Sub: Industrial dispute between the -----Industrial Worker Union Vrs M/s ------------in the site of -------------over non payment of full and final payment benefit to 22 workmen.
Dear seniors,
In inviting reference to the above subject I am to say that two months back we received a letter from LEO requesting us to present in person to settle the issue amicably.
The above letter doesn't disclose the details of the workmen and it is very difficult for us to identify the exact issue as we had executed 5 contract jobs for the same client and we had deployed more than 200 contract labours to execute all contract jobs. As per our record we have paid all legitimate dues to all workmen with respect to all closed contracts.
So we sent a reply by requesting labour office to share the details of the workmen so that we can send relevant documents to his office.
But after two months ie, yesterday we received the same letter from LEO. Now I am planning to send the same reply to his office.
I request senior members to guide me on this. I am also confused how to handle this situation. If we send the same reply then will it be problem for us in future.
Thanking You.
Jitendra Das

From India, Bhubaneswar
Labour Law & Hr Consultant
Deputy Commissioner Of Labour..a.p.

The Labor Enforcement Officer mentioned in the post is an enforcement authority under the CLRA Act,1970. As such the representation received from the Trade Union about the alleged non-settlement of F&F in respect of 22 contract labor is a complaint filed under the said Act and not an industrial dispute under the I.D Act,1947. Also, I am not aware whether the LEO has been notified as a Conciliation Officer under the I.D Act,1947. Whatever the position may be, it is the basic step in the matter of complaint disposal to serve the copy of the complaint to the other side so as to enable him to answer the call. Alternatively, the LEO, as an enforcement officer under the CLRA Act, can inspect the premises of the principal employer and verify the veracity of the complaint with reference to connected documents, if any with the principal employer. At times, even it could be a routine mistake made by the LEO's office. Therefore, a proper approach in my opinion would be that the principal employer's representative may present himself before the officer on the appointed date and submit the letter in person.
From India, Salem
Yes the letter from the LEO may be for joint meeting with employer and the complainant... so please go and defend your version for smooth disposal of complaint submitted to their office against you.
From India, Nellore
Dear Mr. Das,
This is a common phenomenon in our working sphere. The work of labour department is to receive complaint and asked the employer to furnish details to settle the case.
As per the procedure the labour department should furnish the details of workmen lodged complaint with the copy of the application filed. As per your posting no such details have made availble to you by LEO except advice to meet on fixed date.
Your letter to LEO is right in this direction and in between you receive another letter from LEO. You send another communication refering the second letter. That it is futile to attend (LEO office) without any information in hand for any result for which you seek the name of workmen raised the industrial dispute to settle the issue. Request to provide 3o days time after such details provided from the office of LEO.
After making the communication to LEO either you or someone responsible from your establishment should meet LEO in person to get the details.

From India, Mumbai

If you are knowledgeable about any fact, resource or experience related to this topic - please add your views.

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

All rights reserved @ 2022 CiteHRŽ

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