A company with three manufacturing units has its certified standing orders. It is written in the order under the heading "Applicability" - 'any other unit which may come up in the future.'
The company put up a new manufacturing unit in 2016, producing the same product as the old units, near one of the old units in the same city.
In one of the social audits, the auditor raised an objection that the old certified standing order is not applicable to the new unit as the new unit's name is not mentioned in the applicability paragraph of the old certified standing orders.
Questions:
1. When it is written that the CSO will be applicable to any other unit that may come up in the future, is the objection on applicability justified?
2. Can the elected Works Committee, through a resolution, make the old CSO applicable to the new unit?
3. Are questions 1 & 2 illegal? Should the normal process of certification be followed?
I request the members to kindly help me in finding a solution.
Regards,
K.P. Misra
Proprietor
Shreeya Consultancy
Social Accountability Compliance, Values, and HR Systems Implementation
Mob.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
4The company put up a new manufacturing unit in 2016, producing the same product as the old units, near one of the old units in the same city.
In one of the social audits, the auditor raised an objection that the old certified standing order is not applicable to the new unit as the new unit's name is not mentioned in the applicability paragraph of the old certified standing orders.
Questions:
1. When it is written that the CSO will be applicable to any other unit that may come up in the future, is the objection on applicability justified?
2. Can the elected Works Committee, through a resolution, make the old CSO applicable to the new unit?
3. Are questions 1 & 2 illegal? Should the normal process of certification be followed?
I request the members to kindly help me in finding a solution.
Regards,
K.P. Misra
Proprietor
Shreeya Consultancy
Social Accountability Compliance, Values, and HR Systems Implementation
Mob.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Misra,
If the elements of a common balance sheet and functional integrality are present, the various units of the same company can be construed as one organic establishment for the purpose of the application of the Standing Orders certified in respect of the company as a whole. When the applicability of the standing orders has been explicitly extended to any other future unit of the company by the competent Certifying Authority under the special law, the objection of the auditor is an act of excess of enthusiasm. Simply ignore it. If at all any objection is to be raised in this regard, it is the workmen of the establishment and no one else. If the workmen of that particular unit feel such an arrangement is detrimental to their interest, they alone can demand separate standing orders for them. So far, they are silent, which means they unequivocally accept it. Then why should there be such an attempt through the exercise described in the post? Is it to satisfy the audit? I don't think that the social auditor is competent to raise such an objection on a matter decided by the competent authority under the Act. Let the management furnish a reply to the audit accordingly.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If the elements of a common balance sheet and functional integrality are present, the various units of the same company can be construed as one organic establishment for the purpose of the application of the Standing Orders certified in respect of the company as a whole. When the applicability of the standing orders has been explicitly extended to any other future unit of the company by the competent Certifying Authority under the special law, the objection of the auditor is an act of excess of enthusiasm. Simply ignore it. If at all any objection is to be raised in this regard, it is the workmen of the establishment and no one else. If the workmen of that particular unit feel such an arrangement is detrimental to their interest, they alone can demand separate standing orders for them. So far, they are silent, which means they unequivocally accept it. Then why should there be such an attempt through the exercise described in the post? Is it to satisfy the audit? I don't think that the social auditor is competent to raise such an objection on a matter decided by the competent authority under the Act. Let the management furnish a reply to the audit accordingly.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
The Certified Company Standing Orders Act 1946.pdf
Standing Orders Lilly Fashion.doc