I fully agree with my senior colleague Sh. Korgaonkar that the bar to deal with disciplinary cases against a worker or appear before a conciliation office or in a Court or Tribunal on behalf of the Factory management is restricted for the Welfare officers who are appointed under a statute. As such, the Welfare officers appointed under the Mines Act, 1952, or the Factories Act, 1948, have been restrained from dealing with disciplinary cases. There is no other restriction. He is right that the Role & Duties of each HR Head & Welfare Officer are quite different. In my opinion, one mainly works for and in favor of the Management, whereas the other works in favor of the workers primarily for their welfare within the parameters of the rules and in consultation with the management. As such, it will not be fair to amalgamate the duties of the Welfare Officer as well as the HR Head.
In regards to the mail posted by Sh. AK Jain, I agree that the duties of the Welfare Officer are defined in the Mines Rules, 1956, but would like to add that Section 49(1) of the Factories Act, 1948, provides that where 500 or more workers are employed, the occupier shall employ such a number of welfare officers as may be prescribed. Section 49(2) of the Act empowers the State Govts to prescribe the duties, qualifications, and conditions of service of such officers. In accordance with the same, almost all the state Govts have framed their rules. For instance, the State of Punjab has framed "The Punjab Welfare Officers Recruitment and Condition of Service Rules, 1952" via their notification no. 206 I-LP-52/1204 dated 26th March 1952. I am sorry to disagree with Sh. Jain on the suggestion that one should accept the opportunity of handling both responsibilities and prove excellence. In practical situations, it is always very difficult to maintain the balance in a particular organization where there is the existence of a strong union.
I remember an incident where an official was holding an additional charge of an Admin Officer for a week or so. One of his staff applied for the company's accommodation, which was recommended by him but later rejected by the same Admin Officer. His explanation was that as a Dept. head, he has to see the welfare of his staff, but as an Admin officer, he has to show that he is neutral and not favoring his staff.
Regards,
BS Kalsi