Casual Workers and Permanency: Where Does the ID Act Mention the 240-Day Rule?

Under which section of the ID Act is it mentioned that "Casual workers are deemed to be permanent if they work for more than 240 days in a calendar year."

Clarification on the Industrial Disputes Act

The Industrial Disputes Act does not stipulate any such conditions.

Sec. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act states:

No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until:

- (a) The workman has been given one month's notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment, and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice.

- (b) The workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days' average pay for every completed year of continuous service or any part thereof in excess of six months.

It has now been clarified by the Supreme Court that contractual employees are not regular employees, and their termination does not amount to retrenchment. Also, casual workers employed in different establishments under a single employer can now be retrenched without giving notice even if they have completed 240 days of service. Thus, provisions under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, need not be complied with before retrenching a casual or contractual worker.

Kind Regards,

Casual Workers and the ID Act

Casual workers are those employees who have been engaged for work that is essentially casual in nature. This definition finds mention in the Standing Orders. There is no provision in the ID Act which specifically addresses casual workers. Section 25B of the ID Act defines continuous service, and Section 25F deals with conditions precedent to retrenchment. Therefore, an inference can be drawn that if a workman works for a continuous period of 240 days, he will be deemed to have worked for one year, and therefore the provisions of Section 25F would apply.

To my understanding, there are no provisions in the ID Act which confer the status of a permanent workman.

Best Wishes,
Vasant Nair

You are looking for the information in the wrong place, please. It is not the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 but the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act 1946 that has the answer to your question.

Clause 4-C of the Model Standing Orders

Kindly look at Clause 4-C of the Model Standing Orders for "Workmen doing manual and technical work." These are provided in Schedule I to the "Bombay Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules 1959." This provision came in as an amendment sometime in 1978.

I do not know if such an amendment has been made in the rules in other states. If you are not from Maharashtra, it is necessary for you to check if a similar provision exists in the related rules for your state.

Trust this will clarify the issue for all who have participated in this thread!

Regards,
samvedan

Read Here:

[Worker can be sacked even if he has put in 240 days of work: SC - Times Of India](http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-07-24/india/28158407_1_hafed-apex-court-labour-court)

---

Dear Vasant,

Definition and Status of Casual Workers

Casual Workers are those employees who have been engaged for work that is essentially casual in nature. This definition finds mention in the Standing Orders. There is no provision in the ID Act that specifically addresses Casual Workers. Section 25B of the ID Act defines continuous service, and Section 25F deals with Conditions Precedent to Retrenchment. Therefore, an inference can be drawn that if a workman works for a continuous period of 240 days, he will be deemed to have worked for one year, and therefore the provisions of Section 25F would apply.

To my understanding, there are no provisions in the ID Act that confer the status of a Permanent Workman.

Best Wishes, Vasant Nair

Clarification on Permanent Status and Retrenchment Compensation

You are correct in saying that working for 240 days does not create any right for a workman to seek permanent status in the employment of the management. Furthermore, the logic of 240 days regarding permanency in service implies that if a workman works for more than 240 days, it may be presumed that the work is perennial in nature. A casual workman is employed against a permanent nature of work just to deprive the workman of his legally entitled employment benefits. However, any casual workman who completes 240 days cannot automatically become permanent in the services of the management.

It is also true that 240 days give the right to receive retrenchment compensation in case his employment is ended by the management other than by way of punishment for any misconduct. The compensation is 15 days' salary for each completed year of service.

For calculating the total number of workmen under Chapter VB, do we need to count the contractual and casual workers?