Terminate contract worker "a" ( work under contract labour act) due to liqueur use and collecting money from others workers during work and also left the work place when he desire.
Before terminate verbally warned him various time, ones suspend for six w/d from duty then after he had submitted a undertaking regarding not to repeat the same again, if found take against me.
Even though he had not stopped his nature, then we have terminate to pay his dues with us and also settle his pf.
Now after after about one year he make a complain under sec 10 of id act at the office of alc regarding his retrenchment benefit and regularization the job, noted here he had worked more than 240 days with us.
Please advice whether he is entitle to get retrenchment benefit and to continue the job.
Mahesh prasad gupta
From India, Delhi
3Before terminate verbally warned him various time, ones suspend for six w/d from duty then after he had submitted a undertaking regarding not to repeat the same again, if found take against me.
Even though he had not stopped his nature, then we have terminate to pay his dues with us and also settle his pf.
Now after after about one year he make a complain under sec 10 of id act at the office of alc regarding his retrenchment benefit and regularization the job, noted here he had worked more than 240 days with us.
Please advice whether he is entitle to get retrenchment benefit and to continue the job.
Mahesh prasad gupta
From India, Delhi
Dear Mahesh,
First Contract labour is not your employee, If he has completed 240 days he will be claim for permanency to the contractor not to you . If your company engage him in periniel types of work which is doing by your permanent worker in that case he will be claim for permanency to your company.
As you told he has work more than 240 days,he will be eligible for retrenchment benefit under ID Act.
Regards
Sacheein
From India, Mumbai
First Contract labour is not your employee, If he has completed 240 days he will be claim for permanency to the contractor not to you . If your company engage him in periniel types of work which is doing by your permanent worker in that case he will be claim for permanency to your company.
As you told he has work more than 240 days,he will be eligible for retrenchment benefit under ID Act.
Regards
Sacheein
From India, Mumbai
Dear Mahesh
May also see ..
https://www.citehr.com/459762-worker...demanding.html
Regards
Shailesh Parikh
Vadodara, Gujarat
99 98 97 10 65
From India, Mumbai
May also see ..
https://www.citehr.com/459762-worker...demanding.html
Regards
Shailesh Parikh
Vadodara, Gujarat
99 98 97 10 65
From India, Mumbai
dear mr gupta
There are many aspects to this issue. Was the contractor having licence and whether your establishment was rregd with the authorities? What was the nature of work being performed by the contractual employees and who was having control and supervision over them? Who was disbursing their salaries and who has done the full and final payment, so also as you have stated he was issued warnings, who has issued them. See, if all these questions point out to be the contractors employees, purely, there is no need for worry. So far as the contract is not sham and merely camouflage. There are a catena of decisions that contractual employees absorption is ruled out.
From India, Pune
There are many aspects to this issue. Was the contractor having licence and whether your establishment was rregd with the authorities? What was the nature of work being performed by the contractual employees and who was having control and supervision over them? Who was disbursing their salaries and who has done the full and final payment, so also as you have stated he was issued warnings, who has issued them. See, if all these questions point out to be the contractors employees, purely, there is no need for worry. So far as the contract is not sham and merely camouflage. There are a catena of decisions that contractual employees absorption is ruled out.
From India, Pune
The answer will depend on how he was terminated.
If you have terminated him on account of misconduct, with proper enquiry and following the rules, then he will not be entitled to retrenchment benefits. If you have not completed the formalities, then he has an upper hand
From India, Mumbai
If you have terminated him on account of misconduct, with proper enquiry and following the rules, then he will not be entitled to retrenchment benefits. If you have not completed the formalities, then he has an upper hand
From India, Mumbai
For any legal dispute, the first and foremast point comes for discussion is "Employee-Employer" relation. A Contract employee who has been in the rolls of a contractor under supervision and control of the contractor, cannot be treated as an employee of a Principal Employer, just because he is engaged in the premises of PE.
This point is vital in many cases. For any issue, such as enforcement of PF / ESI contribution, implementation of any Acts / Laws, this will be the yardstick.
The way in which you narated the incident, looks like you (your organization) reprimanded him earlier, warned him, suspended him and finally terminated him. Though you had no business to interact with this fellow (supposed to be the scope of the contractor), you exercised your power of "supervision and control" and acted as if you were his employer. Hence this is construed as a "Sham" contract; in this case, the so called "contractorship" is null and void and you will certainly be the employer of this person.
Therefore, better be prepared for any eventualities.
V. Balaji
From India, Madras
This point is vital in many cases. For any issue, such as enforcement of PF / ESI contribution, implementation of any Acts / Laws, this will be the yardstick.
The way in which you narated the incident, looks like you (your organization) reprimanded him earlier, warned him, suspended him and finally terminated him. Though you had no business to interact with this fellow (supposed to be the scope of the contractor), you exercised your power of "supervision and control" and acted as if you were his employer. Hence this is construed as a "Sham" contract; in this case, the so called "contractorship" is null and void and you will certainly be the employer of this person.
Therefore, better be prepared for any eventualities.
V. Balaji
From India, Madras
Hai, here i would like to inform to all against the topic mentioned by us. here i am "X" a contractor of PE "Y" and the "Z" is worker worked under a subcontractor is "A".
PE (Y) >> Contractor ( X) >> Subcontractor (A) >>> worker (Z)
in the above situation, please advice me for our further course of action against the above case mentioned earlier.
MAHESH PRASAD GUPTA
From India, Delhi
PE (Y) >> Contractor ( X) >> Subcontractor (A) >>> worker (Z)
in the above situation, please advice me for our further course of action against the above case mentioned earlier.
MAHESH PRASAD GUPTA
From India, Delhi
You will confuse us further. Can you please restate the full question will all details ?
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
We are a contractor "X" carrying work of PE "Y" and we have executing the work through a subcontractor "Z" but all the statutory compliance maintaining by us i.e. "X". Now one of the worker "A" working under a subcontractor "Z" always using liqueur and collecting money from others workers during the work site and also left the work place when he desire.
Before terminate verbally warned him various time, ones suspend for six w/d from duty then after he had submitted a written undertaking regarding not to repeat the same again, if found take action against me, all these action done through "X".
Even though he had not stopped his nature, then we have terminate him and release to pay his dues with us and also settle his PF.
Now after after about one year he make a complain under sec 10 of id act at the office of alc regarding his retrenchment benefit and regularization the job, noted here he had worked more than 240 days with us.
Please advice whether he is entitle to get retrenchment benefit and to continue the job.
MAHESH PRASAD GUPTA
From India, Delhi
Before terminate verbally warned him various time, ones suspend for six w/d from duty then after he had submitted a written undertaking regarding not to repeat the same again, if found take action against me, all these action done through "X".
Even though he had not stopped his nature, then we have terminate him and release to pay his dues with us and also settle his PF.
Now after after about one year he make a complain under sec 10 of id act at the office of alc regarding his retrenchment benefit and regularization the job, noted here he had worked more than 240 days with us.
Please advice whether he is entitle to get retrenchment benefit and to continue the job.
MAHESH PRASAD GUPTA
From India, Delhi
Ok, what you need to see first is whether there are any records of the termination / absconding and of the warnings that were given. I assume you have found him to be working at some other place in the meanwhile. You will need to show records to convince the labour officer that he left on his own or was terminated due to misconduct (drinking while on duty will qualify). If possible you need to show details of warning and domestic enquiry conducted
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Full n final settlement.doc
Full & final.xls