Circular for Digitization of Labour related records/registers by establishments / business units for ease in compliance - reg.

Shared by: Siju Jose T, Oil Palm India Limited, Senior Manager - HRD

Madra High Court Judgement on Validity of Bond between Employee and Employer

Shared by : Siju Jose T

EPFO Circular on UAN Relaxation

Shared by Siju Jose T, Oil Palm India Limited, Senior Manager - HRD

Kerala HC stays Retrospective Provisions of Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015

KERALA HIGH COURT ORDER STAYING BONUS WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT.  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

United Planters Association of Southern India 

Vs. 

Union of India (Kerala High Court), 

WP(C). No. 3025/2016(C), 

Date of Decision- 27.01.2016 

Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of The United Planters Association of Southern India Vs. Union of India, Stayed the Operation and Implementation of Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015 to the extent the same gives retrospective from 01.04.2014 and further held that such retrospective amendments will be implemented from Year 2015-16 pending disposal of writ petition. 

Kerala High Court Order

Copy of High Court order posted above

Shared by  Siju Jose T, +Siju Jose Oil Palm India Limited, Senior Manager - HRD 

Madras High Court: House Rent Allowance, Travelling Allowance to be included for calculation of Over Time Wages

OVER TIME PAYMENT – WAGES UNDER THE Factories Act, 1948

Case: Heavy Vehicles Factory Employees Union
( Rep. By its general Secretary) & another
vs.
Union Of India
(Rep. By its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Defence & Ors.
(2012 LLR 358)

Forum: Madras High Court

Judgement: The petitioner union are registered and recognised union representing various categories of employees. The employees who were working under the third respondent establishment contended that they were, all along, in receipt of overtime allowances whenever they were detained for duty beyond the normal working hours of 48 hours in a week, and the said allowances were calculated and computed by including all allowances admissible to the employees like House Rent Allowance, City Compensatory Allowance, Transport allowance etc. as per the provisions of the Factories Act 1948. 

The first respondent issued a memorandum, dated 26.06.2009 stating that House Rent Allowance, Travelling Allowance and Small Family Allowance would stand excluded for the purpose of computation of overtime allowance without assigning any reason therein for exclusion of the same. Aggrieved by the order, the employees and the union filed original applications before the Central Administrative Tribunal.

The Tribunal dismissed their applications on the basis of a letter received from Legal advisor of the Ministry of Law opining that allowances are excluded from the term “wages” for the purpose of calculation of overtime allowance. 

On an appeal, the Court observed that as per the definition of sub section (2) of section 59 of the Factories Act, ordinary rate of wages means basic wages plus such allowances including the cash equivalent of the advantage accruing through the concessional sale to workers of food grains and other articles, as the worker is for the time being entitled to, but does not include a bonus and wages for overtime work. The court further observed that, in the absence of any rule to exclude the aforesaid allowances from the definition of the basic wages, when the section excludes only two items, viz, bonus and wages for overtime work, the action of the first respondent in excluding the said allowances is without any authority and such items should be included. Accordingly, the order passed by the tribunal was set aside.

Shared by  Siju Jose T, +Siju Jose Oil Palm India Limited, Senior Manager - HRD

EPFO Housing Scheme Proposal For Subscribers

Retirement fund body EPFO is working on a proposal to provide low cost housing to its over five crore subscribers. 

"The EPFO is working on the proposal to provide low cost housing to its subscribers, which will come up for discussion in the meeting of its trustees expected sometime next month," a source said. 

Earlier this month, Labour Minister Bandaru Dattatreya had said in the Lok Sabha that the government is exploring the possibility for providing a suitable low-cost housing scheme for subscribers of Employees'Pension Fund. 

He was replying to a question whether the government or the EPFO has introduced/proposes to introduce a scheme to allow its subscribers to pledge their future PF contribution to buy low-cost houses. 

Future EPF to be pledged as EMI's

Last year, the proposal was also on the agenda of EPFO's trustees meeting held on September 16. 

A report of an expert committee on housing facility for the subscribers was also presented to the trustees for their perusal. 

The committee had unanimously recommended a scheme to facilitate subscribers to buy houses where they will get an advance from their PF accumulation and will be allowed to pledge their future PF contribution as EMI (Equated Monthly Instalment) payment. 

Under the proposed scheme, there will be a tripartite agreement with member, bank/housing agency and EPFO for pledging future PF contributions as EMI payment. 

The panel had suggested that the subscribers will purchase a dwelling unit with loans from bank or housing finance companies and hypothecation of property in favour of the latter. 

However, the panel had suggested this scheme for those EPFO subscribers who are low income formal workers and could not buy a house during their entire service period.

News Source: Economic Times, [22.05.2016], EPFO to consider housing scheme for members next month

Image Credits: Pixabay.com

Shared by -Siju Jose T +Siju Jose , Sr. Manager - HRD,  Oil Palm India Limited.

Madras High Court Judgement on payment of wages to employees who absented on poll day

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.12.2014
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
Writ Petition Nos.17710 of 2004 and
16368 of 2006

M/s.Raptakos Brett Employees' Union
Rep. by its General Secretary R.Jaikumar
New No.142, Velachery Road,Guindy, Chennai - 600 042. ... Petitioner in both WPs
                                vs.
1.M/s.Raptakos, Brett and Company Ltd.,
New # 142, Velachery Road,
Guindy, Chennai - 600 042. ... 1st respondent in both WPs
2.The Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Division 4, Chennai - 600 006. ... 2nd respondent in
W.P.No.17710/2004
3.The Commissioner of Labour, DMS Compound, Chennai - 600 006. ...2nd respondent in16368/2006

Held,
The learned counsel for the first respondent has brought to my notice, the judgment of theKerala High Court reported in 1999 LLR 1156 [Binani Zinc Employees Union, Binanipuram P.O by
the Vice President and another v. The Labour Commissioner, Trivandrum and others] to fortify his contention that under Section 135-B(4) of the Act, it is not mandatory that all establishments will have to grant paid holiday to the employees on the date of poll.

I have perused the said judgement and the said judgement is distinguishable on facts in view of the fair submission made by the learned counsel for the first respondent that the first respondent
establishment is not covered under Section 135-B(4) of the Act. It was a case, wherein, the employer sought exemption under Section 135-B(4) of the Act. On facts and further taking into account,
Section 135-B of the Act, the Kerala High Court found that the employer is covered under Section135-B(4) of the Act.

Furthermore, basing on the aforesaid Circulars of the Election Commission dated 06.04.1999and 07.04.2004, the Commissioner of Labour, issued letters dated 26.04.2004 and 10.04.2006,directing the establishments in Tamil nadu to comply with the mandate imposed under Section135-B of the Act read with the Circulars of the Election Commission of India to declare holiday with wages on the poll day. In spite of the same, the first respondent has chosen not to follow the circulars as well as the mandatory provisions of the statute.
23. For all the aforesaid reasons, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to succeed.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed. The first respondent is directed to pay wages to all the workmen of the establishment, who abstained from work by not accepting to work in the re-arranged shift during the poll day. The wages shall be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
To
1.The Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Division 4, Chennai - 600 006.
2.The Commissioner of Labour, DMS Compound, Chennai - 600 006.

Shared by - Siju Jose T, +Siju Jose Senior Manager - HRD, Oil Palm India Limited