Can we send trainees on duty to out station (out of states in India) who are appointed as per standing orders? Is there any legal complications for that? Kindly give your advise.
From India, Bangalore

Get Empowered With Critical Leadership Skills That Drive Change →
Promoted: XLRI Leadership & Change Management
There is nothing wrong in sending them to other states provided the same is required as part of their training program. For example, you have appointed a trainee to work in Kerala and suppose as part of his training program he has to under go training in a machinery which is not there in Kerala plant but is available in your Karnataka facility, then you can send him to Karnataka. At the same time, if he is appointed to work in Kerala and due to your business exigencies you transfer him to Karnataka, then it will be view as an attempt on the part of employer to engage workers as trainees on regular jobs. There are cases where the trainees working in the night shift and working in the same manner in which regular workers are employed were considered as workers even though they were appointed as per standing orders.
From India, Kannur
However, you should ensure that they are paid all allowances and also facilities that are normally extended to permanent employees. Best wishes
From India
I would say that if they are genuine trainees you should not give any outstation allowance which is available to permanent workers. If you think that as part of training program they have to work in another plant, you can incorporate the same in the training program itself and the trainees are expected to manage the show without any special allowance from the company. By paying anything extra you will be establishing yourself that for your business requirements you need the trainees to work in another plant and this will later on become an evidence to show that the training is just for name sake but in practice all are regular workers only. It will be worth reading the court ruling in Sree Ram Narayan Mills Ltd vs Employees Provident Fund in which the Court has observed that It is clear from the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, cited supra, that the apprentices, who are doing the regular work, ought to be considered as the employees of the establishment concerned and not mere apprentices.
From India, Kannur

If you are knowledgeable about any fact, resource or experience related to this topic - please add your views using the reply box below. For articles and copyrighted material please only cite the original source link. Each contribution will make this page a resource useful for everyone.

Please Login To Add Reply →






About Us Advertise Contact Us Testimonials
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2021 CiteHR.Com

All Material Copyright And Trademarks Posted Held By Respective Owners.
Panel Selection For Threads Are Automated - Members Notified Via CiteMailer Server