So far as I am able to deduce from the case laws known to me in this regard, a 'trainee' would not be a 'workman' under section 2(s) of the IDA, 1947, if the offer letter states that he would not have any lien on employment after the successful completion of his training in the organization and he has been paid a stipend only during the period of training.
However, as per the practice described and enumerated under serial no. 10 of Part I of the Fifth Schedule to the IDA, 1947, keeping such people as trainees continuously for long years to deprive them of the benefits of permanent employment is certainly an unfair labor practice under section 25-T.