Certainly. The proposed Act is applicable to factories employing 39 or less than 39 employees (the Act says it is less than 40 but it should be worded like ' not more than 40') but many Acts like PF Act, ESI Act are applicable to factories employing less number (20 or 10, as the case may be) of workers. When a Central Act (Small Factories....Act) covers the holidays, then the (state) Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays) Act will have to be amended like 'nothing in this Act shall apply to a factory covered by Small Factories...Act'. At present factories employing 20 or more workers in Kerala should give 13 holidays, which in Tamil Nadu is 9 and in karnataka is 10. Bonus Act is also applicable to smaller firms at present but the Act has an infancy protection of 5 years but the same is not there under the new bill for small factories. Similarly, unlike other Acts, we should have a clarity on the definition of worker. Another point already pointed out by Bhaskar, overtime wages should be excluded from statutory wages. Coverage of Minimum Wages Act is another concern because without coverage of the said Act section 9 of the new Act will not have relevance. With this I think most of the existing Acts will require amendment either by increasing the number of employees required for applicability or by adding a sentence like 'nothing in this Act would apply to factories covered under Small Factories (Regulation and Conditions of Service) Act.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
4239Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Quote: ToI: 22.10.14:
"NEW DELHI: In order to make India a better place to do business, the government is working to cut down the time for registering a business from 27 days to a single day. Towards this end, it has readied a raft of measures, such as, single registration for all labour laws, overhaul of tax systems, reduction in the number of permits required, easing up property registration, quick electricity connection and property registration - measures that are expected to make the country a friendlier investment destination.
Currently, India has the reputation of being a notoriously difficult place to do business. According to The World Bank's " Ease of doing business" index, India ranked 134 out of 189 countries in 2014, behind China (ranked 96) and behind neighbours Pakistani (110) and Bangladesh (130). During the launch of the 'Make in India' campaign, Narendra Modi had announced that his government would take steps to bring the country's ranking among the top 50."
--------
Attaining the 50 ranking, a very tall order for a democratic country India, but still achievable if India targets on the parameters which are going against India. We need not get disturbed at Pak. & Bangladesh ahead of India in the ranking. This would also involve a common legislation bringing all states under one umbrella, a common central act like EPF/ESI prescribing uniform definitions, norms etc. but still we would have separate legislation for J & K. Acts like Professional Tax could be converted to a central act taking clue what is most beneficial for the employees (as this will not affect employers and not expected to receive strong objections from them) applicable to all the states. I don't think this will pose big problems for states as there are no provision impacting them too much. Practically, if we weed out corruption at various stages we would have achieved a world of good in the reforms front.
Hope to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
From India, Bangalore
"NEW DELHI: In order to make India a better place to do business, the government is working to cut down the time for registering a business from 27 days to a single day. Towards this end, it has readied a raft of measures, such as, single registration for all labour laws, overhaul of tax systems, reduction in the number of permits required, easing up property registration, quick electricity connection and property registration - measures that are expected to make the country a friendlier investment destination.
Currently, India has the reputation of being a notoriously difficult place to do business. According to The World Bank's " Ease of doing business" index, India ranked 134 out of 189 countries in 2014, behind China (ranked 96) and behind neighbours Pakistani (110) and Bangladesh (130). During the launch of the 'Make in India' campaign, Narendra Modi had announced that his government would take steps to bring the country's ranking among the top 50."
--------
Attaining the 50 ranking, a very tall order for a democratic country India, but still achievable if India targets on the parameters which are going against India. We need not get disturbed at Pak. & Bangladesh ahead of India in the ranking. This would also involve a common legislation bringing all states under one umbrella, a common central act like EPF/ESI prescribing uniform definitions, norms etc. but still we would have separate legislation for J & K. Acts like Professional Tax could be converted to a central act taking clue what is most beneficial for the employees (as this will not affect employers and not expected to receive strong objections from them) applicable to all the states. I don't think this will pose big problems for states as there are no provision impacting them too much. Practically, if we weed out corruption at various stages we would have achieved a world of good in the reforms front.
Hope to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
From India, Bangalore
All these are good initiatives but will be materialised only when the bureaucrats enforce them properly. Even currently many states in india have on line registration and online system of filing returns etc but I am not sure if these are working properly. I had a bitter experience with Karnataka Labour department when I tried to get one our branches registered online. The Officer/ Inspector (under the Shops and Commercial Establishments Act) had told me that I should do it through a consultant, but i thought after all it is on line registration and for that why should I engage a consultant and I started doing it myself. I got the user Id and password and did something but could not proceed further due to some stupid fields, like details of family members connected with Managing Director etc without which we cannot go to the next step and since ours is not a family run business and we do not have any such relative of MD working with us it was not possible for me to proceed further. Even the PF number which is centralised with Kerala code was not acceptable in the on line system and finally I had do engage a consultant who himself is a retired labour department official. He did not ask for our user id or password(!!) but managed to do everything perfect. He was even having admin powers in the system that he could do it easily.
The above incident is not a rare incident but is common. I have not seen anywhere except courts such number of lawyers inside a civil office like that I saw in Karnataka. All these are consultants or agents of officers. If the new policy is going to make an end to these practices it is good. But the introduction of the new system should not be a burden for we people because already with the introduction of online system by PF many work which the EPF organisation's clerks and officers should do have been shifted from them to our executives. It should not happen that keeping the existing laws in dormant (for the time being) the new Acts like the Small Factories ...Act will be introduced and once the government changes the other Acts will also become active and we will be constrained to follow the old Act and the new Acts.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
The above incident is not a rare incident but is common. I have not seen anywhere except courts such number of lawyers inside a civil office like that I saw in Karnataka. All these are consultants or agents of officers. If the new policy is going to make an end to these practices it is good. But the introduction of the new system should not be a burden for we people because already with the introduction of online system by PF many work which the EPF organisation's clerks and officers should do have been shifted from them to our executives. It should not happen that keeping the existing laws in dormant (for the time being) the new Acts like the Small Factories ...Act will be introduced and once the government changes the other Acts will also become active and we will be constrained to follow the old Act and the new Acts.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
---------
It's very much true in Bangalore what you described, may not be diff.in other states. Unless a big revolution descends in our country these people are not going to change totally. Babus will not behave like govt.servants unless and until there is sea change in mental thinking of our people to cast all the corrupt persons into untouchables and socially boycotted without exception.
From India, Bangalore
It's very much true in Bangalore what you described, may not be diff.in other states. Unless a big revolution descends in our country these people are not going to change totally. Babus will not behave like govt.servants unless and until there is sea change in mental thinking of our people to cast all the corrupt persons into untouchables and socially boycotted without exception.
From India, Bangalore
To Cite HR Members.
SUB: LABOUR REFORMS - PM;S STATEMENT - KINGFISHERS EMPLOYEES SALARY -VIJAYMALLYA
---------------------------------------
This has ref. to the comment of Shri Dinesh Diwekar on the PM;s Statement reg. Labour Reforms & also reg. non-payment of Salaries to the employees of Kingfishers - Vijay Mallya for over 2 years.
As rightly pointed out by Shri Dinesh, many Factories / industries of Politicians (Most Politicians only have Factories & other Estt.in India than Govt.) suddenly closes or payment not given for months when recession or other situations like SC Ban on Iron Ore in Karnataka resulted in closure of many Steel Plants happens. Though there are IDA & other Acts to protect workers interest, they are seldom implemented resulting in sufferings to the employees & NOT TO TOP PEOPLE.
As Mr.Dineshji has been airing the suffering of the employees of Vijay Mallya;s Kingfishers due to non-payment of salaries for more than 2 years, It will be useful for the readers to recall the issues involved leading to workers problem in Kingfisher. Please let us know the issues, LC role, present status of the legal issues involved. This will help us to know the present situation. Vijay Mallya may be flying or enjoying around the world leaving miseries to the people who worked for his pet name KINGFISHER.
From India, Bangalore
SUB: LABOUR REFORMS - PM;S STATEMENT - KINGFISHERS EMPLOYEES SALARY -VIJAYMALLYA
---------------------------------------
This has ref. to the comment of Shri Dinesh Diwekar on the PM;s Statement reg. Labour Reforms & also reg. non-payment of Salaries to the employees of Kingfishers - Vijay Mallya for over 2 years.
As rightly pointed out by Shri Dinesh, many Factories / industries of Politicians (Most Politicians only have Factories & other Estt.in India than Govt.) suddenly closes or payment not given for months when recession or other situations like SC Ban on Iron Ore in Karnataka resulted in closure of many Steel Plants happens. Though there are IDA & other Acts to protect workers interest, they are seldom implemented resulting in sufferings to the employees & NOT TO TOP PEOPLE.
As Mr.Dineshji has been airing the suffering of the employees of Vijay Mallya;s Kingfishers due to non-payment of salaries for more than 2 years, It will be useful for the readers to recall the issues involved leading to workers problem in Kingfisher. Please let us know the issues, LC role, present status of the legal issues involved. This will help us to know the present situation. Vijay Mallya may be flying or enjoying around the world leaving miseries to the people who worked for his pet name KINGFISHER.
From India, Bangalore
Dear Neyim Khan,
As far as payment of salaries to the staffs of KFA is concerned, nothing significant has happened in the last two years. All that Mr Vijay Mallaya has done is to pay the salary for one month and further nothing. Neither union of KFA pilots has filed suit in the court. No political non-political organisation has come forward to take up their cause. Probably employees have resigned to their fate. There is no scope to get justice on this count. National media is too busy in their hunt for the "breaking news" and why they will chew cud of this stale news?
Mr Vijay Mallaya has kept all the political parties in good humour hence none of them raises questions about him. Around year ago, Mr Sharad Yadav of JD (U) has raised questions about KFA however, nothing has happened. He has been elected to the Rajya Sabha from the state of Karnataka with the backing of all the political parties. Hence major political parties like BJP or Congress are just silent.
Our vociferous HR forums like NHRD or NIPM are also silent. Their leadership starts and ends at writing articles on their blogs, givings lectures at B-schools or conducting seminars. In fact this incident was very good occasion to assert themselves and gain the visibility. But then these forums are nothing but larger reflection of average HR in some company. As much average HR in some company is laid back, so are these organisations at national level.
I am member of NHRD, Bangalore Chapter. Around year ago, President of Bangalore Chapter was due to visit Delhi for the all-India meeting of the presidents of all chapters. I had told him personally to bring this point for discussion. I doubt whether he has done anything on this count.
The real reforms will happen when the labour get their all the dues and they are not taken for the ride.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
As far as payment of salaries to the staffs of KFA is concerned, nothing significant has happened in the last two years. All that Mr Vijay Mallaya has done is to pay the salary for one month and further nothing. Neither union of KFA pilots has filed suit in the court. No political non-political organisation has come forward to take up their cause. Probably employees have resigned to their fate. There is no scope to get justice on this count. National media is too busy in their hunt for the "breaking news" and why they will chew cud of this stale news?
Mr Vijay Mallaya has kept all the political parties in good humour hence none of them raises questions about him. Around year ago, Mr Sharad Yadav of JD (U) has raised questions about KFA however, nothing has happened. He has been elected to the Rajya Sabha from the state of Karnataka with the backing of all the political parties. Hence major political parties like BJP or Congress are just silent.
Our vociferous HR forums like NHRD or NIPM are also silent. Their leadership starts and ends at writing articles on their blogs, givings lectures at B-schools or conducting seminars. In fact this incident was very good occasion to assert themselves and gain the visibility. But then these forums are nothing but larger reflection of average HR in some company. As much average HR in some company is laid back, so are these organisations at national level.
I am member of NHRD, Bangalore Chapter. Around year ago, President of Bangalore Chapter was due to visit Delhi for the all-India meeting of the presidents of all chapters. I had told him personally to bring this point for discussion. I doubt whether he has done anything on this count.
The real reforms will happen when the labour get their all the dues and they are not taken for the ride.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Some salient features of the new Small Factories Bill (SFB) recently brought in by the Central Government
I was recently going through the 44 pages draft of the new The Small Factories (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Services) Bill, 2014 and I wish to bring in light some of its features as compared to the old Factories Act, 1948 (FA)
1. Scope widened or restricted? The newly introduced SF Bill intends to apply to every premise wherein manufacturing process is carried out and wherein less than 40 persons are employed.
THIS ENLARGES SCOPE OF APPLICABILITY. Here the requirement of "where 10 or more persons are employed and manufacturing process is carried on WITH THE AID OF POWER or 20 or more workers are employed and manufacturing process is ordinarily carried on" is missing. This means, any workshop, auto repair centers, tea/fast food making centers, tailoring shops, petrol pumps, power looms, furniture making shops, testing/repairs centers and so many such activities which fall in the definition of "manufacturing process" will now be small factories when they employ 1 to 39 persons. These small factories will be required to register with State Government and obtain LIN (Labour Identification Number). It appears there requires no license but only registration.
The factories which are employing between 10 to 39 workers were required to obtain license for each year. Now, they will be required only registration.
Exception is given to the small factory if it is carrying on a hazardous manufacturing process.
2. Consolidation of many provisions from other Acts such as, MW Act, ID Act, Factories Act, PWA, PBA, PGA etc. are suggested. Grievance Settlement procedure is provided.
3. Provision of PF and insurance for Employment injury is suggested. However the rate of contribution is 10 per cent by both (= 20 % of wages) for Insurance is very high. Such a high premium is no where found. It should be about 5 to 6% in all. (i. e. 4.50 % by employer and 1.50 % by worker). Moreover the ration of contribution should not be less than 10 % of consolidated wages. This means, all what is paid as allowance, OT etc are required to be considered for PF and Insurance.
4. Weekly holiday, Annual Leave and holidays: In the new Bill, A PAID WEEKLY HOLIDAY is proposed. Every year 20 days leave with wages, 7 days‘ casual and seven 7 days sick leave with wages and 3 paid national holidays and 5 festival holidays are suggested.
There are some of the features.
From India, Kolhapur
I was recently going through the 44 pages draft of the new The Small Factories (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Services) Bill, 2014 and I wish to bring in light some of its features as compared to the old Factories Act, 1948 (FA)
1. Scope widened or restricted? The newly introduced SF Bill intends to apply to every premise wherein manufacturing process is carried out and wherein less than 40 persons are employed.
THIS ENLARGES SCOPE OF APPLICABILITY. Here the requirement of "where 10 or more persons are employed and manufacturing process is carried on WITH THE AID OF POWER or 20 or more workers are employed and manufacturing process is ordinarily carried on" is missing. This means, any workshop, auto repair centers, tea/fast food making centers, tailoring shops, petrol pumps, power looms, furniture making shops, testing/repairs centers and so many such activities which fall in the definition of "manufacturing process" will now be small factories when they employ 1 to 39 persons. These small factories will be required to register with State Government and obtain LIN (Labour Identification Number). It appears there requires no license but only registration.
The factories which are employing between 10 to 39 workers were required to obtain license for each year. Now, they will be required only registration.
Exception is given to the small factory if it is carrying on a hazardous manufacturing process.
2. Consolidation of many provisions from other Acts such as, MW Act, ID Act, Factories Act, PWA, PBA, PGA etc. are suggested. Grievance Settlement procedure is provided.
3. Provision of PF and insurance for Employment injury is suggested. However the rate of contribution is 10 per cent by both (= 20 % of wages) for Insurance is very high. Such a high premium is no where found. It should be about 5 to 6% in all. (i. e. 4.50 % by employer and 1.50 % by worker). Moreover the ration of contribution should not be less than 10 % of consolidated wages. This means, all what is paid as allowance, OT etc are required to be considered for PF and Insurance.
4. Weekly holiday, Annual Leave and holidays: In the new Bill, A PAID WEEKLY HOLIDAY is proposed. Every year 20 days leave with wages, 7 days‘ casual and seven 7 days sick leave with wages and 3 paid national holidays and 5 festival holidays are suggested.
There are some of the features.
From India, Kolhapur
About Small Factories (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, I have made the following comments to the Ministry for consideration.
1. In section 2 (f) definition of small factories, it would be proper to word ‘not more than forty’ instead of ‘less than forty’ because less than forty will mean 39 or less workers but not more than forty will include factories employing 40 workers also.
2. Section 2(h)(b)- definition of wages- overtime wages may be excluded from the scope of wages
3. Section 2(h)©- definition of wages- bonus may be excluded from the scope of wages
4. Section 2(h)(d)- definition of wages- terminal benefits as per law (ID Act and Payment of Gratuity Act) or other may be excluded from the scope of wages
5. Section 2(j)- The definition of worker- to be more descriptive so that ambiguity relating to persons employed in sales, persons employed in R&D, persons employed in Stores and similar functions wherein they have no reportees below them can be avoided. This will also help to decide whether a factory will come under the Small Factories…Act or not.
6. Provisio to section 4 (2)- appropriate authority- labour department- Department of labour and Department of Factories and Boilers are two departments working parallel to each other. In such a scenario, is it required to include Labour department also?
7. Section 4(3)- control over Inspector- It will be okay if the control is by the Chief Inspector/ Director of factories and not be Labour Commissioner
8. Section 5(a)- Powers of Inspector- should be as per the new inspection policy and as far as possible, avoid surprise visits by the inspectors
9. Section 14- Payment of Bonus- This section makes it obligatory to pay bonus from the date of commencement and no infancy protection will be available to the small factory. This is against the Payment of Bonus Act which gives 5 years time. Moreover, the Payment of Bonus Act applies to Small Factories also and it will be contradictory to have a separate section in this Act.
10. Section 22(iii)- absence from work by concerted action or illegal or uninformed strike and deduction of wages- Under the Payment of Wages Act also it is the same, when it comes to small factories, why can't it be deduction for 8 days salary in case '5' or more workers absent from work?
11. Section 23(3)- earned leave- 20 days EL for a year is at a higher side but let it be one day for every 20 days worked. The eligibility conditions as per the Factories Act shall continue.
12. Section 23 (5)-national and festival holidays- Since there is a State Act regulating the national and festival holidays and the said Act is applicable to establishments wherein 20 or more are employed, the small factories will also come under the said Act. As such at present such factories in Kerala have 4 National holidays and 9 festival holidays, factories in Karnataka have 5 national holidays and five festival holidays, Tamil nadu has four national holidays and five festival holidays etc. It will be advisable to leave it as it is and make the state Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays Act applicable to small factories wherever the state Act is available. In states (like Maharshtra) where a similar Act is not available, this section shall be made applicable.
13. Section 24- maternity leave- maternity benefits for workers be substituted by maternity benefits for ‘female’ workers
14. Section 24(1)- entitlement of maternity benefits- Since the Maternity Benefit Act has applicability to small factories also, it is advisable to make the qualifying service as 80 days. Is it necessary that in order to get benefits for miscarriage also, she should have the qualifying service? Under Maternity Benefit Act so condition relating to service is there for getting benefits (6 weeks leave) for miscarriage. Moreover, under the Maternity Benefit Act the qualifying service is counted during the 12 months immediately preceding the date of (expected) delivery.
15. Section 24(2)- the number of maternity leave- Under maternity Benefit Act it is 12 weeks, ie, 84 days. Therefore, it is advisable to make it 84 days
16. Section 24(3)- leave for miscarriage- Under Maternity benefits Act it is 6 weeks or 42 days. It is advisable if it is made 42 days instead of 30 days proposed.
17. Section 25(1) -Social security- provident fund- A small factory employing 20 or more are expected to be covered by the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Misc. provisions Act. Therefore, establishments covered by EPF & MP Act shall be exempted from the operation of this section.
18. Section 25(2)- health insurance- A small factory employing 10 or more are expected to be covered by ESI Schemes. As such exempt such establishments from the operation of this section
19. Section 25(3)- Gratuity- Payment of Gratuity Act applies to establishments wherein 10 or more are working. Therefore, it would require a clarification that it is not in addition to what the worker gets under Payment of Gratuity Act. The third provisio to this section “The Insurance cover shall include the amount already payable under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 on the date of the enforcement of this Act” requires clarity.
20. Section 32 (1) © -Labour court- unfair practices by union- Recognition of trade Unions by operation of law is in operation only in few states like Kerala. In the absence of a law to recognise and de recognise unions, the provision does not have clarity.
21. Section 42- Latrines and urinals- separate for male and female workers shall be included
22. Section 54- non applicability of certain Acts- 4. Minimum Wages Act- to be deleted because section 9 provides for payment of minimum wages as per the Minimum Wages Act
23. Section 54- non applicability of certain Acts- 7. Employees State Insurance Act- A small factory wherein 10 or more workers are employed will automatically come under ESI Act. Either the ESI Act or this Act requires to be amended accordingly
24. Section 54-non applicability of certain Acts- 8. Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act- A small factory wherein 20 or more workers are employed will automatically come under EPF &MP Act. Either the EPF Act or this Act requires to be amended accordingly.
25. Section 54-non applicability of certain Acts-11. Interstate Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service )Act- Most of the small factories would require engagement of labour from other states. Therefore, the significance of this Act cannot be ruled out.
26. Section 54-non applicability of certain Acts- 13. Equal Remuneration Act- The objective of this Act is very genuine and as such the same may be made applicable to small factories also
27. The Act is aimed at regulation of employment in small factories. What is the need of ‘regulating’ employment is not understood. It is an Act which provides for conditions of service of employees employed in small factories. Therefore, it is advisable to name the Act as Small Factories (Conditions of Service) Act.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
1. In section 2 (f) definition of small factories, it would be proper to word ‘not more than forty’ instead of ‘less than forty’ because less than forty will mean 39 or less workers but not more than forty will include factories employing 40 workers also.
2. Section 2(h)(b)- definition of wages- overtime wages may be excluded from the scope of wages
3. Section 2(h)©- definition of wages- bonus may be excluded from the scope of wages
4. Section 2(h)(d)- definition of wages- terminal benefits as per law (ID Act and Payment of Gratuity Act) or other may be excluded from the scope of wages
5. Section 2(j)- The definition of worker- to be more descriptive so that ambiguity relating to persons employed in sales, persons employed in R&D, persons employed in Stores and similar functions wherein they have no reportees below them can be avoided. This will also help to decide whether a factory will come under the Small Factories…Act or not.
6. Provisio to section 4 (2)- appropriate authority- labour department- Department of labour and Department of Factories and Boilers are two departments working parallel to each other. In such a scenario, is it required to include Labour department also?
7. Section 4(3)- control over Inspector- It will be okay if the control is by the Chief Inspector/ Director of factories and not be Labour Commissioner
8. Section 5(a)- Powers of Inspector- should be as per the new inspection policy and as far as possible, avoid surprise visits by the inspectors
9. Section 14- Payment of Bonus- This section makes it obligatory to pay bonus from the date of commencement and no infancy protection will be available to the small factory. This is against the Payment of Bonus Act which gives 5 years time. Moreover, the Payment of Bonus Act applies to Small Factories also and it will be contradictory to have a separate section in this Act.
10. Section 22(iii)- absence from work by concerted action or illegal or uninformed strike and deduction of wages- Under the Payment of Wages Act also it is the same, when it comes to small factories, why can't it be deduction for 8 days salary in case '5' or more workers absent from work?
11. Section 23(3)- earned leave- 20 days EL for a year is at a higher side but let it be one day for every 20 days worked. The eligibility conditions as per the Factories Act shall continue.
12. Section 23 (5)-national and festival holidays- Since there is a State Act regulating the national and festival holidays and the said Act is applicable to establishments wherein 20 or more are employed, the small factories will also come under the said Act. As such at present such factories in Kerala have 4 National holidays and 9 festival holidays, factories in Karnataka have 5 national holidays and five festival holidays, Tamil nadu has four national holidays and five festival holidays etc. It will be advisable to leave it as it is and make the state Industrial Establishments (National and Festival Holidays Act applicable to small factories wherever the state Act is available. In states (like Maharshtra) where a similar Act is not available, this section shall be made applicable.
13. Section 24- maternity leave- maternity benefits for workers be substituted by maternity benefits for ‘female’ workers
14. Section 24(1)- entitlement of maternity benefits- Since the Maternity Benefit Act has applicability to small factories also, it is advisable to make the qualifying service as 80 days. Is it necessary that in order to get benefits for miscarriage also, she should have the qualifying service? Under Maternity Benefit Act so condition relating to service is there for getting benefits (6 weeks leave) for miscarriage. Moreover, under the Maternity Benefit Act the qualifying service is counted during the 12 months immediately preceding the date of (expected) delivery.
15. Section 24(2)- the number of maternity leave- Under maternity Benefit Act it is 12 weeks, ie, 84 days. Therefore, it is advisable to make it 84 days
16. Section 24(3)- leave for miscarriage- Under Maternity benefits Act it is 6 weeks or 42 days. It is advisable if it is made 42 days instead of 30 days proposed.
17. Section 25(1) -Social security- provident fund- A small factory employing 20 or more are expected to be covered by the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Misc. provisions Act. Therefore, establishments covered by EPF & MP Act shall be exempted from the operation of this section.
18. Section 25(2)- health insurance- A small factory employing 10 or more are expected to be covered by ESI Schemes. As such exempt such establishments from the operation of this section
19. Section 25(3)- Gratuity- Payment of Gratuity Act applies to establishments wherein 10 or more are working. Therefore, it would require a clarification that it is not in addition to what the worker gets under Payment of Gratuity Act. The third provisio to this section “The Insurance cover shall include the amount already payable under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 on the date of the enforcement of this Act” requires clarity.
20. Section 32 (1) © -Labour court- unfair practices by union- Recognition of trade Unions by operation of law is in operation only in few states like Kerala. In the absence of a law to recognise and de recognise unions, the provision does not have clarity.
21. Section 42- Latrines and urinals- separate for male and female workers shall be included
22. Section 54- non applicability of certain Acts- 4. Minimum Wages Act- to be deleted because section 9 provides for payment of minimum wages as per the Minimum Wages Act
23. Section 54- non applicability of certain Acts- 7. Employees State Insurance Act- A small factory wherein 10 or more workers are employed will automatically come under ESI Act. Either the ESI Act or this Act requires to be amended accordingly
24. Section 54-non applicability of certain Acts- 8. Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act- A small factory wherein 20 or more workers are employed will automatically come under EPF &MP Act. Either the EPF Act or this Act requires to be amended accordingly.
25. Section 54-non applicability of certain Acts-11. Interstate Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service )Act- Most of the small factories would require engagement of labour from other states. Therefore, the significance of this Act cannot be ruled out.
26. Section 54-non applicability of certain Acts- 13. Equal Remuneration Act- The objective of this Act is very genuine and as such the same may be made applicable to small factories also
27. The Act is aimed at regulation of employment in small factories. What is the need of ‘regulating’ employment is not understood. It is an Act which provides for conditions of service of employees employed in small factories. Therefore, it is advisable to name the Act as Small Factories (Conditions of Service) Act.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Sir(s),
1. I appreciate the comments/suggestions made by Sh. Madhu T.K. to the Ministry of Labour & Employment in respect of draft Small Factories (Regulation of Employment and other Condition of Service), Act, 2014. However, I want to submit following important points for consideration by the seniors and experts.
2. The Term "small factory" has been defined as "any premises wherein a manufacturing process is carried on and which employs less than forty workers." Whether it will mean that all factories even employing less than 10 i.e. employing 1 to 9 workers will also be covered under said Act ?. If it is so, it is doubtful whether an employer employing 1 to 9 employees will be in a position to maintain all such records as mentioned in the above draft Act. It will also be doubtful whether the small employer employing 1 to 9 employees will be in a position to provide all social security benefits to his workers. If so, I think, it will be a very good step so far as employees working in such small establishments are concerned. The factories presently employing 1 to 9 persons are treated as falling in "unorganised sector"
3. Further the term "worker" has been defined as "a person who is wholly or partly employed whether directly or through any agent or contractor for wages or reward in connection with the work of any small factory to which this Act applies but does not include a person performing administrative, supervisory or managerial functions." As per section 54 of said Act, in respect of said small factory, ESI Act, 1948 and EPF & MP Act, 1952 will not be applicable and hence the workers of the category of "performing administrative, supervisory or managerial functions" will neither be coverable under said proposed Act, nor under ESI Act or EPF & MP Act, 1952. Therefore, such administrative , supervisory or managerial type of employees perhaps will not be coverable under any of such Acts and social security benefits will not be available to such staff.
4. Further, as mentioned by me in earlier comments in this thread, the Government is silent on the recommendations of the 2nd National Commission on Labour. If above proposed Act is passed, then it will be perhaps 45th Labour Law as passed by the Parliament of India. Therefore, it will add to another authority in the name of Labour Inspector etc. as will be established under said proposed Act. Had Govt. taken action, as per recommendations of 2nd Labour Commission, such situation could have been avoided to the great extent. I am mentioning following famous Quotes by eminent jurists/writers on multiplicity of laws as follows:-
CICERO: "THE MORE LAWS, THE LESS JUSTICE".
WINSTON S. CHURCHILL: " IF YOU HAVE TEN THOUSAND REGULATIONS, YOU DESTROY ALL RESPECT OF LAWS"
LEO TOLESTOY: " WRITTING LAWS IS EASY, BUT GOVERNING IS DIFFICULT."
5. Even after the above proposed Act is passed, enforced and implemented, the questions will definitely arise as to who will check the compliance of said Act in present situation when the visits of said "Inspectors" have been barred by the administrative instructions of the departments. And even, by general tendency and practice, the compliance position of labour laws is much lower.
From India, Noida
1. I appreciate the comments/suggestions made by Sh. Madhu T.K. to the Ministry of Labour & Employment in respect of draft Small Factories (Regulation of Employment and other Condition of Service), Act, 2014. However, I want to submit following important points for consideration by the seniors and experts.
2. The Term "small factory" has been defined as "any premises wherein a manufacturing process is carried on and which employs less than forty workers." Whether it will mean that all factories even employing less than 10 i.e. employing 1 to 9 workers will also be covered under said Act ?. If it is so, it is doubtful whether an employer employing 1 to 9 employees will be in a position to maintain all such records as mentioned in the above draft Act. It will also be doubtful whether the small employer employing 1 to 9 employees will be in a position to provide all social security benefits to his workers. If so, I think, it will be a very good step so far as employees working in such small establishments are concerned. The factories presently employing 1 to 9 persons are treated as falling in "unorganised sector"
3. Further the term "worker" has been defined as "a person who is wholly or partly employed whether directly or through any agent or contractor for wages or reward in connection with the work of any small factory to which this Act applies but does not include a person performing administrative, supervisory or managerial functions." As per section 54 of said Act, in respect of said small factory, ESI Act, 1948 and EPF & MP Act, 1952 will not be applicable and hence the workers of the category of "performing administrative, supervisory or managerial functions" will neither be coverable under said proposed Act, nor under ESI Act or EPF & MP Act, 1952. Therefore, such administrative , supervisory or managerial type of employees perhaps will not be coverable under any of such Acts and social security benefits will not be available to such staff.
4. Further, as mentioned by me in earlier comments in this thread, the Government is silent on the recommendations of the 2nd National Commission on Labour. If above proposed Act is passed, then it will be perhaps 45th Labour Law as passed by the Parliament of India. Therefore, it will add to another authority in the name of Labour Inspector etc. as will be established under said proposed Act. Had Govt. taken action, as per recommendations of 2nd Labour Commission, such situation could have been avoided to the great extent. I am mentioning following famous Quotes by eminent jurists/writers on multiplicity of laws as follows:-
CICERO: "THE MORE LAWS, THE LESS JUSTICE".
WINSTON S. CHURCHILL: " IF YOU HAVE TEN THOUSAND REGULATIONS, YOU DESTROY ALL RESPECT OF LAWS"
LEO TOLESTOY: " WRITTING LAWS IS EASY, BUT GOVERNING IS DIFFICULT."
5. Even after the above proposed Act is passed, enforced and implemented, the questions will definitely arise as to who will check the compliance of said Act in present situation when the visits of said "Inspectors" have been barred by the administrative instructions of the departments. And even, by general tendency and practice, the compliance position of labour laws is much lower.
From India, Noida
Sir(s),
1. I may further add that under section 25, Chapter-VIII of the said proposed Act, the employees will be required to pay a contribution of 20% of wages(as defined) and the employer will also be required to pay contributions @ 20 % of wages as defined. 10% of such share is marked for provident fund and 10% for health insurance. These rates are more higher than the present rate of 1.75 % + 4.75 % as applicable in ESI Act, 1948 and perhaps will be less favourable to such employees.
2. Further, in the said proposed Act, there is no mention of wage ceiling of Rs.15000/- presently applicable both in respect of EPF & ESI. It will, perhaps mean that all workers (except managerial etc.as defined) irrespective of any wage classification/limit will be coverable under said Act. Even in small establishment, there are number of employees getting wages exceeding to Rs. 15000/- especially in IT etc. sectors. Such provisions will not be beneficial to the employees getting higher wages.
3. Further, it is also mentioned in above Chapter VIII that such schemes will be framed under the provisions of IRDA Act, 1999. The said Act so far as I understand, controls schemes framed as commercial insurance and in such schemes, there will always be some cape on amounts and level of medical facilities. Thus, such health insurance schemes, which will be commercial insurance scheme in its nature, will not be beneficial to such workers of small factories.
4. I submit my doubts as above for consideration by seniors and experts on the subject.
From India, Noida
1. I may further add that under section 25, Chapter-VIII of the said proposed Act, the employees will be required to pay a contribution of 20% of wages(as defined) and the employer will also be required to pay contributions @ 20 % of wages as defined. 10% of such share is marked for provident fund and 10% for health insurance. These rates are more higher than the present rate of 1.75 % + 4.75 % as applicable in ESI Act, 1948 and perhaps will be less favourable to such employees.
2. Further, in the said proposed Act, there is no mention of wage ceiling of Rs.15000/- presently applicable both in respect of EPF & ESI. It will, perhaps mean that all workers (except managerial etc.as defined) irrespective of any wage classification/limit will be coverable under said Act. Even in small establishment, there are number of employees getting wages exceeding to Rs. 15000/- especially in IT etc. sectors. Such provisions will not be beneficial to the employees getting higher wages.
3. Further, it is also mentioned in above Chapter VIII that such schemes will be framed under the provisions of IRDA Act, 1999. The said Act so far as I understand, controls schemes framed as commercial insurance and in such schemes, there will always be some cape on amounts and level of medical facilities. Thus, such health insurance schemes, which will be commercial insurance scheme in its nature, will not be beneficial to such workers of small factories.
4. I submit my doubts as above for consideration by seniors and experts on the subject.
From India, Noida
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.
WhatsApp Image 2020-12-03 at 2.39.55 PM.jpeg