Essential services are continuing, and employees of those organizations are attending to work. While most people are safe in the confines of their home, a few are taking the risk to come and work.
The EC Act 1923 covers occupational diseases peculiar to the employment Sec 3(2)a & Sch III, but will it also include any disease contracted during an epidemic? In case of a permanent disability or death, what is the employer's liability?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
The EC Act 1923 covers occupational diseases peculiar to the employment Sec 3(2)a & Sch III, but will it also include any disease contracted during an epidemic? In case of a permanent disability or death, what is the employer's liability?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Employees' Compensation Act confines the liability of the employer for death or disability occurring during the course of employment. Only diseases due to and related to occupation will be covered; COVID-19 is not considered an occupational disease, and death due to COVID-19 will not fall under the employer's responsibility.
However, if the employer asks employees to come to the office or factory despite government instructions stating that offices and factories should be closed, and employees should stay at home, and if someone contracts COVID-19 as a result, the employer will be held liable. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment for one year, which may extend up to two years in the case of death or similar occurrences.
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
4771However, if the employer asks employees to come to the office or factory despite government instructions stating that offices and factories should be closed, and employees should stay at home, and if someone contracts COVID-19 as a result, the employer will be held liable. The punishment for this offense is imprisonment for one year, which may extend up to two years in the case of death or similar occurrences.
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This case in point falls within the meaning of "Occupational Hazard," though not stated, specified, or listed. No employer needs to divest himself/herself from his/her "responsibility" on any ground, including moral/ethical ones, as the concerned employee was "ordered" to present himself/herself on duty despite readiness or unwillingness. The "issue" needs to be looked into by employers, also on humanitarian grounds. The incapacitated or deceased was faithfully fulfilling his/her part of the employment contract may be not in writing.
Harsh K Sharan, Kritarth Team,
7.5.20
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Harsh K Sharan, Kritarth Team,
7.5.20
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks. But I am asking about essential services which are permitted by MHA notification. For example, water supply, electricity supply, banks, etc. They are coming to their workplace to ensure essential services are ongoing. What if someone from those essential services contracts COVID due to being in the workplace?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
COVID-19 is an epidemic disease. It has nothing to do with occupation. A person can get COVID-19 even without working anywhere. An occupational disease to come under the purview of the Employees' Compensation Act is a disease attributed to occupation only. Moreover, it should be contracted during the course of employment.
However, we can take a defense like this. In the case of an employee of a bank, the chances of getting a disease transmitted through currency notes and persons visiting the bank are very high. Though you can get it when you exchange currency in a grocery shop or talk to a shopkeeper, you can say that you got it in the workplace and you got the disease just because you were asked to work. But how can you prove that it was through the currency notes that you handled in the bank that you got the disease?
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
However, we can take a defense like this. In the case of an employee of a bank, the chances of getting a disease transmitted through currency notes and persons visiting the bank are very high. Though you can get it when you exchange currency in a grocery shop or talk to a shopkeeper, you can say that you got it in the workplace and you got the disease just because you were asked to work. But how can you prove that it was through the currency notes that you handled in the bank that you got the disease?
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We are overlooking Sec 3(2) of the ECA. It says:
(3)(2) "If an employee employed in any employment specified in Part A of Schedule III contracts any disease specified therein as an occupational disease..."
Thus, unless the central government specifies, it will not fall within section 3(2). There are many more riders in the section.
However, for conditions like heart attacks or strokes, if they could be related to the employment, compensation may be attracted. Labor jurisprudence follows the principle of preponderance. Hence, these are the documents and evidence available with the employer, and the employee will decide whether it will be covered under the ECA. If the employee could prove that the employer, while permitted to operate the facility, did not follow the rules and guidelines for social distancing, personal hygiene, disinfection of workplaces, transports, provisions of masks, hand washing, etc., or did not conduct awareness programs, which might have attributed to infection resulting in COVID-19 to him, he may get compensation. Similarly, if the employer can prove otherwise by documents and other substantial evidence that compliance was made, the liability cannot be fastened on him. In short, each case will go on its merit. Thus, employers must be particular in documentation. Whatever they do, that must be documented.
P K Jadia
Labor Law Consultant, Silvassa, UT of DNH and DD
9687625260, pkj@totalhr.in
From India, Vapi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
(3)(2) "If an employee employed in any employment specified in Part A of Schedule III contracts any disease specified therein as an occupational disease..."
Thus, unless the central government specifies, it will not fall within section 3(2). There are many more riders in the section.
However, for conditions like heart attacks or strokes, if they could be related to the employment, compensation may be attracted. Labor jurisprudence follows the principle of preponderance. Hence, these are the documents and evidence available with the employer, and the employee will decide whether it will be covered under the ECA. If the employee could prove that the employer, while permitted to operate the facility, did not follow the rules and guidelines for social distancing, personal hygiene, disinfection of workplaces, transports, provisions of masks, hand washing, etc., or did not conduct awareness programs, which might have attributed to infection resulting in COVID-19 to him, he may get compensation. Similarly, if the employer can prove otherwise by documents and other substantial evidence that compliance was made, the liability cannot be fastened on him. In short, each case will go on its merit. Thus, employers must be particular in documentation. Whatever they do, that must be documented.
P K Jadia
Labor Law Consultant, Silvassa, UT of DNH and DD
9687625260, pkj@totalhr.in
From India, Vapi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The COVID-19 or any other epidemic disease may not be covered under the EC Act and cannot be considered under Occupational Health Hazards.
All of us are aware that the Government declared special insurance coverage for deceased individuals dealing with COVID-19 cases, especially for health and police personnel.
What remedy is available for individuals engaged in essential services who succumb to death or disability is a valid question?
Employees engaged in any establishment are either covered under ESI or by the WC policy taken by the employer. Additionally, the Government (TRAI) has already instructed all insurance companies to extend the scope to cover COVID-19 cases.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
All of us are aware that the Government declared special insurance coverage for deceased individuals dealing with COVID-19 cases, especially for health and police personnel.
What remedy is available for individuals engaged in essential services who succumb to death or disability is a valid question?
Employees engaged in any establishment are either covered under ESI or by the WC policy taken by the employer. Additionally, the Government (TRAI) has already instructed all insurance companies to extend the scope to cover COVID-19 cases.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Members,
EPFO has announced Ex-gratia Death Relief Fund of Rs. 10 lakh in the event of the death of an employee due to COVID-19 for his/her family. (Please refer EPFO Circular No. WELFARE/3 (136) 2019/ Policy Matter/08 dated 28.04.2020.)
Suresh
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
EPFO has announced Ex-gratia Death Relief Fund of Rs. 10 lakh in the event of the death of an employee due to COVID-19 for his/her family. (Please refer EPFO Circular No. WELFARE/3 (136) 2019/ Policy Matter/08 dated 28.04.2020.)
Suresh
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Is not too much hue and cry being made of Covid-19? Yes, it is highly contagious, but, to my knowledge, not as deadly as it is being made out to be. Most deaths occur in cases where the affected persons are afflicted by many other health complications. Given the real situation, there is no substantial chance of death due to Covid during the course of employment.
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Kochi
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.