Is there any reference in Industrial dispute act that management can with hold salary till during pendency of proceedings in the court for workman or management fails to prove 'MISCONDUCT' in the court and submits report without terminating/suspending the employee. An early reply will be highly appreciated.
From India, Kanpur
1From India, Kanpur
Your question and the cause of action behind it as narrated are not clear to me.
Whether the pending Court Proceedings is sequel to the dispute raised by the workman consequent on his dismissal?
If so whether any domestic enquiry was conducted prior to dismissal or not?
The proposition " Management fails to prove the misconduct in the Court and submits report without terminating/suspending the employee" does actually indicate simply the enquiry conducted before the Court on the misconduct for which the punishment of dismissal was awarded based on a defective enquiry and to rectify the defects the subsequent enquiry before the Court?
Payment of salary is a question after the orders of dismissal being set aside and award of reinstatement with back-wages by the Court. Whether the question relates to the unwillingness of the implementation of the award in a situation of appeal against the award?
Pl.clarify.
From India, Salem
Whether the pending Court Proceedings is sequel to the dispute raised by the workman consequent on his dismissal?
If so whether any domestic enquiry was conducted prior to dismissal or not?
The proposition " Management fails to prove the misconduct in the Court and submits report without terminating/suspending the employee" does actually indicate simply the enquiry conducted before the Court on the misconduct for which the punishment of dismissal was awarded based on a defective enquiry and to rectify the defects the subsequent enquiry before the Court?
Payment of salary is a question after the orders of dismissal being set aside and award of reinstatement with back-wages by the Court. Whether the question relates to the unwillingness of the implementation of the award in a situation of appeal against the award?
Pl.clarify.
From India, Salem
Dear Pharma Company HR,
Management can not withhold salary of an Employee who is on the Rolls of the Employer.You have not mentioned the reasons for withholding of Salary by the Employer.Further, you have not mentioned whether an Employee has been terminated from the Service.if the service of an Employee has been terminated, the question of payment of Salary does not arise.Please apply your mind & furnish required details.
From India, New Delhi
Management can not withhold salary of an Employee who is on the Rolls of the Employer.You have not mentioned the reasons for withholding of Salary by the Employer.Further, you have not mentioned whether an Employee has been terminated from the Service.if the service of an Employee has been terminated, the question of payment of Salary does not arise.Please apply your mind & furnish required details.
From India, New Delhi
Thanks for the prompt reply. In this case enquiry has been conducted after transfer of the employee. As till date the employee has not been dismissed but salary has been stopped immediately after transfer i.e. 2 year back.. As C.B. case is in the labour Court, on question of demanding interim relief in the court, the presiding officer has asked to bring reference regarding interim relief if any given in law. I seek your suggestion in this matter.Enquiry has been closed
From India, Kanpur
From India, Kanpur
Most probably the employee must be a Sales Promotion Employee. Whether he joined at the new station after transfer? Whether any dispute raised by the employee against the transfer? Better furnish the complete deatails in a single go.
From India, Salem
From India, Salem
The employee is covered under SPE act. He never joined at the transferred location and asked for Standing order compliance by the labour authorities which was not there as the employers failed to show certified copy of model standing order as confirmed by labour deptt. Immediately employee raised the dispute under section 10 (1) c of I.D. act with reference from State Labour Deptt with C.B. case. As in this matter till date the management has neither suspended/ termiminated, chargesheeted or retrenched the employee, the employee has placed an application for interim relief so as to look after his family on humanitarian grounds.Transfer order is still challenged in absence of standing order. Seeking your valuable comments. Reference of labour deptt. is ' Is transfer of the Sales promotion employee justified/legal ? If not, then the concerned sales promotion employee has every Right to get the benefits etc under what details?
From India, Kanpur
From India, Kanpur
Condition for Transfer of Service has been mentioned in the Appointment Letter? Whether your establishment comes under the Definition of "industrial Employment" as defined in Standing Orders act? Whether your establishment is Employing 50 or More Employees?When Employee refused to report for work at the place where his services transferred, did management issued him Show cause notice? Application for interim Relief can be objected by the management also with valid arguments.If it is not a bonafide Transfer & Management not followed due procedure, Transfer order will be set aside
From India, New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
"industrial employment" (Wrongly menioned) should be read as "industrial Establishment"
From India, New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
The employer has no legal backing to with hold the salary whatever might be the reason behind this action. And not joining in the transferred place is not an excuse. Pl.refer Payment of wages Act, if he is covered under this act.
From India, Bangalore
From India, Bangalore
Dear Pharma Company HR,
Steady increase of industrial disputes between the Pharma Companies and their SP Employees, particularly on the issue of transfer is indicative of poor HRM in such enterprises. To my understanding transfer is not the real issue of contention for both the management and the SPEs are well aware that transfer is an incidence of employment. Unfortunately both the resourceful partners of employment in the Pharmaceutical Industry always tend to arm-twist each other at the slightest provocation from either side in stead of going down to the rock-bottom of the performance issues and difficult service conditions created by each other respectively and solving them amicably. Because of the higher academic qualifications, attractive salary and perks and independent nature of the performance of the SPEs, the managements refuse to recognize them as " workman " under the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 despite the judicial dicta and statutory amendment. The SPEs in their turn shift the blame on the alleged unrealistic targets fixed by the managements and subjective supervisory controls exercised by the middle level managers. The invariable pan-India presence of most of such companies is a blessing in disguise to the managements. Therefore, transfer on work exigencies is a ploy to dispense with the services of an unwanted SPE and the employees also fight it tooth and nail without obeying the orders of transfer on the grounds of victimisation and unfair labour practice. Hence, the problems raised in your post.
To reiterate strictly, transfer is an incidence of service and it is the prerogative of the employer to decide where, when and how long an employee can work. At the same time, it shall not be a measure of victimisation or coloroble exercise of power or against the terms of the contract of employment relating to service conditions or applicable Standing Orders. When the affected employee chooses not to obey the transfer orders can not claim wages or salary though he's raised a dispute u/s 2k of the ID Act,1947. The Labour Court has no powers to grant any interim relief to such an employee. Even the management can initiate disciplinary action against such an employee if it is so provided in the service regulations and dismiss him with the prior permission of the Labour Court u/s 33(1) of the ID Act,1947. Otherwise the employment relations continue though the employee is not entitled to salary/wages for the time being on the doctrine of no work-no wages.
From India, Salem
Steady increase of industrial disputes between the Pharma Companies and their SP Employees, particularly on the issue of transfer is indicative of poor HRM in such enterprises. To my understanding transfer is not the real issue of contention for both the management and the SPEs are well aware that transfer is an incidence of employment. Unfortunately both the resourceful partners of employment in the Pharmaceutical Industry always tend to arm-twist each other at the slightest provocation from either side in stead of going down to the rock-bottom of the performance issues and difficult service conditions created by each other respectively and solving them amicably. Because of the higher academic qualifications, attractive salary and perks and independent nature of the performance of the SPEs, the managements refuse to recognize them as " workman " under the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 despite the judicial dicta and statutory amendment. The SPEs in their turn shift the blame on the alleged unrealistic targets fixed by the managements and subjective supervisory controls exercised by the middle level managers. The invariable pan-India presence of most of such companies is a blessing in disguise to the managements. Therefore, transfer on work exigencies is a ploy to dispense with the services of an unwanted SPE and the employees also fight it tooth and nail without obeying the orders of transfer on the grounds of victimisation and unfair labour practice. Hence, the problems raised in your post.
To reiterate strictly, transfer is an incidence of service and it is the prerogative of the employer to decide where, when and how long an employee can work. At the same time, it shall not be a measure of victimisation or coloroble exercise of power or against the terms of the contract of employment relating to service conditions or applicable Standing Orders. When the affected employee chooses not to obey the transfer orders can not claim wages or salary though he's raised a dispute u/s 2k of the ID Act,1947. The Labour Court has no powers to grant any interim relief to such an employee. Even the management can initiate disciplinary action against such an employee if it is so provided in the service regulations and dismiss him with the prior permission of the Labour Court u/s 33(1) of the ID Act,1947. Otherwise the employment relations continue though the employee is not entitled to salary/wages for the time being on the doctrine of no work-no wages.
From India, Salem
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.
Employee Salary file - India 2016 AB.xls
Employee Appraisal Form new.doc