Comments on: Rotational Employment of Temporary Workers Illegal

By: Pandurang trimbak

Pandurang trimbak — Mon, 26 Jul 2021 09:24:51 +0000

HI SIR I AM ONE OF THEM I MOST APRECHIT YOUR POST NOW WE ARE IN SUPRIM COURT
I WANT TALK WITH YOU FOR FEW MINUITS
MOB NO 9421439221

By: Mirza Yawar Baig

Mirza Yawar Baig — Tue, 18 May 2021 17:56:11 +0000

The problem with anything becoming a common practice is that people stop worrying whether it is just and fair….. you said it. Also, the usual attitude of Indian employers is not to follow laws, but to see how to get away with breaking them. In this process anything goes. Even globally, ask, “Who gets retrenched when a business realizes that it has too many people?” Who SHOULD get retrenched? The person who hired too many people. After all, those people didn’t just walk into the business one day and declare, “From today I work here.” They were recruited in ‘good times’ when nobody was thinking about cost and then when times change, they are thrown out without a thought about the havoc that is created in their lives. Employing temporary workers to do regular work inculcates sloppy practices and is a clearly exploitative practice. It is high time that we see businesses from a moral standpoint also and not merely in terms of ROI. This must be taught in BS’s and must be practiced on the shop-floor – not merely be a postscript or sign-off note in the Annual Report.

By: Vivek Patwardhan

Vivek Patwardhan — Tue, 18 May 2021 06:27:30 +0000

Mehernosh Mehta writes (Posted with his permission):
Dear Sir,

Read your article and couldn’t agree more! Hard-hitting and factual as always.

The sheer hypocrisy of corporates boggles the mind. We can spend crores on CSR activities to align the local police, village communities and the village head, but deny genuine rights of our workers citing costs as a major constraint!! And now they are spending crores on rolling out ‘Compassionate Benevolent Funds’ for their permanent employees who are affected by COVID!! As if others will never get infected by the disease!! I see such hubris everyday and wonder what is my role as the CHRO??

Do I show spine and take a risk of being called a union lackey or like most of my colleagues put my head down and be an obedient soul??

For me the case for a ‘Spine’ can never be over-emphasised but wonder for the others. Some serious questions for which there are no clear answers.

By: Upendra Suresh Bhatmuley

Upendra Suresh Bhatmuley — Mon, 17 May 2021 15:00:29 +0000

Fantastic…. Thanks for reminding us that there are such practices which are unfair…. We have assumed it as a way of life.

Hopefully with the new labour codes, the concept of FTC/FTE will bring a fairness in this practice.

By: Dr. Nirav Mandir

Dr. Nirav Mandir — Mon, 17 May 2021 10:23:00 +0000

Very well captured sir!!! Truly Appreciate the Judgement.

“Law Stems when Ethics Fail”

I can proudly share our best practices pertaining to contract workforce management which has already been captured by your good self in one of yours blog. Out of the total workforce (6000 Pax.), more than 20% are of the contracted workforce without having any discrimination to their remuneration in comparison to the permanent workforce inclusive of all the benefits, perks along with voluntary PF Coverage. A big no to rotational 7 month play around!!!!

We are following the same despite being part of the manufacturing sector. When there is a will then there is always a way provided it is intended by the genuine leadership…

By: G v joshi

G v joshi — Sun, 16 May 2021 12:42:12 +0000

It is a good judgment delivering justice to permanently temporary workers .Am sure the judgement would be challenged further. In the era of global competition, employers would find other ways such as FTC to remain competitive. Thanks for sharing the important judgment.
Regards

By: SURESH S KADAM

SURESH S KADAM — Sun, 16 May 2021 05:40:47 +0000

Dear Vivek Sir.
Thanks for sharing the news and your views.
In Pune, this practice is a permanent feature of employment. All stakeholders had taken it as an accepted practice and employees are taking it as ‘Fate accompli’.

A good decision by Bombay High Court, albeit very late.

This should be taken by State Government in good spirit and appropriate remedial amendment be done to both MRTU & PULP Act and ID Act. Engaging temporaries and FTEs should not a matter of rejoicing by the Employers. A need based and proactive socially responsible approach by Employers is need of the hour. Hope for the best.

By: VJ Rao

VJ Rao — Sun, 16 May 2021 04:16:39 +0000

Dear Aravamudhan,

Good morning and was’nt the provision for temporaries introduced for temporary increase in work load? And see where we have gone with that!!

By: Aravamudhan

Aravamudhan — Sun, 16 May 2021 04:11:27 +0000

FTE is not a matter for rejoicing for Employers. After State Bank Of India’s Case by the Supreme Court Sect 2 (oo ) bb was introduced under the ID Act 1947 for taking away the Employment for specific period from the Def. of “ Retrenchment “. IR Code 2020 just provided for the classification for FTE subject to certain conditions. However it is a well established Legal Position that FTE applies only when the Job itself is Of for a Fixed Period. and the Employer can not have set of FTEs for a job of continuous and Permanent Nature..
Needless to mention that Labour Relations in India needs to be Managed as a Socio/ Economic Issue. More Laws will not ensure more jobs or sustained Earnings. All the Stake holders do have issues particularly now in the Pandemic World with many uncertainties and challenges traditional Mindset of the Key Stake Holders need to Change. As mentioned by a famous English Jurist, Laws should reflect the Contemporary aspirations of the Society. Judicial Activism, Managerial Arrogance or Populistic or ideological overtones will not serve the
purpose.
Pragmatism , Matured and Balance Approach should be Pursued.
Aravamudhan

By: VJ Rao

VJ Rao — Sun, 16 May 2021 03:48:52 +0000

Dear Vivek, A welcome judgement. I have always said that it has been exploitation. I am afraid that things will not change as they will be converted into FTCs. These will be for a period of six months or even a year but then the termination will not amount to retrenchment, given the changes recently made. I think legal provisions are the fig leaf that employers often use to cover their real intent. – Getting cheap and flexible labour. How can any business operate with 60 to 70 % uncertainty ? That is the ratio of temporaries to the overall workforce. I think it is indefensible.