I beg to differ from you, Maneesha. Gratuity is for all, irrespective of whether the employee is on a contract basis or permanent basis.
Yes, in case the employee is on a contract basis, then it will be the responsibility of the contractor to provide the gratuity. It will be the moral responsibility of the Principal Employer to ensure that the contractor has paid the gratuity to the contractual employee.
I would like to draw your attention to one of our earlier threads discussing the same by SUHAS GARDE FROM NAGPUR.
Dear All,
The payment of gratuity is linked with a concept that if someone renders/offers his continuous service for more than 5 years to a particular establishment, then as a gesture of goodwill, he certainly deserves some appreciation. Thus, to extend his gratitude, the employer makes some payment as a token of appreciation for long association/service to the employee. To shape up or streamline this concept, our legislators enacted this into a piece of legislation termed as ''The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972''. This is a central act and an independent piece of legislation. On the plain reading of Section 2(e) of the Act, i.e., the definition of 'employee', the words 'contract employee' are not seen. This means the employees engaged by the contractor per se are not covered under the Act.
Similarly, the contract employees (which is a subject matter under the Contract Labour Act) being the employees of the contractor, the contractor is at liberty to move them from one establishment to another. Thus, even if the contract employee remains in continuous employment with a contractor, he is rendering his uninterrupted service to his employer, i.e., the 'Contractor'. In many contractual services like security, canteen, garden maintenance, housekeeping, packing, the contractor keeps his employees moving to different locations. That shows the contract employee is offering his service to a particular contractor.
One of our friends has stated that it is the liability of the Principal Employer to pay gratuity in case the contractor fails to make the payment. I feel he wanted to say it in a different context. In Maharashtra, many industries like textile, residual, and some engineering industries are covered under the BIR Act, where the definition of 'employee' covers even the contractor employee. Furthermore, some case laws under the CL(R & A) Act show that in case the contractor fails to make payment to his employees' statutory dues, it is the liability of the Principal Employer to pay. But we haven't come across any such specific case law relating to gratuity payment being made by the Principal Employer.
I am of the opinion that the contractor's employee is not the liability of the Principal Employer to pay as far as the issue relating to gratuity payment is concerned. This can be validated with a reasoning that any establishment engages the contract employees for a specific nature of the job and for a specified period, with specific numbers, by signing an agreement and by complying with provisions under CL (R & A) Act. The establishment ensures that the services being given on contract are not of a permanent nature and duration but rather support services, such as security, canteen, transport, packing, housekeeping, garden maintenance, loading, stacking, etc. Any industry offloads/outsources such support services to a contractor/vendor by following prescribed provisions under the CL (R & A) Act, which is again a separate enactment. Thus, to talk about security service, it can certainly be given on contract. The contractor keeps them on rotation by moving them to various locations; hence, we can conclude that for such services, even if liability arises for gratuity, it is for the contractor to pay and not for the Principal Employer.
In Maharashtra, for regulating the employment of private security guards employed in factories and establishments, the security agency has to get registered under ''The Maharashtra Private Security Guards (Regulation of Employment & Welfare) Act, 1981.'' This is a board that declares minimum wages for private security guards and takes care of such issues, it's like the mathadi board.
Please do not engage contract workers in continuous uninterrupted service for more than 5+ years; then, you have no reason to call them contract employees.
Thanks and Regards,
Deepak Sabharwal