Dear friends,
Supreme Court in its important judgement dated 19.11.2011 (copy attached) has held that workers cannot be forced to work under new management without their consent and in such an event they are entitled to retirement/ retrenchment compensation under Industrial Disputes Act.
In this case Philips India Ltd had entered into an agreement for saleof its consumer electronics factory at Salt Lake City, Calcutta with Kitchen Appliances India Ltd. Some of the workers had opposed the move and demanded compensation. Management took the plea that the workers had neither been retired nor resigned nor retrenched and hence the question of payment of compensation should not arise, which was turned down by the court.
Regards,
From India, Malappuram
1442Supreme Court in its important judgement dated 19.11.2011 (copy attached) has held that workers cannot be forced to work under new management without their consent and in such an event they are entitled to retirement/ retrenchment compensation under Industrial Disputes Act.
In this case Philips India Ltd had entered into an agreement for saleof its consumer electronics factory at Salt Lake City, Calcutta with Kitchen Appliances India Ltd. Some of the workers had opposed the move and demanded compensation. Management took the plea that the workers had neither been retired nor resigned nor retrenched and hence the question of payment of compensation should not arise, which was turned down by the court.
Regards,
From India, Malappuram
Mr. Aggarwal I appreciate your efforts to make all of us aware to such a decision with a copy of honorable supreme court. Thanks & hope for sharing important issues in future too. Subhash Sharma
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Hi
In my opinion its an unfair judgement towards employer management. My points are :
Majority of employees joined the new management
only 35 employees objected from joining
It is mentioned in the judgement that, transfer of employees do not affect compensation & benefit levels.
VRS scheme was not availed during stipulated time when offered.
What is the objection of the workforce ?? are their any negative affect on their employment, demotions, cut in compensation ??
It is mentioned that, such transfer will not affect on the continuity of the employment.
Only because workforce was not consulted or informed of such transfer they objected !! or its just that workforce dont like new bosses !! they are extorting management to let them go.
Think from employer point of view also, when employees are safeguraded from any harm, then what is employees's objection. They are employees .. not owners of the business !!
Shareholders who invest money in business shall have the right to take decision keeping in mind no rights of any stakeholders are reduced or violated.
Please correct me if I m wrong in my opinion.
From Kuwait, Salmiya
In my opinion its an unfair judgement towards employer management. My points are :
Majority of employees joined the new management
only 35 employees objected from joining
It is mentioned in the judgement that, transfer of employees do not affect compensation & benefit levels.
VRS scheme was not availed during stipulated time when offered.
What is the objection of the workforce ?? are their any negative affect on their employment, demotions, cut in compensation ??
It is mentioned that, such transfer will not affect on the continuity of the employment.
Only because workforce was not consulted or informed of such transfer they objected !! or its just that workforce dont like new bosses !! they are extorting management to let them go.
Think from employer point of view also, when employees are safeguraded from any harm, then what is employees's objection. They are employees .. not owners of the business !!
Shareholders who invest money in business shall have the right to take decision keeping in mind no rights of any stakeholders are reduced or violated.
Please correct me if I m wrong in my opinion.
From Kuwait, Salmiya
Once the company has transferred its assets with liabilities and employees to the new management/company, it is obviously understood that, the new company has to pay the Final Benefits to all the employees for the entire service, without any deductions/recovery, for the period completely an employee has worked in that company (with both new as well as old company).
Thanks for sharing the judgement with our members Mr. Agrawal.
From India, Kumbakonam
Thanks for sharing the judgement with our members Mr. Agrawal.
From India, Kumbakonam
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Supreme Court - 19 Nov 2011 - workers cannot be forced to work under new management.pdf