etc. Though the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 has stringent provisions, the lack of political will has resulted in its diluted enforcement. The difference between core and incidental activities is practically not taken into consideration nowadays in the engagement of contract labour. Engaging contract labour in any activity other than those prohibited under section 10 of the Act has become the normal practice.
In this context, whether the proposal to raise the minimum wages of the contract labour to Rs.10,000-00 will serve any useful purpose seems to me doubtful. Already, minimum wages are fixed for scheduled employment-cum-post wise without any distinction as to the nature of employment such as permanent, temporary, etc. Therefore, contract labour are also entitled to the minimum wages in force. If the minimum wages are fixed exclusively for contract labour as a distinct class without reference to the job done by them, it may be lesser than the rate fixed for a particular job in the establishment or industry. So, let's wait and see the notification.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the first place, yours is a thought-provoking question as it presupposes a firm conviction that the fixation of minimum wages exclusively for contract labour and its periodical revision alone would neither solve the problems of contract labour as a less-privileged class of labour nor eradicate the menace of contract labour as a system of indirect employment.
If any activity of business, trade, commerce, manufacture or analogous thereto is perennial in nature, it requires a labour force for hire that has the feature of regularity in terms of attendance, working hours, leave and holidays, payment of wages, methods of work, control and supervision by the employer, tenure of employment, etc., thus creating a direct and implicit nexus or a long-lasting relationship between the employer and the persons employed which is otherwise called the contract of service. In short, this is what is called the system of direct labour that is employed on the core activity of the establishment. Still, there may be certain other activities which are incidental to the main activity and last for a limited duration of time involving no skill or altogether different types of skill and hence no supervision of the employer. When some people are engaged in such activities, that is called casual employment, which is only ad hoc. However, when such incidental activities require more people and considerably last longer, in order to ensure their timely mobilization and supervision, the assignment is given to a third person simply in terms of the results to be produced by means of a time-bound agreement or contract, and the labour engaged therein is called contract labour, which is nothing but a form of indirect employment just because of the presence of an intermediary. Thus, the contract labour have two employers, i.e., the immediate employer who is the contractor and the principal employer for whom the contract labour have to work. So far so good.
But the real problem arises when the contract labour is shifted to the core activities of the establishment purely for reasons of economy, higher bargaining power of the regular workforce because of their unionization, flexibility of employment in tune with market conditions, etc. Though the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 has stringent provisions, the lack of political will has resulted in its diluted enforcement. The difference between core and incidental activities is practically not taken into consideration nowadays in the engagement of contract labour. Engaging contract labour in any activity other than those prohibited under section 10 of the Act has become the normal practice.
In this context, whether the proposal to raise the minimum wages of the contract labour to Rs.10,000-00 will serve any useful purpose seems to me doubtful. Already, minimum wages are fixed for scheduled employment-cum-post wise without any distinction as to the nature of employment such as permanent, temporary, etc. Therefore, contract labour are also entitled to the minimum wages in force. If the minimum wages are fixed exclusively for contract labour as a distinct class without reference to the job done by them, it may be lesser than the rate fixed for a particular job in the establishment or industry. So, let's wait and see the notification.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Minimum wages are fixed for each kind of work and each scheduled employment. There is no scheduled employment called contract labour. Suppose that all contract workers are brought under one scheduled employment, viz., contract labour, and fix the minimum wages for that employment as Rs. 10,000 per month, that will be the wages payable to all who are hired through agencies or contractors.
Now we have separate minimum wages based on work, such as minimum wages for security guards, minimum wages for housekeeping staff, etc. If the proposed amendment to the CLRA Act is enforced, then there can be a chance that the housekeeping staff engaged through a contractor will get wages of Rs. 10,000 and those doing the same work but employed directly by the (principal) employer will get, say, Rs. 7,000, being the minimum wages applicable to housekeeping staff. I don't think that this is fair.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Now we have separate minimum wages based on work, such as minimum wages for security guards, minimum wages for housekeeping staff, etc. If the proposed amendment to the CLRA Act is enforced, then there can be a chance that the housekeeping staff engaged through a contractor will get wages of Rs. 10,000 and those doing the same work but employed directly by the (principal) employer will get, say, Rs. 7,000, being the minimum wages applicable to housekeeping staff. I don't think that this is fair.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with the comments of both Shri Umakanthan & TK Madhu Sirs. In fact, if the Govt. were to fix the minimum wages of Rs. 10,000 for casual labor engaged through the Contractor, there are hundreds of direct employees in several companies who will be drawing less than Rs. 10,000 and there will be heartburn. Even with periodical increments/revision, there are many unskilled to skilled employees drawing Rs. 5,000-7,000. A thorough scrutiny of wages/salaries, benefits given to all types of employees has to be reviewed before fixing only for contract workers.
C. Neyimkhan 5.5.16.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
C. Neyimkhan 5.5.16.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Kindly can anyone confirm if any objections has been raised against the said contract labor minimum wage notification
From India, Bhilai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bhilai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
Mr. T.K. Madhu and Mr. Umakanthan have well-explained the fixation of wages for contractor labor at a minimum of Rs. 10,000/-. In fact, the wages in some job categories mentioned in the notification are higher. The amount of ten thousand rupees is specifically for unskilled (Central Labor) workers only. Up to now, no objections have been raised by any of the trade unions. However, the state government may face issues if the trade unions demand to extend the same to State-level Contract Labor.
Regards, PBS KUMAR
From India, Kakinada
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. T.K. Madhu and Mr. Umakanthan have well-explained the fixation of wages for contractor labor at a minimum of Rs. 10,000/-. In fact, the wages in some job categories mentioned in the notification are higher. The amount of ten thousand rupees is specifically for unskilled (Central Labor) workers only. Up to now, no objections have been raised by any of the trade unions. However, the state government may face issues if the trade unions demand to extend the same to State-level Contract Labor.
Regards, PBS KUMAR
From India, Kakinada
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi, I need Karnataka minimum wages for 2016-17 for construction workers. Can anybody provide this for me. Thanks in anticipation Maqsood Technoart Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My understanding is that the proposal is not to make it applicable to central level employees but to amend the CLRA (Central) Rules so that the same will cover all the states. Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Enforcement of statutory wages rather than fixing wages for contract labor is more necessary. The online payment method should be strictly enforced in place of direct payment so that contract labor receives the same amount as the principal employer is paying to the contractors.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The government is revising wages, bonuses, PF, and ESI, as well as minimum wages for the working class from time to time. However, many organizations are not following these revisions, which is a well-known fact.
The government seems to show a lack of concern for the strict implementation of these measures. Resorting to courts and authorities is a cumbersome process, often resulting in delayed justice. Then, one wonders why the government is making these revisions if their enforcement is lacking.
The government should ensure that wages, bonuses, and minimum wages are paid through banks, with payments checked by officials every month. Dispute resolution processes should be expedited (within 3 months).
If sincere efforts are made, it would greatly benefit the working class by improving productivity, reducing disputes, and boosting the economy. This would lead to industrial peace and prosperity, making the working class happier. Otherwise, it would all be in vain.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The government seems to show a lack of concern for the strict implementation of these measures. Resorting to courts and authorities is a cumbersome process, often resulting in delayed justice. Then, one wonders why the government is making these revisions if their enforcement is lacking.
The government should ensure that wages, bonuses, and minimum wages are paid through banks, with payments checked by officials every month. Dispute resolution processes should be expedited (within 3 months).
If sincere efforts are made, it would greatly benefit the working class by improving productivity, reducing disputes, and boosting the economy. This would lead to industrial peace and prosperity, making the working class happier. Otherwise, it would all be in vain.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.