The provident fund (PF) department has voluntarily given up its powers to take action against employers who fail to deposit workers' dues unless it can name workers whose savings are in danger, evoking protest from union leaders and labour experts who said this could protect companies that fail to make PF contributions.
Seven-Year Limit for Probing Defaults
The directive also sets a seven-year limit for probing cases of PF default by companies that are required to remit 24% of a workers' salary into their provident fund accounts till they retire.
What are your views on this.........
From India, Gurgaon
37Seven-Year Limit for Probing Defaults
The directive also sets a seven-year limit for probing cases of PF default by companies that are required to remit 24% of a workers' salary into their provident fund accounts till they retire.
What are your views on this.........
From India, Gurgaon
Dear Shweta
This is very very unfortunate !!!
As it is, the PF authorities lacked teeth to enforce the Act; but now it will encourage the small and dubious companies to pocket the contributions with impunity.
Provident fund is meant as the last resort of subsistence for an employee; however it will no longer remain so.
If govt is not interested in taking responsibility of the fund or its implementation; then its better to scrap the Act altogether; rather than let the wolves loose among the lambs !!!
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
This is very very unfortunate !!!
As it is, the PF authorities lacked teeth to enforce the Act; but now it will encourage the small and dubious companies to pocket the contributions with impunity.
Provident fund is meant as the last resort of subsistence for an employee; however it will no longer remain so.
If govt is not interested in taking responsibility of the fund or its implementation; then its better to scrap the Act altogether; rather than let the wolves loose among the lambs !!!
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Very True!!! But this is injustice and what we can do is to make people aware of this so that they take their salary breakup very seriously and negotiate on in hand salary not on CTC.
From India, Gurgaon
From India, Gurgaon
I appreciate your intent to " make people aware of this so that they take their salary breakup very seriously and negotiate on in hand salary not on CTC."
In fact the concept of CTC as it has evolved in itself is very erroneous, which every HR in his heart,would agree. Its more of a PR exercise and display by a company, while soliciting the services of a candidate; rather than what exactly a new entrant is actually concerned with.
The employer share of PF contribution is now routinely shown on CTC statement given with the offer; so is the ESI or any other contribution made by the company on account of employees.
Sure, there is always a lot of costs associated with manpower; but why should an would be employee concerned with the costs that a company incurs which is not directly credited in his salary account ?
For instance, even gratuity is shown in CTC. What is the point of taking into consideration the gratuity while salary negotiation, and paying him the amount at the end of his service period from his own negotiated salary package ??
Does it not amount to complying with the law at the cost of employees'own salary package ??
What about those who leave the company before completion of 5 years ? No company gives a certain definite answer on this.
Moreover; what is the actual meaning of "gratuity" ?? Is not it like a reward for services rendered ? then why it should be recovered from his salary package every month and then paid to him at the end of his service ??
Isn't it like we deduct a part of the bill in a restaurant and then say this is the 'tip' that i would like to pay the waiter. Will any restaurant/hotel owner permit it ??
As HR professionals we have a lots of points to ponder over and MAKE PEOPLE AWARE that what they accept as a MATTER-OF-FACT need not be so.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
In fact the concept of CTC as it has evolved in itself is very erroneous, which every HR in his heart,would agree. Its more of a PR exercise and display by a company, while soliciting the services of a candidate; rather than what exactly a new entrant is actually concerned with.
The employer share of PF contribution is now routinely shown on CTC statement given with the offer; so is the ESI or any other contribution made by the company on account of employees.
Sure, there is always a lot of costs associated with manpower; but why should an would be employee concerned with the costs that a company incurs which is not directly credited in his salary account ?
For instance, even gratuity is shown in CTC. What is the point of taking into consideration the gratuity while salary negotiation, and paying him the amount at the end of his service period from his own negotiated salary package ??
Does it not amount to complying with the law at the cost of employees'own salary package ??
What about those who leave the company before completion of 5 years ? No company gives a certain definite answer on this.
Moreover; what is the actual meaning of "gratuity" ?? Is not it like a reward for services rendered ? then why it should be recovered from his salary package every month and then paid to him at the end of his service ??
Isn't it like we deduct a part of the bill in a restaurant and then say this is the 'tip' that i would like to pay the waiter. Will any restaurant/hotel owner permit it ??
As HR professionals we have a lots of points to ponder over and MAKE PEOPLE AWARE that what they accept as a MATTER-OF-FACT need not be so.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
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.
Provident fund.zip
PROVIDENT FUND.rar
PROVIDENT FUND.doc