As our pharma company (principal employer) is forcing us that this scheme is not beneficial to the employer (manpower contractor), whether you have registered with EPFO or not, 8.33% PF contribution is paid by the principal employer. So, EPFO-registered employers are unable to avail this benefit. Kindly clarify this matter.
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
PMRPY is an incentive for employers to encourage fresh employment. If the gross salary exceeds 15000/-, then PMRPY will be automatically switched off, but the contribution will continue from both the employee and the employer.
If the principal employer wants to avail the incentive, he can enroll the contractor worker under his own muster roll and complete the formalities. There is a series of formalities to be completed before making ECR/challan, and it is to be detailed by the employer who is liable to pay 12% of the employer's share.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
725If the principal employer wants to avail the incentive, he can enroll the contractor worker under his own muster roll and complete the formalities. There is a series of formalities to be completed before making ECR/challan, and it is to be detailed by the employer who is liable to pay 12% of the employer's share.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here are two questions:
1. Please update whether 15,000/- below means gross salary or basic pay. You are aware that the basic salary is always 40% to 60% of the gross salary. For example, for a 16,000 gross salary employee, is he covered under PMRY?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Please update whether 15,000/- below means gross salary or basic pay. You are aware that the basic salary is always 40% to 60% of the gross salary. For example, for a 16,000 gross salary employee, is he covered under PMRY?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please answer:
The actual PMRY scheme began in April 2016. However, we only became aware of this benefit in May 2017, and we have been receiving PMRY benefits since May 2017. Is it possible for us to receive arrears from April 2016 to May 2017 from the PF department? If so, what is the procedure to obtain the arrears amount?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The actual PMRY scheme began in April 2016. However, we only became aware of this benefit in May 2017, and we have been receiving PMRY benefits since May 2017. Is it possible for us to receive arrears from April 2016 to May 2017 from the PF department? If so, what is the procedure to obtain the arrears amount?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
if the employer register the employees under PMRPY, then gov will calculate the benefit, and credit the same to given bank account on the portal after annual a/c finalization
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear members,
This is really an intersting matter to discuss.
First of all I would like to update now the whole employer PF contribution (12%) is applicable for PMRPY scheme wef 01.04.2018. Rightly said by learned members the immediate employer can avail the benefits.
Now the main point is whether the PE can force / request the contractor to pass on the benefits. Though everyone will favour to their part. Contractor will never like to pass on the benefits whereas the PE would like to get the benefits (through the contractor’s invoices) for cost optimization. From my point of view there could be two scenario :-
1 Whether the PE has awarded lump sum contract? Which includes recruiting and managing the manpower, compliance of all statutory benefits (irrespective of revision in MW Act, Amendments in PF-ESI contribution, Amendment in Bonus-Gratuity-MB Act etc.). In such contract as per my opinion the PE is not supposed to request/force the contractor to pass on the PMRPY benefits. Because the contractor has been bearing all statutory compliance related expense from his pocket only and in case of increasing the cost (due to amendment in various acts) not claiming the cost impact from the PE.
2 In case where the contractor is providing service on “Service Charge” basis (which is now a days regular practice from many PEs). There are many big corporates / contractor who are providing “Third Party Services” to various organisation on basis of actual month CTC (which arrives on basis of defined wages and acutal attendance). On the monthly calculated CTC they claim some service charge (5% - 10% as per the negotiations). All other cost (Bonus, gratuity, MB, MW Act revision) are also charged as per Amendments in the Acts.
In such case the PE can request the contractor to pass on the benefits. Bcoz PE has been bearing all cost impact directly (due to change in law). Hence if any benefit is being given by the govt. to the “Third Party”, same should be pass on to the PE. The contractor should also pass on the benefits to the PE.
I am handling more than 50 contractors (who deploy huge manpower in our projects all over India). In case where the benefitted is amount is high, I requested the contractors to pass on the benefits. Some of them have been agree and we are in discussion with the rest as well.
Hope the senior member will agree with my justification, if required I would like to throw more light on the matter.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This is really an intersting matter to discuss.
First of all I would like to update now the whole employer PF contribution (12%) is applicable for PMRPY scheme wef 01.04.2018. Rightly said by learned members the immediate employer can avail the benefits.
Now the main point is whether the PE can force / request the contractor to pass on the benefits. Though everyone will favour to their part. Contractor will never like to pass on the benefits whereas the PE would like to get the benefits (through the contractor’s invoices) for cost optimization. From my point of view there could be two scenario :-
1 Whether the PE has awarded lump sum contract? Which includes recruiting and managing the manpower, compliance of all statutory benefits (irrespective of revision in MW Act, Amendments in PF-ESI contribution, Amendment in Bonus-Gratuity-MB Act etc.). In such contract as per my opinion the PE is not supposed to request/force the contractor to pass on the PMRPY benefits. Because the contractor has been bearing all statutory compliance related expense from his pocket only and in case of increasing the cost (due to amendment in various acts) not claiming the cost impact from the PE.
2 In case where the contractor is providing service on “Service Charge” basis (which is now a days regular practice from many PEs). There are many big corporates / contractor who are providing “Third Party Services” to various organisation on basis of actual month CTC (which arrives on basis of defined wages and acutal attendance). On the monthly calculated CTC they claim some service charge (5% - 10% as per the negotiations). All other cost (Bonus, gratuity, MB, MW Act revision) are also charged as per Amendments in the Acts.
In such case the PE can request the contractor to pass on the benefits. Bcoz PE has been bearing all cost impact directly (due to change in law). Hence if any benefit is being given by the govt. to the “Third Party”, same should be pass on to the PE. The contractor should also pass on the benefits to the PE.
I am handling more than 50 contractors (who deploy huge manpower in our projects all over India). In case where the benefitted is amount is high, I requested the contractors to pass on the benefits. Some of them have been agree and we are in discussion with the rest as well.
Hope the senior member will agree with my justification, if required I would like to throw more light on the matter.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Works Contract is usually on a fixed price plus taxes (normally GST as of today), and it may contain a certain part of goods and a certain part of services. However, the rates are inclusive of all labor benefits and perks.
In the case of a pure labor contract only, Form 5, Form 7, Form 13, and Form 14 are vital documents under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act to discuss the issue. If these forms are maintained, then these employers get amalgamated to Principal Employer (PE) through the contractor channel. In case of any mishap or fatal accident, the PE would have to report to the departments and complete the legal formalities, as well as being responsible for compensation under the Industrial Disputes Act.
The choice lies with the PE to chase the beneficiary incentive, which is actually payable to the immediate contractor and become liable for all Industrial Disputes responsibilities of the contract employees, or to ignore such small amounts and neglect the Industrial Disputes responsibilities altogether.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the case of a pure labor contract only, Form 5, Form 7, Form 13, and Form 14 are vital documents under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act to discuss the issue. If these forms are maintained, then these employers get amalgamated to Principal Employer (PE) through the contractor channel. In case of any mishap or fatal accident, the PE would have to report to the departments and complete the legal formalities, as well as being responsible for compensation under the Industrial Disputes Act.
The choice lies with the PE to chase the beneficiary incentive, which is actually payable to the immediate contractor and become liable for all Industrial Disputes responsibilities of the contract employees, or to ignore such small amounts and neglect the Industrial Disputes responsibilities altogether.
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.
Contract employee & Principal employer 2017.pdf
NOTE ON PRINCIPAL EMPLOYER TO ENGAGE CONTRACT LABOUR.pptx