Dear All, Can an executive approach the labour court for any dispute with the organization or he can only approach the civil court. Kindly provide with your valuable input. Thanks & Regards C.M.Mohla
From India, Delhi
14From India, Delhi
all the disputes arisen from Schedule II can be adjudicvated in labour court.
ie, leaglity of s.o , interpretation of matters in s.o, dismissal etc..
all the disputes arisen from schedule III can be adjudicated in tribunals, national tribunals and also labour court. ie, leaves, hour of work, pay, retrenchment, rationalisation, holidays, overtime etc.
Moreover only individual defined as "workmen" in an industry can raise a dispute. No executive can raise the dispute, who is a management employee/cadre., ie he/she must be a workmen under id act
From India, Calcutta
ie, leaglity of s.o , interpretation of matters in s.o, dismissal etc..
all the disputes arisen from schedule III can be adjudicated in tribunals, national tribunals and also labour court. ie, leaves, hour of work, pay, retrenchment, rationalisation, holidays, overtime etc.
Moreover only individual defined as "workmen" in an industry can raise a dispute. No executive can raise the dispute, who is a management employee/cadre., ie he/she must be a workmen under id act
From India, Calcutta
Dear Sir,
Only if you fit the definition of "workman" as per Industrial disputes act, can you raise a dispute in the Labour or Industrial courts otherwise the jurisdiction will be ousted. Even if the designation is executive or manager or officer, if you are performing duties of manual, clerical, technical nature and not taking any independent decisions, you would be a workman under the Act. Nomenclature merely does not decide the status.
From India, Pune
Only if you fit the definition of "workman" as per Industrial disputes act, can you raise a dispute in the Labour or Industrial courts otherwise the jurisdiction will be ousted. Even if the designation is executive or manager or officer, if you are performing duties of manual, clerical, technical nature and not taking any independent decisions, you would be a workman under the Act. Nomenclature merely does not decide the status.
From India, Pune
Dear All, The employee is working at an supervisory position, wherein he have 10-15 working under him. Regards C.M.MOhla
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Elaborating further what Dmc said, only work man can approach a Labour Court and it all depends up on the nature of duties which the supervisor is performing and a Supervisor drawing wages up to Rs 10000/- is a workman.
B.Saikumar
HR & Labour Law advsor
mumbai
From India, Mumbai
B.Saikumar
HR & Labour Law advsor
mumbai
From India, Mumbai
I would like to add one more thing. A employee who has not been given the authority either to sanction leave of his subordinates, initiate disciplinary action against his subordinates or appraise his subordinates of their performance is a workman even if by designation he comes under managerial or supervisory capacity.
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Dmc &Madhu are right.Please to sec.2(s),2A(b ) of the ID Act.There are n"number of SC decision to prove their point ,all of which cannot be referred here. VARGHESE MATHEW O9961266966
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
dear sir
There are many case laws which have settled the position of the definition of workman under the I.D.act. For instance, a pilot also has been held to be a workman. In your case you may refer to the judgement of A.D.INAMDAR V. M/S BAJAJ TEMPO LTD. AND OTHERS reported in 2000(86) FLR 345 passed by Bombay high court which highlights the duties of supervisors.
From India, Pune
There are many case laws which have settled the position of the definition of workman under the I.D.act. For instance, a pilot also has been held to be a workman. In your case you may refer to the judgement of A.D.INAMDAR V. M/S BAJAJ TEMPO LTD. AND OTHERS reported in 2000(86) FLR 345 passed by Bombay high court which highlights the duties of supervisors.
From India, Pune
Dear Friends,
I would like to share my views on the subject. The question of designation depends on the nature of work he do. There may glorified designations, but the nature of the work will prove in the eyes of law - Under Section 2(s) of the ID Act. The Managers/Supervisors should have the powers of sanctioning leave, alloting OT, powers to permit his subordinates permission to go out, drafting of work schedule, planning of his department work, appraising his subordinates, recommending for promotion during appraisal, attending managerial meetings and giving suggestions to management, part of ISO -9001 team, etc. Appointment and disciplinary powers shall not be vested with most of the supervisors or Juniors level. Hence, these two aspects will not much relevant for supervisory category in the eyes of law. The Supervisor/Executive is one who supervises the work of his subordinates. If he only supervises the work of his subordinates and gives them the direction, then he will not come under the perview of Section 2(s) of the ID Act. The glorified executive or supervisors do any manual, clerical or technical nature of job, yes, he covered under Sec. 2(s).
Hope this clears the doubts of my friends.
G.K.Manjunath,
Sr. Manager-HR
From India, Bangalore
I would like to share my views on the subject. The question of designation depends on the nature of work he do. There may glorified designations, but the nature of the work will prove in the eyes of law - Under Section 2(s) of the ID Act. The Managers/Supervisors should have the powers of sanctioning leave, alloting OT, powers to permit his subordinates permission to go out, drafting of work schedule, planning of his department work, appraising his subordinates, recommending for promotion during appraisal, attending managerial meetings and giving suggestions to management, part of ISO -9001 team, etc. Appointment and disciplinary powers shall not be vested with most of the supervisors or Juniors level. Hence, these two aspects will not much relevant for supervisory category in the eyes of law. The Supervisor/Executive is one who supervises the work of his subordinates. If he only supervises the work of his subordinates and gives them the direction, then he will not come under the perview of Section 2(s) of the ID Act. The glorified executive or supervisors do any manual, clerical or technical nature of job, yes, he covered under Sec. 2(s).
Hope this clears the doubts of my friends.
G.K.Manjunath,
Sr. Manager-HR
From India, Bangalore
Dear Mohla
I would like to clarify further more-
1. First of all be clear that for filing of a case in Labour Court designation is not important, any employee can raise a dispute before a Labour Court if he is a “workman” within the meaning of sec.2(s) of the IDAct, 1947.
Whether the employee is a workman or not to be decided on the basis of nature of work and other condition of service and not by mare designation (as alredy clerified in the previous many posts stated above)
As such the answer of your first query is affirmative, an employee designated as Executive or an Executive can approach to Labour Court if he satisfied the conditions of sec. 2(s) of the ID Act.
2. I further like to clarify that not “any Dispute” can be refer to a Labour court it must be a industrial dispute within the meaning of Sec. 2(k) of ID Act,1947 and the "Organization” must be a “Industry” within the meaning of Sec. 2(j) of the ID Act.
3. If any employee does not fall within the definition of workman as stated above he can raise his claim in a Civil Court and get it adjudicated.
From the further post dated 24.8.2012 of you, it appears that the employee is designated as supervisor and supervising 10-15 workers but you have not mentioned exact nature of his duties and his salary details. However, such an employee can file his case in Labour Court unless employer established that he is drawing salary more than 10,000/- and exercises managerial powers vested in him and he is barred by sec. 2(s)(iv) of ID Act.
Regards
PKJAIN
From India, Delhi
I would like to clarify further more-
1. First of all be clear that for filing of a case in Labour Court designation is not important, any employee can raise a dispute before a Labour Court if he is a “workman” within the meaning of sec.2(s) of the IDAct, 1947.
Whether the employee is a workman or not to be decided on the basis of nature of work and other condition of service and not by mare designation (as alredy clerified in the previous many posts stated above)
As such the answer of your first query is affirmative, an employee designated as Executive or an Executive can approach to Labour Court if he satisfied the conditions of sec. 2(s) of the ID Act.
2. I further like to clarify that not “any Dispute” can be refer to a Labour court it must be a industrial dispute within the meaning of Sec. 2(k) of ID Act,1947 and the "Organization” must be a “Industry” within the meaning of Sec. 2(j) of the ID Act.
3. If any employee does not fall within the definition of workman as stated above he can raise his claim in a Civil Court and get it adjudicated.
From the further post dated 24.8.2012 of you, it appears that the employee is designated as supervisor and supervising 10-15 workers but you have not mentioned exact nature of his duties and his salary details. However, such an employee can file his case in Labour Court unless employer established that he is drawing salary more than 10,000/- and exercises managerial powers vested in him and he is barred by sec. 2(s)(iv) of ID Act.
Regards
PKJAIN
From India, Delhi
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.
A NEW HR EXECUTIVE HAND BOOK.pdf
The Positive Approach.doc