i am running a small firm with negligible business.no registers maintained.no appointment letter.only one employee.can recieving letters(from village or lic premium) by employee on office address establish employee employer relationship.can bearer cheques in employee name be given off as loan to a person defying employee relationship.are witnesses allowed
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Hello, I have not understood "negligible business". We need to know not only the nature of your business but also the number of employees (or people who work at your establishment/elsewhere for you) who you do want to be treated as your employees. After you provide the desired information only it will be possible to provide a valid response. But, if your operations are at a level that has started to cause worries on this count of employer-employee relations or of aplicability, I appeal to you to look at these people at partners in your progress and treat them appropriately. On a very general level and in the absence of relevant information with me, I will only say that often and in many acts the concept of "deemed terms & conditions of employment" is recognised. Watch your step. Be kind to these people. Be a good corporate citizen by complying with all applicable laws and your business will flourish even more! Would you kindly describe your situation a little more elaborately so that we may be able to help you better through the forum? Regards samvedan July 6, 2008 --------------------------------------
From India, Pune
315From India, Pune
i had one employee in my office.the firm registered is filing nil sales tax returns for the last 3 years.no appointment letter is given or any registers are maintained.EMPLOYEE HAS SENT A LEGAL NOTICE THROUGH LABOUR OFFICE THAT HE WAS WORKING AS EMPLOYEE WITH US FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS,NOT SURE OF WHICH 3 DIFFERENT FIRMS ON OUR OFFICE ADDRESS ,DRAWING 2,500 MONTHLY SALARY.HE CLAIMS THAT WE HAVE MADE HIM SIGN FAKE VOUCHERS/BLANK PAPERS,ETC AND HAVE THROWN HIM OUT WITHOUT PAYING HIS ARREARS. HE HAD BEEN COMING TO OUR OFFICE AS A JHALLI WORKER(TO GATHER DELIVERY CHALLANS TO BE GIVEN TO TRANSPORTERS KEEPING HIS COMMISSION UNDER FREIGHT CHARGES.HE WAS PROBABLY DOING THE SAME WITH MANY OTHER TRADERS.AT TIMES OF RAIN,HEAT,ETC HE USED TO SIT AROUND OUR OFFICE AND SOME TIMES STAYED OVERNITE IN A SEPARATE ROOM WITH US.WE ALLOWED SO FOR OUR SECURITY PURPOSE.IN THE TIME BEING HE WAS GETTING LETTERS FROM LIC,VILLAGERS ETC DELIVERED AT OUR OFFICE WHICH WE DID NOT OBJECT .HE HAS SOME RELATIVES WORKING AROUND WHO ARE READY TO GIVE THEIR STATEMENTS IN COURT AS WITNESS. OUT OF 3 FIRMS STATED BY EMPLOYEE,1 FIRM IS NOT OPERATING FROM THAT ADDRESS,HAVING TURNOVER OF 1-2 LAC. 2ND FIRM IS AN HUF FIRM WHERE NO TRADING TAKES PLACE ,BUT HAS A SAVING ACCOUNT FROM THE OFFICE ADDRESS WHERE SOME BEARER GHEQUES WERE ISSUED TO HIM FOR LOAN FORWARDED TO HIM OR TO WITHDRAW FOR OUR PERSONAL PURPOSES. 3RD FIRM IS FILING NIL SALES TAX RETURNS FOR LAST 3 YEARS. NO APPOINTMENT LETTER IS ISSUED.NO RECORDS ARE MAINTAINED. HE CAME SOME 18 YEARS BACK,THEN VANISHED ,NOW COMING FOR THE LAST 6-7 YEARS. WE WERE READY TO PAY HIM SOME COMPENSATION TO AVOID LEGAL PROCEDURES,BUT HE CLAIMS HIGH COMPENSATION OF AROUND 35,000.PL ADVICE URGENTLY WITH RESPECT TO DELHI LABOUR LAW/INDUSTRIAL ACT DISPUTE 1. HOW MUCH SHOULD I PAY AS SETTLEMENT CHARGES? 2. HOW MUCH CAN THE LABOUR OFFICE ,LABOUR COURT,DEEMED EMPLOYEE ,LABOUR OFFICER,INSPECTOR,ETC ASK ME TO PAY UP? 3. HOW STRONG IS MY CASE?
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Dear Mr. Azad, From your post, what I have understood that you have kept that guy on the part time basis for just carrying the Challans. Also he is a carrying that work for the other Traders also. You can easily gather the proof of the same and mentioned that he is not a permanent employee of my firm. Now comes the question that what he has mentioned in his writ petition filed with the labour department, as your reply will entirely be depending upon the writ petition filed by that Individual.
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Hello, On the facts stated it is clear to me that he is NOT in, and was never in, your employment. To me, he is not even a part time employee. He was a "contractor" who simply visited the establishment to collect some papers for dlivery to the stated people even if this was done daily. What you are facing is a typical old trick played by some out of work union leaders (joining hands with some officials from the labour department) to show the fear of law and authorities to coerce an employer in succumbing by either granting employment with some compensation to the complainant or by making a financial settlement (where both get a "share in the pie") The way the dispute will be processed by the authorities will go on the following lines. 1. You will be called many times to Labour Commossioner's office and you may be persuaded ro even brow-beaten to reach a "settlement". You should not succumb. 2. After a few visits, the matter may be admitted in "conciliation" as per the Industrial Disputes Act and a few more meetings where you will be told that once the matter goes to the court, you may have to pay heavily and therefore you might as well "settle". You should not succumb. This conciliation stage is a formal stage in dispute processing where the outcome can only be a compromise or a reference to a court for judicial determination of the dispute. 3. If you remain firm the authorities will have no choice but to refer the matter to a court as said above. If they do that, they lose all initiative in the matter and now it will be a battle between the lawyers before the court. This is most convenient to you now. Your time is not wasted and the money you may have to spend will be on lawyers and not on the bandicoots who were attempting to fleece you. Also, the disputant has to reckon with the reality of lawyers charges. So far his advisors helped him, perhaps gratis, in the hope making substantial money (bu their standards) through a compromise. I am strongly in favour of this approach as the basic principle in judicial determination is that one who alleges has to prove the allegation. If the workman has claimed/alleged that he was your workman, then he has to prove it. If the facts are against him, you have nothing to worry. Finally after having said all this, if you desire to compromise to avoid further entanglement and are willing to spend some money, you may do so but please engage services of a good labour advocate to ensure the documentation that will hav to be generated will be fool-proof and do not compromise before the matter is referred to a court for judicial determination.. I hope you query is answered. Cheer up, this a routine matter. Regards samvedan July 7, 2008 -------------------------
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
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.
SBT Vs Asst. Labour Commissioner- Gratuity dismissed employee-LTS.PD F
PPT on Employee Relation.ppt