Dear All, Hope you are doing good, Please clarify
1. Who all are comes under "Worker / Workman" as per Factories Act,1948.
2. Is HR Manager, Finance Manager comes under "Worker / Workman" category.
Thanks in advance.
T.S.Krishna Prasath
From Australia, Revesby
11. Who all are comes under "Worker / Workman" as per Factories Act,1948.
2. Is HR Manager, Finance Manager comes under "Worker / Workman" category.
Thanks in advance.
T.S.Krishna Prasath
From Australia, Revesby
Dear Krishna Prasath
1. Whoever working in the shop floor in the Manufacturing Industries are workmen.
2. The HR Manager, Office Assistants, person working in office premises, Directors, Managers partly involved in Managerial activities are not at all considered as workmen/workers.
From India, Kumbakonam
1. Whoever working in the shop floor in the Manufacturing Industries are workmen.
2. The HR Manager, Office Assistants, person working in office premises, Directors, Managers partly involved in Managerial activities are not at all considered as workmen/workers.
From India, Kumbakonam
Hi ,
Read below logic .....you will get an idea
"All workers are Employees but not all Employees are workers"
The person who is get wage below 10000 is a worker.The person who is getting above 10000 is called as employee not a worker.
hope you understand......
Tks&Reg
Ambika
From India, Madras
Read below logic .....you will get an idea
"All workers are Employees but not all Employees are workers"
The person who is get wage below 10000 is a worker.The person who is getting above 10000 is called as employee not a worker.
hope you understand......
Tks&Reg
Ambika
From India, Madras
Hello Ambika
Which Act defines workman or worker like this?
@T.S Krishna Prasath
It is a rather tricky question.The Factories Act defines a worker as a person emplyed directly in any manufacturing process or in any work incidental to or connected with such manufacturing process such as bringing raw materail for it etc. or employed in cleaning any part of the machinery or the premises used for such manufacturing process. Thus you may observe that the definition is too wide to include any person empoyed not only in the manufacturing process but also those employed in any work connected with such process. Therefore, the status of a person as worker can be decided only on the facts and cirumstances of each case but at the same time, it cannot be stretched beyond the spirit and objectives of the Act to include every official employed in the comapny which run s the factory.
Coming back to your specific question whether HR Manager or Finance Manager will be a worker, Iam of the view that they cannot come under the purview of worker under Factories Act, as they are not construed to be directly involved in any manufacturig process or in any work connected therewith.
"Workman" is a different concept defined under the Industrial disputes Act 1947 and include those persons employed to
do skilled, unskilled, manual, technical,clerical or supervisory work and clearly excludes persons who are performing functions of managerial nature and thus a HR Manger or Finance Manager are not workmen, if they are really discharging function sof mangerial nature such as sanctioning leave or appraising performance of subordinates or exercising powers of disciplining them. It is not enough if theyare merely designated as managers but in fact dischrging clerical functions in which acse they may come within the definition of "workman."
Thus the concepts of "worker " and "workman" need to be understod differently.
B.Saikumar
HR& Labour Law Advsior
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Which Act defines workman or worker like this?
@T.S Krishna Prasath
It is a rather tricky question.The Factories Act defines a worker as a person emplyed directly in any manufacturing process or in any work incidental to or connected with such manufacturing process such as bringing raw materail for it etc. or employed in cleaning any part of the machinery or the premises used for such manufacturing process. Thus you may observe that the definition is too wide to include any person empoyed not only in the manufacturing process but also those employed in any work connected with such process. Therefore, the status of a person as worker can be decided only on the facts and cirumstances of each case but at the same time, it cannot be stretched beyond the spirit and objectives of the Act to include every official employed in the comapny which run s the factory.
Coming back to your specific question whether HR Manager or Finance Manager will be a worker, Iam of the view that they cannot come under the purview of worker under Factories Act, as they are not construed to be directly involved in any manufacturig process or in any work connected therewith.
"Workman" is a different concept defined under the Industrial disputes Act 1947 and include those persons employed to
do skilled, unskilled, manual, technical,clerical or supervisory work and clearly excludes persons who are performing functions of managerial nature and thus a HR Manger or Finance Manager are not workmen, if they are really discharging function sof mangerial nature such as sanctioning leave or appraising performance of subordinates or exercising powers of disciplining them. It is not enough if theyare merely designated as managers but in fact dischrging clerical functions in which acse they may come within the definition of "workman."
Thus the concepts of "worker " and "workman" need to be understod differently.
B.Saikumar
HR& Labour Law Advsior
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Hello,
A "worker" is a term defined under the Factories Act and it includes, those employed by the factory, employees employed by the contractor-with or without knowledge of the employer, for wages or not, to do any work connected with the "manufacturing process"....etc. Factories Act being an establishment legislation the term used is "worker" and the scope is wide as the purpose is safety, health etc.
Yes, there are certain categories to whom exemption from various provisions of the act is granted and one has to follow a procedure stipulated. You will find details under Sec. 100 to 102 and the rules thereunder.
The term "workman" is defined under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 and include all those, including the white collared employees who conform to this definition. The definition also excludes certain categories of workmen (those who are engaged mainly in Supervisory or managerial work.
I am NOT quoting definitions but am am only providing broad guidelines since many issues involved in both definitions are not obvious or simple. Largely however the actual nature of work performed by the individual decides his status as a "workman" or a "non-workman_ and it is open to third party (courts, conciliation officers-in appropriate cases) to decide if any given individual conforms to the definition of "workman" under this act. This is significant as Industrial Disputes Act is essentially a disputes processing legislation. That is why, the scope of both definition is different!
Your query seems to have emerged out of academic interests but if you have a real life situation on hand kindly provide more specific inputs and receive better advice!
Regards
samvedan
August 30, 2012
--------------------
From India, Pune
A "worker" is a term defined under the Factories Act and it includes, those employed by the factory, employees employed by the contractor-with or without knowledge of the employer, for wages or not, to do any work connected with the "manufacturing process"....etc. Factories Act being an establishment legislation the term used is "worker" and the scope is wide as the purpose is safety, health etc.
Yes, there are certain categories to whom exemption from various provisions of the act is granted and one has to follow a procedure stipulated. You will find details under Sec. 100 to 102 and the rules thereunder.
The term "workman" is defined under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 and include all those, including the white collared employees who conform to this definition. The definition also excludes certain categories of workmen (those who are engaged mainly in Supervisory or managerial work.
I am NOT quoting definitions but am am only providing broad guidelines since many issues involved in both definitions are not obvious or simple. Largely however the actual nature of work performed by the individual decides his status as a "workman" or a "non-workman_ and it is open to third party (courts, conciliation officers-in appropriate cases) to decide if any given individual conforms to the definition of "workman" under this act. This is significant as Industrial Disputes Act is essentially a disputes processing legislation. That is why, the scope of both definition is different!
Your query seems to have emerged out of academic interests but if you have a real life situation on hand kindly provide more specific inputs and receive better advice!
Regards
samvedan
August 30, 2012
--------------------
From India, Pune
Hello Mr.Samvedan,
Its a real life situation, I am working in an Manufacturing company.
This doubt mainly came when we had a discussion for Overtime to Junior level Management staffs(Non Manufacturing)(i.e. Finance Executive, HR Executive, Customer Support Executive).
1. If they are coming under workers category then whether we need to get Over Time exception from Inspector of Factories ?
2. We have decided to pay only for the above said category(Not for Manufacturing Employees), is that is advisable?
Thanks & Regards
KP
From Australia, Revesby
Its a real life situation, I am working in an Manufacturing company.
This doubt mainly came when we had a discussion for Overtime to Junior level Management staffs(Non Manufacturing)(i.e. Finance Executive, HR Executive, Customer Support Executive).
1. If they are coming under workers category then whether we need to get Over Time exception from Inspector of Factories ?
2. We have decided to pay only for the above said category(Not for Manufacturing Employees), is that is advisable?
Thanks & Regards
KP
From Australia, Revesby
Dear Saikumar,
Sir,
This doubt mainly came when we had a discussion for Overtime to Junior level Management staffs(Non Manufacturing)(i.e. Finance Executive, HR Executive, Customer Support Executive).
1. If they are coming under workers category then whether we need to get Over Time exception from Inspector of Factories ?
2. We have decided to pay only for the above said category(Not for Manufacturing Employees), is that is advisable?
Thanks & Regards
KP
Attribution: https://www.citehr.com/427519-worker...#ixzz252TgNB3K
From Australia, Revesby
Sir,
This doubt mainly came when we had a discussion for Overtime to Junior level Management staffs(Non Manufacturing)(i.e. Finance Executive, HR Executive, Customer Support Executive).
1. If they are coming under workers category then whether we need to get Over Time exception from Inspector of Factories ?
2. We have decided to pay only for the above said category(Not for Manufacturing Employees), is that is advisable?
Thanks & Regards
KP
Attribution: https://www.citehr.com/427519-worker...#ixzz252TgNB3K
From Australia, Revesby
Hello,
The categories you have mentioned, prima-facie will come under the exempted category. But Factories Act is an OLD legislation and the parts we are dealing with here have not been amended for quite some time.
It is best to recheck the position (Sections 100, 101 and 102 particularly) I stated in the earlier response, before any policy decisions are made. If these categories are not mentioned in the present list of exempted categories, you may have to obtain fresh exemption.
To be technically correct, anyone who is NOT exempted will be entitled to get Overtime! The law does NOT prohibit the employer from paying OT even to the exempted categories and it will have to be a managerial decision.
At this stage I would like to draw your attention to a material fact and that is NO OT is possible to ANY unexempted category UNLESS necessary exemption from working hours is obtained under Sections 61 onward of the Factories Act!
Usually the enforcement agencies do not object unless there is a specific complaint against breach of law or when they need to make some money in a clandestine manner! You will have to watch out such a move.
As to whether your proposed action is advisable, I feel it is just to follow law but very difficult to stop stop such a system at will and it does become a precedent and to that extent, if I were in your position, I would try and steer clear of this "fairness and compensate concerned staff in some other way
Regards
samvedan
August 30, 2012
--------------------
From India, Pune
The categories you have mentioned, prima-facie will come under the exempted category. But Factories Act is an OLD legislation and the parts we are dealing with here have not been amended for quite some time.
It is best to recheck the position (Sections 100, 101 and 102 particularly) I stated in the earlier response, before any policy decisions are made. If these categories are not mentioned in the present list of exempted categories, you may have to obtain fresh exemption.
To be technically correct, anyone who is NOT exempted will be entitled to get Overtime! The law does NOT prohibit the employer from paying OT even to the exempted categories and it will have to be a managerial decision.
At this stage I would like to draw your attention to a material fact and that is NO OT is possible to ANY unexempted category UNLESS necessary exemption from working hours is obtained under Sections 61 onward of the Factories Act!
Usually the enforcement agencies do not object unless there is a specific complaint against breach of law or when they need to make some money in a clandestine manner! You will have to watch out such a move.
As to whether your proposed action is advisable, I feel it is just to follow law but very difficult to stop stop such a system at will and it does become a precedent and to that extent, if I were in your position, I would try and steer clear of this "fairness and compensate concerned staff in some other way
Regards
samvedan
August 30, 2012
--------------------
From India, Pune
Managers also come under the definition of workmen under FA Act.But the provisions of chapter vI (working hrs, etc)except those of working hrs of women will not apply to the managers defined to hold supervisory, managerial,confidential post.This definition is done by state govts/chief inspectors.If the monthly salary of such a manager is upto Rs10000/ he is eligible for OT wages also.please see sec 64 of the act.If by definition they were not workers the exemption u/s 64(1) was not required.
VARGHESE MATHEW BIL PGDPM
Labour law consultant.
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
VARGHESE MATHEW BIL PGDPM
Labour law consultant.
From India, Thiruvananthapuram
I am working in public ltd company, and are in disputes with management on definition of workman. In this case our fellow workman have been promoted as managers/shift officers and are working under same condition. Do this act of encroachment in our work even after giving promotions violate rules and where it should it be raised, what will be its logical course.
From India, Pune
From India, Pune
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.
Average annual hours actually worked per worker.rar
NOTIFICATION_PF _INTERNATIONAL WORKER.pdf