Legal Dilemma: Can Executives Take Their Disputes to Labor Court or Only Civil Court?

Can an executive approach the labor court for any dispute with the organization, or can he only approach the civil court? Kindly provide your valuable input.

Thanks & Regards,
C.M. Mohla

All the disputes arising from Schedule II can be adjudicated in the labour court. For example, the legality of Standing Orders, interpretation of matters in Standing Orders, dismissal, etc.

All the disputes arising from Schedule III can be adjudicated in tribunals, national tribunals, and also the labour court. For instance, matters like leaves, hours of work, pay, retrenchment, rationalization, holidays, overtime, etc.

Moreover, only individuals defined as "workmen" in an industry can raise a dispute. No executive, who is a management employee/cadre, can raise a dispute. They must be classified as workmen under the ID Act.

Only if you fit the definition of "workman" as per the Industrial Disputes Act, can you raise a dispute in the Labour or Industrial courts; otherwise, the jurisdiction will be ousted. Even if the designation is executive, manager, or officer, if you are performing duties of a manual, clerical, or technical nature and not making independent decisions, you would be considered a workman under the Act. Nomenclature alone does not determine the status.

Regards

Elaborating further on what Dmc said, only a workman can approach a Labour Court, and it all depends on the nature of duties that the supervisor is performing. A supervisor drawing wages up to Rs 10,000/- is considered a workman.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
Mumbai

I would like to add one more thing. An employee who has not been given the authority to sanction leave for subordinates, initiate disciplinary action against subordinates, or appraise subordinates of their performance is considered a workman, even if by designation he falls under a managerial or supervisory capacity.

Regards,
Madhu.T.K

DMC & Madhu are right. Please refer to Section 2(s), 2A(b) of the ID Act. There are a number of Supreme Court decisions to prove their point, all of which cannot be referred to here.

Regards,
Varghese Mathew
[Phone Number Removed For Privacy Reasons]

There are many case laws that have settled the position of the definition of a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act. For instance, a pilot has also been held to be a workman. In your case, you may refer to the judgment of A.D. Inamdar v. M/S Bajaj Tempo Ltd. and Others reported in 2000 (86) FLR 345 passed by the Bombay High Court, which highlights the duties of supervisors.

Regards

I would like to share my views on the subject. The question of designation depends on the nature of work he does. There may be glorified designations, but the nature of the work will prove in the eyes of the law—under Section 2(s) of the ID Act.

Managerial and Supervisory Roles

Managers/Supervisors should have the powers of sanctioning leave, allotting overtime, permitting subordinates to go out, drafting work schedules, planning departmental work, appraising subordinates, recommending promotions during appraisals, attending managerial meetings, giving suggestions to management, and being part of the ISO-9001 team, etc. Appointment and disciplinary powers shall not be vested with most supervisors or junior levels. Hence, these two aspects will not be much relevant for the supervisory category in the eyes of the law.

Supervisory and Executive Roles

The Supervisor/Executive is one who supervises the work of his subordinates. If he only supervises the work of his subordinates and gives them direction, then he will not come under the purview of Section 2(s) of the ID Act. If the glorified executive or supervisors perform any manual, clerical, or technical nature of the job, yes, he is covered under Sec. 2(s).

Hope this clears the doubts of my friends.

Regards,
G.K. Manjunath, Sr. Manager-HR

I would like to clarify further:

1. First of all, be clear that for filing a case in Labour Court, designation is not important. Any employee can raise a dispute before a Labour Court if he is a "workman" within the meaning of sec. 2(s) of the ID Act, 1947. Whether the employee is a workman or not is to be decided based on the nature of work and other conditions of service, not merely by designation (as already clarified in the previous posts stated above). As such, the answer to your first query is affirmative; an employee designated as an Executive can approach the Labour Court if he satisfies the conditions of sec. 2(s) of the ID Act.

2. I further like to clarify that not "any Dispute" can be referred to a Labour Court. It must be an industrial dispute within the meaning of Sec. 2(k) of the ID Act, 1947, and the "Organization" must be an "Industry" within the meaning of Sec. 2(j) of the ID Act.

3. If any employee does not fall within the definition of a workman as stated above, he can raise his claim in a Civil Court and get it adjudicated. From your further post dated 24.8.2012, it appears that the employee is designated as a supervisor and supervises 10-15 workers, but you have not mentioned the exact nature of his duties and his salary details. However, such an employee can file his case in Labour Court unless the employer establishes that he is drawing a salary of more than 10,000/- and exercises managerial powers vested in him, and he is barred by sec. 2(s)(iv) of the ID Act.

Regards,
PKJAIN

Mr. GK,

The glorified executive/manager or supervisors who perform any manual, clerical, or technical nature of the job, yes, they are covered under Sec. 2(s). But what if they are receiving a good salary; is salary an issue?

Harsh