We have issue four worker hit our supervisor we have suspend them under pending inquiry suspension now after inquiry they have confess their indiscipline now management & union jointly decide to take them back by punishment of four day suspension. Pending inquiry run for almost one and half year we have give them 50% of their wages for first three month & then 75% of their wages to till date now union demanding their full salary of last one and half year is it legal? please guide about that.
From India, Gandhinagar
From India, Gandhinagar
if inquiry is not completed in 180 days so payment of allowance is 100%, Refer Gujarat I E Standing orders Act, 1946,Section 10-c NOTES .
From India, Poona
3From India, Poona
Dear Ashish: First of all, see the Standing Order provisions applicable to you. The guiding principle is that a suspended employee is entitled to full salary etc, only if he is exonerated. Since the parties have mutually resolved the matter, it shows that the charges have been accepted by the parties, so there is no question of exoneration. Moreover, there is a suspension of four days suspension as punishment, so there is no question of any more payment. In deed, in addition to the suspension pending enquiry, the employee is to be treated as suspended for four more days as punishment. Ho for suspension days. Hope that the punishment order clarifies that. In case you pay salary etc for the suspension period, this would amount to condonation of the misconduct which is not the case here. Assaulting supervisor at work place is serious charge and merits termination of service. The punishment is limited to supension for four days is a big relief already granted and any thing further would not be in the interest of discipline. So you be very rigid in this regard. KK
From India, Bhopal
From India, Bhopal
The inquiry took 18 months to complete
and at the end of the inquiry, the disciplinary hearing gave 4 days suspension.
That means it was a minor misconduct, which is why the punishment is so less.
In that case, suspension of 18 months, of which 6 months is at 50% of salary and balance at 75% of salary, is definitely unfair, dont you think ? If the facts is what i have stated above, then you should definately give that money back to them
From India, Mumbai
and at the end of the inquiry, the disciplinary hearing gave 4 days suspension.
That means it was a minor misconduct, which is why the punishment is so less.
In that case, suspension of 18 months, of which 6 months is at 50% of salary and balance at 75% of salary, is definitely unfair, dont you think ? If the facts is what i have stated above, then you should definately give that money back to them
From India, Mumbai
The payment of subsistence allowance occur only if you are covered by IE (SO ) Act 1946 or any state laws on payment of subsistence allowance. Varghese Mathew 09961266966
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
Dear Ashish,
This seems to be mutual agreement / settlement between management and union, otherwise such type of misconduct, if prooved, attracts serious punishment including termination of the services. If both management and union is ready to reach to an agreement, I would suggest you make settlement under 2p of ID Act where you can reduce his punishment and the suspended employee can unconditionally ready to settel this dispute and sign the agreement, where he will have to forgo his back wages or wages for the period of suspenssion. It is mutual agreement so legal provisions are not applicable.
PD
From India, Mumbai
This seems to be mutual agreement / settlement between management and union, otherwise such type of misconduct, if prooved, attracts serious punishment including termination of the services. If both management and union is ready to reach to an agreement, I would suggest you make settlement under 2p of ID Act where you can reduce his punishment and the suspended employee can unconditionally ready to settel this dispute and sign the agreement, where he will have to forgo his back wages or wages for the period of suspenssion. It is mutual agreement so legal provisions are not applicable.
PD
From India, Mumbai
I some what agree with the learned followers specially Mr. KK Nair. I would like to add the following :-
In case of Charge-sheet and/or suspension, there is specific mention regarding treatment of Suspension Period in the Certified Standing Orders applicable to the establishment/industry. In case there is no such certified standing order, the provisions of Model Standing Orders are made applicable.
As per provisions of Standing Orders, no wage/salary is paid for the period of first 10 days. After expiry of 10th day, if suspension continues, the Accused Workman is paid Subsistence Allowance @ 50% of his normal salary/wages. After expiry of 21 days, if suspension continues, AW is paid @ 75% of his salary/ wages if the inquiry is delayed due to reasons which are not attributed to the AW and/or it is reduced to 25% if the inquiry is being delayed for the reasons attributed to AW. But this reduction of Subsistence Allowance has to be recorded in the inquiry proceedings by the Inquiry Officer. Furthermore, the workman has to give an undertaking periodically that he has not undertaken any alternate employment during the period of suspension. In absence of such undertaking or refusal to give one by the AW, will make him liable for non-payment of Subsistence Allowance.
There is no question of making 100% payment. This 100 % payment will only be made after the final out-come of the inquiry and findings of I.O. in which he has exonerated the AW of the charges framed against him, for which he was charged/suspended. Making full payment prior to the outcome of Inquiry report/exoneration, will imply to automatic exoneration of AW. It may be noted that the amount paid as Subsistence allowance is recoverable from the 100% amount, if paid at a later stage. Statutory deductions will be made from the Subsistence Allowance viz. PF, I. TAX, Loans/advances etc. etc.
AK Jain
From India, Jabalpur
In case of Charge-sheet and/or suspension, there is specific mention regarding treatment of Suspension Period in the Certified Standing Orders applicable to the establishment/industry. In case there is no such certified standing order, the provisions of Model Standing Orders are made applicable.
As per provisions of Standing Orders, no wage/salary is paid for the period of first 10 days. After expiry of 10th day, if suspension continues, the Accused Workman is paid Subsistence Allowance @ 50% of his normal salary/wages. After expiry of 21 days, if suspension continues, AW is paid @ 75% of his salary/ wages if the inquiry is delayed due to reasons which are not attributed to the AW and/or it is reduced to 25% if the inquiry is being delayed for the reasons attributed to AW. But this reduction of Subsistence Allowance has to be recorded in the inquiry proceedings by the Inquiry Officer. Furthermore, the workman has to give an undertaking periodically that he has not undertaken any alternate employment during the period of suspension. In absence of such undertaking or refusal to give one by the AW, will make him liable for non-payment of Subsistence Allowance.
There is no question of making 100% payment. This 100 % payment will only be made after the final out-come of the inquiry and findings of I.O. in which he has exonerated the AW of the charges framed against him, for which he was charged/suspended. Making full payment prior to the outcome of Inquiry report/exoneration, will imply to automatic exoneration of AW. It may be noted that the amount paid as Subsistence allowance is recoverable from the 100% amount, if paid at a later stage. Statutory deductions will be made from the Subsistence Allowance viz. PF, I. TAX, Loans/advances etc. etc.
AK Jain
From India, Jabalpur
I have only one question on this :
The AW has been suspended for 18 months and has lost part of wages, allowance and increment
At the end of 18 months, he has been awarded suspension of 4 days (less than 0.75% of period already served).
This is not just and equitable
All that is required then for the company wishing to harass someone is to suspend, delay inquiry for years and in the end even if the punishment awarded is minor, but not fully exoned, the worker has lost for no reason.
So this can't be correct as such traversity of justice will not be allowed in labour laws
From India, Mumbai
The AW has been suspended for 18 months and has lost part of wages, allowance and increment
At the end of 18 months, he has been awarded suspension of 4 days (less than 0.75% of period already served).
This is not just and equitable
All that is required then for the company wishing to harass someone is to suspend, delay inquiry for years and in the end even if the punishment awarded is minor, but not fully exoned, the worker has lost for no reason.
So this can't be correct as such traversity of justice will not be allowed in labour laws
From India, Mumbai
There is no such provision in sec 10A of standing orders Act 1946,as posted by Mr Jain. Varghese Mathew
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
Dear all, Responding to Shri Saswatabanerjee, let it not be presumed that delay of 18 months may have been caused by management, in deed from my experience of over three decades, I can say that in most cases it is the workman/defence helper who delays the enquiry. The logic is that with the passage of time, tempers would be cooled and some sympathy would creep in. Managements are more or less interested in expediting the enquiry to teach a lesson to the erring employee and so also to others. KK
From India, Bhopal
From India, Bhopal
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.
Initial telephonic inquiry.doc
Domestic Inquiry.pdf