1
PE cannot be held responsible for payment of gratuity for the workers of a contractor since the PE has no record of employment of the worker with the contractor.
A worker might have worked with the contractor for 8 years, where as PE may got the service of the worker before his termination, only for one year.
From India, Hyderabad
A worker might have worked with the contractor for 8 years, where as PE may got the service of the worker before his termination, only for one year.
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Friend
In the instant case the security agency though employed more 10 employees in all his sites but all those employees are governed by the provisions of CLRA Act. Only three employees employed in the Office and the disputed guard along with another are not governed by CLRA Act. The Asst. Commissioner of Labour clarified that the persons who are governed by the provisions of CLRA Act need not be counted again under the AP Shops and Estt Act, 1961. In such scenrio only 5 employees employed by the Security Agency are governed by the AP Shop & Estt Act and in such case the provisions of PGA does not apply to the Security Agency. When both CLRA Act and PGA does not apply to the Security Agency the question of payment of gratutity to the guard may not arise. Please give a thought and clarify the position.
with regards
sanagapalli
From India, Hyderabad
In the instant case the security agency though employed more 10 employees in all his sites but all those employees are governed by the provisions of CLRA Act. Only three employees employed in the Office and the disputed guard along with another are not governed by CLRA Act. The Asst. Commissioner of Labour clarified that the persons who are governed by the provisions of CLRA Act need not be counted again under the AP Shops and Estt Act, 1961. In such scenrio only 5 employees employed by the Security Agency are governed by the AP Shop & Estt Act and in such case the provisions of PGA does not apply to the Security Agency. When both CLRA Act and PGA does not apply to the Security Agency the question of payment of gratutity to the guard may not arise. Please give a thought and clarify the position.
with regards
sanagapalli
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Sanagpalli,
While counting of number of employees to determine applicability of PGA, CLRA and PGA have no bearings.. It is employership that will be determining factor. Since, security service provider employs 10 or more employees, prime facie there is case for gratuity for your security guard. However, you must refer a good commentary over the relevant provisions as there are number of things which will have to be studied for constructing a firm opinion.
A lot has been said about section 12 (4) of CLRA, no claim application can be filed based on this section before any authority. Reasons ... a - CLRA does not have a claim recovery provision, ..b - PGA does not have concept of PE or indirect employee.
Regards
P K Jadia
While counting of number of employees to determine applicability of PGA, CLRA and PGA have no bearings.. It is employership that will be determining factor. Since, security service provider employs 10 or more employees, prime facie there is case for gratuity for your security guard. However, you must refer a good commentary over the relevant provisions as there are number of things which will have to be studied for constructing a firm opinion.
A lot has been said about section 12 (4) of CLRA, no claim application can be filed based on this section before any authority. Reasons ... a - CLRA does not have a claim recovery provision, ..b - PGA does not have concept of PE or indirect employee.
Regards
P K Jadia
Dear Mr Khola,
You do have a point that a principal employer for default on account of Gratuity and Bonus can take a stand that these 2 payment are the liability of the contractor only. But keeping in mind these are social legislations and authrorities can make their interpretation more flexible and in favour of the weak section of the society. In my present employment many such case are pending,we have taken such a stand but we have been made the party alongwith the contractor though we have made strong objections.
Regards,
Ashok K. Ghose
From India
You do have a point that a principal employer for default on account of Gratuity and Bonus can take a stand that these 2 payment are the liability of the contractor only. But keeping in mind these are social legislations and authrorities can make their interpretation more flexible and in favour of the weak section of the society. In my present employment many such case are pending,we have taken such a stand but we have been made the party alongwith the contractor though we have made strong objections.
Regards,
Ashok K. Ghose
From India
hi, i am director of a security agency. if u r paying all the statutory benefits to the security agency, then it is responsibility of the agency to pay to the guards, however being principle employer it is ur duty to check whether the agency has paid or not. for further clarification / info, u may contact me at 
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.
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 & The Rules.ppt
THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT 1972.doc