Dear All,
I would like to inform you that one contract employee has filed a case against the principal employer, stating that he was an employee of ABC Company (Principal employer) and not AZ Company (Contractor). In response to this, the Conciliation Officer sent a notice to the principal employer to attend conciliation proceedings based on the contract employee's petition.
We attended the conciliation proceedings and submitted relevant documents to prove that he was a contract employee. However, the contract employee has not submitted any documents so far to prove that he is an employee of ABC Company. We requested the Conciliation Officer to close the proceedings since the contract employee has not submitted any documents to prove that he is our employee. However, he is not interested in closing the proceedings and has also shown no interest in reviewing the documents we have submitted. Therefore, we have decided not to attend further proceedings.
Kindly advise on this issue.
Thank you,
[Your Name]
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
5I would like to inform you that one contract employee has filed a case against the principal employer, stating that he was an employee of ABC Company (Principal employer) and not AZ Company (Contractor). In response to this, the Conciliation Officer sent a notice to the principal employer to attend conciliation proceedings based on the contract employee's petition.
We attended the conciliation proceedings and submitted relevant documents to prove that he was a contract employee. However, the contract employee has not submitted any documents so far to prove that he is an employee of ABC Company. We requested the Conciliation Officer to close the proceedings since the contract employee has not submitted any documents to prove that he is our employee. However, he is not interested in closing the proceedings and has also shown no interest in reviewing the documents we have submitted. Therefore, we have decided not to attend further proceedings.
Kindly advise on this issue.
Thank you,
[Your Name]
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear RNs,
In the capacity of Conciliation Officer under the ID Act, 1947, he is only to try for an amicable settlement on the demand notice filed by the workman. If no settlement could be arrived at between the parties, then he is required to send a failure report (FOC) to the appropriate government. Thus, he is not in a position to close the proceedings. You should not hesitate in attending the conciliation proceedings. For more details, please go through sections 11 and 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
With Regards,
R.N. Khola
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the capacity of Conciliation Officer under the ID Act, 1947, he is only to try for an amicable settlement on the demand notice filed by the workman. If no settlement could be arrived at between the parties, then he is required to send a failure report (FOC) to the appropriate government. Thus, he is not in a position to close the proceedings. You should not hesitate in attending the conciliation proceedings. For more details, please go through sections 11 and 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
With Regards,
R.N. Khola
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Conciliation in the instant case would be based on the following issues:
1. Whether the employee was performing work similar to the regular employees of the company or not, that is whether the work is perennial in nature or not.
2. Whether there were direct supervisions by the Principal employer or not.
3. Whether the contract between the Principal employer and the contractor is sham or not.
If the contract is sham or if the DLO finds that the work being performed by the contract labour is perennial in nature/regular in nature that is connected to the core activities of the company, then there is a chance that the DLO will abolish engagement of contract labour in such activities. However, the employee cannot demand regularization of his job. The employer can terminate the contract and start engaging direct workers for that job. During recruitment, the then contract labours shall be given preference, but that will not have any retrospective effect.
Therefore, it is meaningless to abstain from the meeting but do attend the meetings and defend that the work was purely on a contract basis and there did not exist any employee-employer relationship between the complainant employee and the Principal employer.
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Whether the employee was performing work similar to the regular employees of the company or not, that is whether the work is perennial in nature or not.
2. Whether there were direct supervisions by the Principal employer or not.
3. Whether the contract between the Principal employer and the contractor is sham or not.
If the contract is sham or if the DLO finds that the work being performed by the contract labour is perennial in nature/regular in nature that is connected to the core activities of the company, then there is a chance that the DLO will abolish engagement of contract labour in such activities. However, the employee cannot demand regularization of his job. The employer can terminate the contract and start engaging direct workers for that job. During recruitment, the then contract labours shall be given preference, but that will not have any retrospective effect.
Therefore, it is meaningless to abstain from the meeting but do attend the meetings and defend that the work was purely on a contract basis and there did not exist any employee-employer relationship between the complainant employee and the Principal employer.
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear MS,
You will have to honor the law of the land to let its course decide the case. Your absence during the conciliation proceedings can harm only the interest of your organization. You may present your own case supported by genuine documents. Let it become a failed case, as suggested by Shri R.N. Khola.
PS Dhingra
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You will have to honor the law of the land to let its course decide the case. Your absence during the conciliation proceedings can harm only the interest of your organization. You may present your own case supported by genuine documents. Let it become a failed case, as suggested by Shri R.N. Khola.
PS Dhingra
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1) Attend the proceedings and insist on closure.
2) Write a letter to the conciliation authority about the long delay and the lack of interest from contract employees in the issue.
3) If there is no reply or any developments, refrain from attending the proceedings.
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
2) Write a letter to the conciliation authority about the long delay and the lack of interest from contract employees in the issue.
3) If there is no reply or any developments, refrain from attending the proceedings.
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear,
As per the Apex Court decision in the famous SAIL case, the conciliator has no power to decide the issue of a claim for permanency. It is only the Industrial Adjudicator who can decide the issue. In fact, as per the amendment, on the failure of the conciliator to make a reference, the worker can make the reference to the Labour Court.
Please keep attending the proceedings and patiently wait for his order, either of reference or closure. Patience is the key word for an HR person.
Rajan Associates
https://www.citehr.com/285737-legal-...-industry.html
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As per the Apex Court decision in the famous SAIL case, the conciliator has no power to decide the issue of a claim for permanency. It is only the Industrial Adjudicator who can decide the issue. In fact, as per the amendment, on the failure of the conciliator to make a reference, the worker can make the reference to the Labour Court.
Please keep attending the proceedings and patiently wait for his order, either of reference or closure. Patience is the key word for an HR person.
Rajan Associates
https://www.citehr.com/285737-legal-...-industry.html
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I presume the proceedings are under the ID Act. The contract labor does not come within the definition of workmen under the ID Act. Hence, where there is no master-servant relationship, the principal employer is not liable to answer. Please raise this preliminary objection on the maintainability of the claim itself. However, you should be present and contest the matter.
From India, Bhopal
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Bhopal
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The conciliation officer has to admit the documents filed by you if they are relevant to the issue under conciliation. Please ask him to admit and sign the conciliation recordings. You can also submit to him that all the records and deposition made by you are sufficient to prove that he is not your employee and further ask him to write in the records that you have nothing more to submit and close the proceedings. He has to accept your pleading. Ultimately, he has to send the final report to the Government, and hence ensure that whatever you want to say should be recorded properly in the conciliation proceedings.
Finally, my request is to maintain cordial relations with the conciliation officer.
From India, Secunderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Finally, my request is to maintain cordial relations with the conciliation officer.
From India, Secunderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.