Strictly speaking, yes, my dear anonymous friend. The term "worker" as defined under Section 2(l) of the Factories Act, 1948 means a person employed directly or by or through any agency, including a contractor, in any manufacturing process or in any other kind of work incidental to or connected with the manufacturing process.
However, a conjunctive reading of the deeming provision of "contract labor" under Section 2(1)(b) and the definition of the term "workman" under Section 2(1)(i) of the CLRA Act, 1970 would give a negative answer to your query. The outsourced graduate staff and officers for the manufacturing activity may escape the ambit of the definition of Section 2(1)(i) by virtue of their supervisory capacity coupled with their salary.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
6108However, a conjunctive reading of the deeming provision of "contract labor" under Section 2(1)(b) and the definition of the term "workman" under Section 2(1)(i) of the CLRA Act, 1970 would give a negative answer to your query. The outsourced graduate staff and officers for the manufacturing activity may escape the ambit of the definition of Section 2(1)(i) by virtue of their supervisory capacity coupled with their salary.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Respected Umakanthan Sir,
I am a little bit confused by the query from our anonymous friend in post #10 above, as well as your response to it. I further want to add to this confusion with my post. However, I am sure you will provide some insights.
After reading your response, I understood what the queriest meant by CO Act. His question, as I now understand it, is whether the outsourced graduate staff/officers engaged in manufacturing activity fall under the CLRA Act or not. Your answer to it is yes - strictly speaking. However, you rightly mentioned that the conjunctive reading of the deeming provision of "contract labor" under section 2(1)(b) and the definition of the term "workman" under section 2(1)(i) of the CLRA Act, 1970 would lead to a negative answer to the query, as the outsourced graduate staff and officers for the manufacturing activity may fall outside the definition of section 2(1)(i) due to their supervisory capacity and salary.
I would like to add to what you said to provide more clarity. Apart from the nature of work, i.e., supervisory capacity combined with their salary, one must also consider the clause prohibiting the employment of contract labor. It is essential to determine whether graduate staff and officers are engaged in core activities or ancillary ones, whether the work is incidental or necessary, and whether it is typically done by regular employees in that establishment, justifying the employment of a significant number of full-time workers.
In reality, many organizations, including MNCs, PSUs, private and government banking sectors, and courts, engage computer programmers, stenographers, office assistants, engineers, technicians, etc., through outsourcing agencies. I have even seen HR Managers working as outsourced employees. Certainly, HR Managers and engineers may not be considered workmen under the CLRA due to their job roles and salaries. However, the question remains unanswered as to whether we can prohibit such employment on a contract or outsourcing basis based on the prohibition clause.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I am a little bit confused by the query from our anonymous friend in post #10 above, as well as your response to it. I further want to add to this confusion with my post. However, I am sure you will provide some insights.
After reading your response, I understood what the queriest meant by CO Act. His question, as I now understand it, is whether the outsourced graduate staff/officers engaged in manufacturing activity fall under the CLRA Act or not. Your answer to it is yes - strictly speaking. However, you rightly mentioned that the conjunctive reading of the deeming provision of "contract labor" under section 2(1)(b) and the definition of the term "workman" under section 2(1)(i) of the CLRA Act, 1970 would lead to a negative answer to the query, as the outsourced graduate staff and officers for the manufacturing activity may fall outside the definition of section 2(1)(i) due to their supervisory capacity and salary.
I would like to add to what you said to provide more clarity. Apart from the nature of work, i.e., supervisory capacity combined with their salary, one must also consider the clause prohibiting the employment of contract labor. It is essential to determine whether graduate staff and officers are engaged in core activities or ancillary ones, whether the work is incidental or necessary, and whether it is typically done by regular employees in that establishment, justifying the employment of a significant number of full-time workers.
In reality, many organizations, including MNCs, PSUs, private and government banking sectors, and courts, engage computer programmers, stenographers, office assistants, engineers, technicians, etc., through outsourcing agencies. I have even seen HR Managers working as outsourced employees. Certainly, HR Managers and engineers may not be considered workmen under the CLRA due to their job roles and salaries. However, the question remains unanswered as to whether we can prohibit such employment on a contract or outsourcing basis based on the prohibition clause.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Korgaonkarji,
There is a Vedic quote that no two scholars agree on the same issue. That's the problem of a scholarly approach to a given issue. Unless and until any activity of an establishment is specifically prohibited by the appropriate Government under Section 10 of the CLRA Act, 1970, there is no use in scanning the activity such as core, incidental, perennial, or intermittent. Therefore, in such a case, what remains to be seen at first is whether the engagement of such outsourcing is through a contractor. Since the question involves some people in the manufacturing activity of a factory, I said yes only to make the questioner understand the import of the meaning of the term "worker" as defined under the Factories Act, 1948.
Then, what comes next is the question of the application of the regulatory provisions of the CLRA Act, 1970 to such an engagement with a combined reference to the deeming provision of Section 2(1)(b) and the definition of "workman" under Section 2(1)(i) of the Act, which would legally end up with a negative answer to the query as a whole.
Coming to your ultimate question dictated by the sense of equity and justice, I think that this is yet another unanswerable question relating to the sphere of paid employment in a market-driven global economy. The pointer is the recent amendment to the Standing Orders Rules legalizing F.T.C employment.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is a Vedic quote that no two scholars agree on the same issue. That's the problem of a scholarly approach to a given issue. Unless and until any activity of an establishment is specifically prohibited by the appropriate Government under Section 10 of the CLRA Act, 1970, there is no use in scanning the activity such as core, incidental, perennial, or intermittent. Therefore, in such a case, what remains to be seen at first is whether the engagement of such outsourcing is through a contractor. Since the question involves some people in the manufacturing activity of a factory, I said yes only to make the questioner understand the import of the meaning of the term "worker" as defined under the Factories Act, 1948.
Then, what comes next is the question of the application of the regulatory provisions of the CLRA Act, 1970 to such an engagement with a combined reference to the deeming provision of Section 2(1)(b) and the definition of "workman" under Section 2(1)(i) of the Act, which would legally end up with a negative answer to the query as a whole.
Coming to your ultimate question dictated by the sense of equity and justice, I think that this is yet another unanswerable question relating to the sphere of paid employment in a market-driven global economy. The pointer is the recent amendment to the Standing Orders Rules legalizing F.T.C employment.
From India, Salem
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.