Dear all,
I have attached views and objections regarding raising the limit under ESI. Honestly, I am thankful to the retired ESI person; without his opinion, I could not have completed this task.
I have also attached one more file on behalf of employers' objections.
Please try to send your views by adding or subtracting at the earliest.
If you are in contact with employers' associations or federations, then send the objections on their letterhead by amending the draft attached.
If someone or a union can approach the High Court to stay the limit, and in Mumbai, if any association needs any help, please give them my contact details.
Regards,
Hiren Chheda
09821078457
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
11I have attached views and objections regarding raising the limit under ESI. Honestly, I am thankful to the retired ESI person; without his opinion, I could not have completed this task.
I have also attached one more file on behalf of employers' objections.
Please try to send your views by adding or subtracting at the earliest.
If you are in contact with employers' associations or federations, then send the objections on their letterhead by amending the draft attached.
If someone or a union can approach the High Court to stay the limit, and in Mumbai, if any association needs any help, please give them my contact details.
Regards,
Hiren Chheda
09821078457
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Hiren Chheda,
I have read both of your documents. I strongly disagree with your proposition.
Your main contention is that ESI does not have adequate infrastructure to cater to the needs of existing beneficiaries. With an increase in the slab of ESI contribution, the number of beneficiaries would go up. Therefore, beneficiaries would not be able to avail of the benefits.
If the ESI infrastructure is inadequate, then Mr. Hiren Chheda, you can file a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) i.e. writ mandamus and direct the ESI corporation to raise the quality of their services by bringing a court order.
If you say that for a long time you had been an employer, then how many times have your employees complained to you that they do not get the benefits of ESI as they are supposed to get? If they had complained to you, then how many times did you refer their complaint to the ESI commissioner of your area? If the ESI commissioner of your area did not heed your complaint, then how many times have you complained to the central authorities of ESI?
Granted, Mr. Hiren Chheda, that you are quite honest in the remittance of ESI contribution. But then how many employers are like you? How many evade the contribution and still enjoy impunity? Now you have given a submission to authorities to desist from increasing the ceiling, but have you ever approached trade bodies like CII, ASSOCHAM, or FICCI and told them that they should ensure that all employers remit their contributions timely and in a fair manner?
Have you done all of the above? If not, then what stopped you from doing all this?
In your petition, you have mentioned that when the last revision was done, trade unions had approached the court challenging the increase. They also cited the same reasons that benefits do not percolate to the intended beneficiaries. The approach of trade unions is always dubious. Many trade unions are puppets at the hands of employers. When the beneficiaries do not get benefits, then why did these trade unions not approach the court? Instead of raising hassles with employers on petty issues, why did these unions not channelize their energies into fighting for the cause of workers? Why has none of the unions ever held a dharna in front of the ESI office?
Divesting the benefits of social securities is not a solution. Raising the quality of life is a solution. What you are suggesting is to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. Today your objection is on raising the ceiling of ESI contribution, tomorrow you may approach the Government of India to stop benefits for below poverty line (BPL) families. A quarter-century ago, the then prime minister had openly admitted that only 15 paise of a rupee reach the BPL families. 25 years later, the situation is no different, but then this is what your or my leadership is - to stand for what is just and not run away from the truth!
Regards,
Dinesh V. Divekar
"Limit of your words is the limit of your world"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have read both of your documents. I strongly disagree with your proposition.
Your main contention is that ESI does not have adequate infrastructure to cater to the needs of existing beneficiaries. With an increase in the slab of ESI contribution, the number of beneficiaries would go up. Therefore, beneficiaries would not be able to avail of the benefits.
If the ESI infrastructure is inadequate, then Mr. Hiren Chheda, you can file a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) i.e. writ mandamus and direct the ESI corporation to raise the quality of their services by bringing a court order.
If you say that for a long time you had been an employer, then how many times have your employees complained to you that they do not get the benefits of ESI as they are supposed to get? If they had complained to you, then how many times did you refer their complaint to the ESI commissioner of your area? If the ESI commissioner of your area did not heed your complaint, then how many times have you complained to the central authorities of ESI?
Granted, Mr. Hiren Chheda, that you are quite honest in the remittance of ESI contribution. But then how many employers are like you? How many evade the contribution and still enjoy impunity? Now you have given a submission to authorities to desist from increasing the ceiling, but have you ever approached trade bodies like CII, ASSOCHAM, or FICCI and told them that they should ensure that all employers remit their contributions timely and in a fair manner?
Have you done all of the above? If not, then what stopped you from doing all this?
In your petition, you have mentioned that when the last revision was done, trade unions had approached the court challenging the increase. They also cited the same reasons that benefits do not percolate to the intended beneficiaries. The approach of trade unions is always dubious. Many trade unions are puppets at the hands of employers. When the beneficiaries do not get benefits, then why did these trade unions not approach the court? Instead of raising hassles with employers on petty issues, why did these unions not channelize their energies into fighting for the cause of workers? Why has none of the unions ever held a dharna in front of the ESI office?
Divesting the benefits of social securities is not a solution. Raising the quality of life is a solution. What you are suggesting is to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. Today your objection is on raising the ceiling of ESI contribution, tomorrow you may approach the Government of India to stop benefits for below poverty line (BPL) families. A quarter-century ago, the then prime minister had openly admitted that only 15 paise of a rupee reach the BPL families. 25 years later, the situation is no different, but then this is what your or my leadership is - to stand for what is just and not run away from the truth!
Regards,
Dinesh V. Divekar
"Limit of your words is the limit of your world"
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Employee Benefits.doc
Employee Benefits.zip