Dear Pharma Company HR,
Steady increase of industrial disputes between the Pharma Companies and their SP Employees, particularly on the issue of transfer is indicative of poor HRM in such enterprises. To my understanding transfer is not the real issue of contention for both the management and the SPEs are well aware that transfer is an incidence of employment. Unfortunately both the resourceful partners of employment in the Pharmaceutical Industry always tend to arm-twist each other at the slightest provocation from either side in stead of going down to the rock-bottom of the performance issues and difficult service conditions created by each other respectively and solving them amicably. Because of the higher academic qualifications, attractive salary and perks and independent nature of the performance of the SPEs, the managements refuse to recognize them as " workman " under the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 despite the judicial dicta and statutory amendment. The SPEs in their turn shift the blame on the alleged unrealistic targets fixed by the managements and subjective supervisory controls exercised by the middle level managers. The invariable pan-India presence of most of such companies is a blessing in disguise to the managements. Therefore, transfer on work exigencies is a ploy to dispense with the services of an unwanted SPE and the employees also fight it tooth and nail without obeying the orders of transfer on the grounds of victimisation and unfair labour practice. Hence, the problems raised in your post.
To reiterate strictly, transfer is an incidence of service and it is the prerogative of the employer to decide where, when and how long an employee can work. At the same time, it shall not be a measure of victimisation or coloroble exercise of power or against the terms of the contract of employment relating to service conditions or applicable Standing Orders. When the affected employee chooses not to obey the transfer orders can not claim wages or salary though he's raised a dispute u/s 2k of the ID Act,1947. The Labour Court has no powers to grant any interim relief to such an employee. Even the management can initiate disciplinary action against such an employee if it is so provided in the service regulations and dismiss him with the prior permission of the Labour Court u/s 33(1) of the ID Act,1947. Otherwise the employment relations continue though the employee is not entitled to salary/wages for the time being on the doctrine of no work-no wages.