I kindly require information on the condition of 240 days of work for contract labor. We have engaged contract laborers through a labor contractor. They are involved in similar processes to our regular employees. My question is, can a contract laborer claim permanency if their work period within our company exceeds 240 days?
I anticipate receiving guidance and insight on this matter. Thank you in advance.
From India, Rajkot
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
4I anticipate receiving guidance and insight on this matter. Thank you in advance.
From India, Rajkot
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No. By efflux of time, contract labor can not claim permanency against the principal employer unless the contract is proved to be sham in industrial adjudication.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
This thread may be of use to you: https://www.citehr.com/429346-after-...permanent.html
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-[The user's reply does not provide a direct answer to the original query regarding the potential claim for permanency by contract labor after 240 days of work. It would be more helpful to address the specific legal aspects and implications in this situation.]
0
0
Umakanthan Sir, Kindly elaborate in simple and easy understandable words. Regards,
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user reply does not address the original post's query about whether a contract labor can claim permanency after working for more than 240 days. Please provide relevant information on this specific scenario. Thank you for your input.
0
0
The contractor workmen cannot claim to be employees of the principal employer. The work of the workmen is valid until the contractor's license under CL (R&A) exists or until the work order is issued to the contractor, whichever is earlier. Working for 240 days does not guarantee absorption by the principal employer.
In the absence of a license under CL (R&A) by the contractor, it provides an opportunity for such a claim. The error has been made by engaging contract labor in a similar process as your regular on-roll workmen. Now, it is your responsibility to terminate the contractor engagement in work of a continuous nature/core work of the company before the claim transforms. In the eyes of the law, this type of contract is considered a camouflage or sham contract. I hope this clarifies your query entirely.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
In the absence of a license under CL (R&A) by the contractor, it provides an opportunity for such a claim. The error has been made by engaging contract labor in a similar process as your regular on-roll workmen. Now, it is your responsibility to terminate the contractor engagement in work of a continuous nature/core work of the company before the claim transforms. In the eyes of the law, this type of contract is considered a camouflage or sham contract. I hope this clarifies your query entirely.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user reply contains inaccuracies. Under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, contract workers can claim permanency if engaged in work of a perennial nature for more than 240 days. It is essential to follow legal requirements to avoid legal repercussions.
0
0
Dear HR Professional,
Engagement of labor through a contractor for the works of an establishment is called the Contract Labor System. Essentially, it is a system of indirect labor involving three parties, namely the principal employer, the contractor, and the contract labor out of a contract for service entered into between the principal employer and the contractor. As such, there is no contractual relationship between the principal employer and the contract labor, even though the latter works for the former. However, employment is a substantial relationship of Employer-Employee formed under a Contract of Service. Therefore, no contract laborer can stake a claim for permanency against his principal employer just because he has worked in the principal employer's establishment for more than 240 days when the contract between his contractor and the principal employer is a genuine one.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
Engagement of labor through a contractor for the works of an establishment is called the Contract Labor System. Essentially, it is a system of indirect labor involving three parties, namely the principal employer, the contractor, and the contract labor out of a contract for service entered into between the principal employer and the contractor. As such, there is no contractual relationship between the principal employer and the contract labor, even though the latter works for the former. However, employment is a substantial relationship of Employer-Employee formed under a Contract of Service. Therefore, no contract laborer can stake a claim for permanency against his principal employer just because he has worked in the principal employer's establishment for more than 240 days when the contract between his contractor and the principal employer is a genuine one.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply is mostly accurate. However, the statement that "no contract labor can stake a claim for permanency against his PE just because he has worked in the PE's establishment for more than 240 days when the contract between his contractor and the PE is a genuine one" needs clarification based on labor laws and recent court rulings.
0
0
It's a fact that permanent workers do not give their desired output, and shop floor engineers don't have much control over them either. In this situation, contractual workers are also deployed on core operations to meet the production target.
"Same work, same pay" is emerging as a serious industrial relations issue. How to handle this issue when raised by contractual workers.
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
"Same work, same pay" is emerging as a serious industrial relations issue. How to handle this issue when raised by contractual workers.
From India, Jaipur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-[The user reply does not address the legal aspect of the query regarding the potential permanency claim of contract labor after working more than 240 days. It is essential to focus on legal implications and rights of contract workers under labor laws. "Same work, Same pay" principle is indeed important but not the central issue here. Suggest exploring legal obligations and potential solutions within the framework of labor laws.]
0
0
Addition to the above given comments:
A contract employee can surely ask for permanency at work only in the case if the contract is proven to be a SHAM contract. A contract can be a SHAM contract if the work is directly assigned and supervised by the company or a company employee as a supervisor, or if their attendance and salary records are maintained by the employer. These are a few examples that may turn the contract into a SHAM contract. Therefore, please verify your contractual relation with the contractor and contract employee first, which will surely give you an idea if this will be applicable to the contract employee or not.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
A contract employee can surely ask for permanency at work only in the case if the contract is proven to be a SHAM contract. A contract can be a SHAM contract if the work is directly assigned and supervised by the company or a company employee as a supervisor, or if their attendance and salary records are maintained by the employer. These are a few examples that may turn the contract into a SHAM contract. Therefore, please verify your contractual relation with the contractor and contract employee first, which will surely give you an idea if this will be applicable to the contract employee or not.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The user's reply is mostly accurate. It correctly highlights the concept of a sham contract and provides examples of factors that could indicate a contract being sham. No specific amendments are required. (1 Acknowledge point)
0
0
Hi
Hi
Absolutely NO. In principle (as per the decision of various High Courts and Apex Court) the contract workers cannot claim permanency. If the contract is SHAM and if there is an existence of master and servant relationship between the workers and the Principal Employer the workers claim for permanency will stand before the eye of law.
In order to determine the existence of master and servant relationship and as to when it can be termed as a SHAM contract the Karnataka High Court in the case of Management of VISL –Vs- Presiding Officer reported in 1994(69) FLR 536 has given the following tests to be applied.
1. Who pays?
2. For whose benefit the workmen work?
3. Under whose supervision?
4. Whether disciplinary action can be taken?
5. If so, by whom?
6. Has the employer the right to reject the end product?
Regards
P.S.Lakshmanan
S. G. Management Services
(PAN INDIA Consultant – Labour Law Compliance,
PF, ESI, P Tax, Benefit Management &
POSH COMPLIANCE) Kolkata
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
Hi
Absolutely NO. In principle (as per the decision of various High Courts and Apex Court) the contract workers cannot claim permanency. If the contract is SHAM and if there is an existence of master and servant relationship between the workers and the Principal Employer the workers claim for permanency will stand before the eye of law.
In order to determine the existence of master and servant relationship and as to when it can be termed as a SHAM contract the Karnataka High Court in the case of Management of VISL –Vs- Presiding Officer reported in 1994(69) FLR 536 has given the following tests to be applied.
1. Who pays?
2. For whose benefit the workmen work?
3. Under whose supervision?
4. Whether disciplinary action can be taken?
5. If so, by whom?
6. Has the employer the right to reject the end product?
Regards
P.S.Lakshmanan
S. G. Management Services
(PAN INDIA Consultant – Labour Law Compliance,
PF, ESI, P Tax, Benefit Management &
POSH COMPLIANCE) Kolkata
From India, Kolkata
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The user reply is accurate. It correctly states that contract workers cannot claim permanency unless the contract is deemed a "sham" with a master and servant relationship. The tests provided by the Karnataka High Court are relevant in determining this relationship. (1 Acknowledge point)
0
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.
Contractor Labour Cost Sheet Format.xls
Contractor Labour Minimum wges calculation .rar
Labour laws.ppt
CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The user reply is mostly correct. However, it's essential to note that the threshold for claiming permanency by contract labor may vary based on specific labor laws in the region. It's advisable to consult relevant labor laws or legal experts for precise guidance. Thank you for your input. (1 Acknowledge point)