I work for an MNC in India in a middle management role. In my organization, there is a policy called Productivity Linked Wage in practice for workmen. In other words, a person has to deliver a certain fixed output per shift, which is agreed upon between the management and the employee union. If any person fails to meet the agreed production in a month (less than 5%), then their salary will be deducted accordingly. My query is, is it legal to do so? By the way, all the workmen's salaries are far more than the minimum wages act.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
2From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Instead of having a "negative" incentive policy, it could have been a positive incentive policy. What it means is to have a fixed and a variable component. The variable component could be linked with the production output. So, whoever fulfills the laid-out criteria gets an incentive to the extent envisaged in the scheme, and those who don't, don't get the incentive. Such a policy would not only be fair but also appear to be fair to all, thus preventing any heartburn.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
I think a deduction from salary for not meeting the production level would be a violation of the Payment of Wages Act. It lists the deductions that are allowed. All other deductions are illegal.
Instead of a deduction, you can structure your salary to include an incentive amount that will only come into effect upon reaching the production target. There should be a fixed salary that will be payable regardless of production levels, possibly at the minimum wage level.
Furthermore, your statement "salary will be deducted accordingly" implies that the full salary is variable. In this case, consider opting for a piece-rate system. Of course, under this system, the workers who are more efficient will earn more than what you are currently paying. You cannot have a piece rate and also impose a salary cap.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(5)
Amend(0)
Instead of a deduction, you can structure your salary to include an incentive amount that will only come into effect upon reaching the production target. There should be a fixed salary that will be payable regardless of production levels, possibly at the minimum wage level.
Furthermore, your statement "salary will be deducted accordingly" implies that the full salary is variable. In this case, consider opting for a piece-rate system. Of course, under this system, the workers who are more efficient will earn more than what you are currently paying. You cannot have a piece rate and also impose a salary cap.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(5)Amend(0)
Dear Raj Kumar, Appreciate your reply. The policy I mentioned is in practice for 25+ years now. My query is "Is such deduction legal?"
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my view, a deduction clause may be controversial and disputable since it implies that you are reducing wages that you have agreed to pay to a workman. There may be issues with the language of the agreement.
Regards,
Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
Regards,
Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
Fixing Salary and Deductions for Not Achieving Targets
Fixing the salary and making deductions from it for not achieving the target is ILLEGAL. Instead, fix the salary to match minimum wages, set the target, and determine the corresponding incentive amount. This way, the question of deduction will not arise.
Deductions can only be made for misconduct and not otherwise. Proper procedures must be followed for any deductions. Moreover, your proposal does not fall under authorized deductions.
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Fixing the salary and making deductions from it for not achieving the target is ILLEGAL. Instead, fix the salary to match minimum wages, set the target, and determine the corresponding incentive amount. This way, the question of deduction will not arise.
Deductions can only be made for misconduct and not otherwise. Proper procedures must be followed for any deductions. Moreover, your proposal does not fall under authorized deductions.
From India, Tiruchchirappalli
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
The company policy may not have been challenged by default despite being in vogue for 25 years. However, if the affected people decide to pursue the legal path, you may not be surprised by the decision to pay with retrospective effect. Therefore, it may be wise to break up each worker's salary into two distinct parts: (i) Fixed wages and (ii) Variable Pay or Performance-linked incentives. The 'Fixed wages' cannot be lower than the 'Minimum Wages' payable to workers of different categories and have to be revised as and when an increase is announced by the State Government.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
I seem to have a totally different opinion! If the wage settlement contains such a clause (of deduction for not meeting the "norms"), there is NOTHING WRONG about it per se!
If the wage settlement with such a condition is binding due to the nature of the settlement, and if the "norms" of work are also agreed to by and between the parties to that settlement, then not achieving "agreed norms" would amount to a "breach of settlement" liable to other possible actions aside from deductions.
Under such conditions, the Payment of Wages Act will not come in the way! Just as unauthorized absence is liable to pro-rata deduction of wages, non-performance also merits pro-rata deduction of wages, and the Payment of Wages will not be able to intervene or interfere if the wage settlement is properly constructed, and the binding nature of the same is explicit.
Talking about the "illegality" of such an arrangement, I will state that this arrangement does not amount to contracting out of law, and to that extent, the illegality fears are unfounded.
After all, the employer pays wages for attendance and for work. If either does not happen for any reason, where is the justification to claim or to pay wages? But one caution, if the non-performance or non-achievement of norms is not due to any fault or shortcoming on the part of the workman, then the deduction can be easily challenged! And if all the wherewithal was available for the performance, and the employee does not perform despite having agreed to (in the wage settlement), the action of deduction of wages as provided for in the settlement is perfectly in order.
To someone who has spent a lifetime in the manufacturing industry, this really is a non-issue!
Regards,
samvedan
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
If the wage settlement with such a condition is binding due to the nature of the settlement, and if the "norms" of work are also agreed to by and between the parties to that settlement, then not achieving "agreed norms" would amount to a "breach of settlement" liable to other possible actions aside from deductions.
Under such conditions, the Payment of Wages Act will not come in the way! Just as unauthorized absence is liable to pro-rata deduction of wages, non-performance also merits pro-rata deduction of wages, and the Payment of Wages will not be able to intervene or interfere if the wage settlement is properly constructed, and the binding nature of the same is explicit.
Talking about the "illegality" of such an arrangement, I will state that this arrangement does not amount to contracting out of law, and to that extent, the illegality fears are unfounded.
After all, the employer pays wages for attendance and for work. If either does not happen for any reason, where is the justification to claim or to pay wages? But one caution, if the non-performance or non-achievement of norms is not due to any fault or shortcoming on the part of the workman, then the deduction can be easily challenged! And if all the wherewithal was available for the performance, and the employee does not perform despite having agreed to (in the wage settlement), the action of deduction of wages as provided for in the settlement is perfectly in order.
To someone who has spent a lifetime in the manufacturing industry, this really is a non-issue!
Regards,
samvedan
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Dear phanikrishnan,
Hope you got the answer you were looking for from the responses of our members. I would just like to add here that, on the part of someone looking for an answer, sometimes it is too naive to ask whether an action is legal or illegal.
On the contrary, one should enquire in terms of whether an issue/policy is good or "bad in law".
Similarly, there should be sufficient caution on the part of the person giving the answer to pronounce ANY ACT as LEGAL, for there is a responsibility placed on that person. If one says it is LEGAL and the other person keeps COMMITTING the ACT with IMPUNITY and later on it is declared as ILLEGAL and hence PUNISHABLE by a Court of Law, then in such circumstances, who shall be CONSIDERED AS GUILTY? The person who COMMITS the Act or the one who says it is LEGAL? The suggestor cannot escape his vicarious responsibility.
I hope you understand what I mean to convey.
Moreover, our laws define what are the DOs and the punishment for non-compliance or commitment of an act. There can be hundreds of situations which cannot be covered, spelled out, or mentioned.
Therefore, if you want to know specifically, then I would only say, irrespective of whether the practice has been going on for several decades in your company, please refer to Sec. 7 under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, wherein you will find that ONLY the following types of deductions are permitted:
1. FINES
- An employed person can be fined only for acts and omissions which are specified in a list approved by the State Government or the prescribed authority (section-8).
- Before the fine is imposed on an employed person, he must be given an opportunity for explanation (section-8).
- Fines should not exceed 3% of the wages in a month (section-8).
- Fines shall not be recovered by installment or later than 60 days of the date of imposition (section-8).
- The paymaster shall maintain a register of Wages, Fines, Damages, Deductions, and Advances in Form VI(PW) (Rule 3, 4 & 17).
2. Deductions (section-9 to 13)
- Deductions for the absence from duty.
- Deductions for damages to or loss of goods expressly entrusted to the employed person for custody, or for loss of money for which he is required to account, where such damage or loss is directly attributed to his negligence or default.
- Deductions for house accommodation.
- Deduction for amenities as authorized by the Govt.
- Deduction for recovery of advances and interest, and for adjustment of overpayment of wages.
- Deductions for recovery of loans from any fund constituted for the welfare of labor approved by the state Govt.
- Deductions for recovery of loans for house building or for purposes approved by Govt.
- Deduction for income-tax.
- Deduction on orders of a court or other authority.
- Deductions for subscription and repayment of advance from any provident fund.
- Deduction for payments to cooperative sectors.
- Deduction of premium for LIC policy or for post office saving scheme on written authorization of the employed person.
- Deduction for contribution to any fund constituted by the employed or trade union for the welfare of employed person with the approval of state govt.
- Deduction for payment of membership fee of trade union with written authorization of employed person.
- Deduction for contribution to Prime Minister's National Relief Fund or to such other fund as notified by Central Govt. with the written authorization of the employed person.
Total amount of deductions should not exceed 75% of wages of the employed person in any wage period if whole or part of the deduction is meant for payment to cooperative societies. In other cases, it should not exceed 50%.
(a) The advance may be recovered in installments by deductions from wages spread over not more than twelve months. No installment shall exceed one-third or where the wages for any wage period are not more than 20 rupees, ¼ of the wages for the wage period in respect of which deduction is made.
(b) Recovery of advances of wages or loans or payment to cooperative societies and insurance scheme shall be subject to any rules/conditions of the State Govt.
Law does not allow an employer to make any type of deduction out of the wages of a worker except those authorized by this Act.
Hope the above clarifies the matter for you.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
Hope you got the answer you were looking for from the responses of our members. I would just like to add here that, on the part of someone looking for an answer, sometimes it is too naive to ask whether an action is legal or illegal.
On the contrary, one should enquire in terms of whether an issue/policy is good or "bad in law".
Similarly, there should be sufficient caution on the part of the person giving the answer to pronounce ANY ACT as LEGAL, for there is a responsibility placed on that person. If one says it is LEGAL and the other person keeps COMMITTING the ACT with IMPUNITY and later on it is declared as ILLEGAL and hence PUNISHABLE by a Court of Law, then in such circumstances, who shall be CONSIDERED AS GUILTY? The person who COMMITS the Act or the one who says it is LEGAL? The suggestor cannot escape his vicarious responsibility.
I hope you understand what I mean to convey.
Moreover, our laws define what are the DOs and the punishment for non-compliance or commitment of an act. There can be hundreds of situations which cannot be covered, spelled out, or mentioned.
Therefore, if you want to know specifically, then I would only say, irrespective of whether the practice has been going on for several decades in your company, please refer to Sec. 7 under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, wherein you will find that ONLY the following types of deductions are permitted:
1. FINES
- An employed person can be fined only for acts and omissions which are specified in a list approved by the State Government or the prescribed authority (section-8).
- Before the fine is imposed on an employed person, he must be given an opportunity for explanation (section-8).
- Fines should not exceed 3% of the wages in a month (section-8).
- Fines shall not be recovered by installment or later than 60 days of the date of imposition (section-8).
- The paymaster shall maintain a register of Wages, Fines, Damages, Deductions, and Advances in Form VI(PW) (Rule 3, 4 & 17).
2. Deductions (section-9 to 13)
- Deductions for the absence from duty.
- Deductions for damages to or loss of goods expressly entrusted to the employed person for custody, or for loss of money for which he is required to account, where such damage or loss is directly attributed to his negligence or default.
- Deductions for house accommodation.
- Deduction for amenities as authorized by the Govt.
- Deduction for recovery of advances and interest, and for adjustment of overpayment of wages.
- Deductions for recovery of loans from any fund constituted for the welfare of labor approved by the state Govt.
- Deductions for recovery of loans for house building or for purposes approved by Govt.
- Deduction for income-tax.
- Deduction on orders of a court or other authority.
- Deductions for subscription and repayment of advance from any provident fund.
- Deduction for payments to cooperative sectors.
- Deduction of premium for LIC policy or for post office saving scheme on written authorization of the employed person.
- Deduction for contribution to any fund constituted by the employed or trade union for the welfare of employed person with the approval of state govt.
- Deduction for payment of membership fee of trade union with written authorization of employed person.
- Deduction for contribution to Prime Minister's National Relief Fund or to such other fund as notified by Central Govt. with the written authorization of the employed person.
Total amount of deductions should not exceed 75% of wages of the employed person in any wage period if whole or part of the deduction is meant for payment to cooperative societies. In other cases, it should not exceed 50%.
(a) The advance may be recovered in installments by deductions from wages spread over not more than twelve months. No installment shall exceed one-third or where the wages for any wage period are not more than 20 rupees, ¼ of the wages for the wage period in respect of which deduction is made.
(b) Recovery of advances of wages or loans or payment to cooperative societies and insurance scheme shall be subject to any rules/conditions of the State Govt.
Law does not allow an employer to make any type of deduction out of the wages of a worker except those authorized by this Act.
Hope the above clarifies the matter for you.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
You must have gained the clarity you were seeking from the responses of the members. You have also mentioned that this practice has been in vogue for 25 years. However, I don't think this needs to be a benchmark for any improvement in the overall policy, as long as you are able to 'sell the idea' to the Unions. Why not consider implementing what Raj Kumar suggested - "Instead of having a 'negative' incentive policy, it could have been a positive incentive policy... the variable component could be linked with the production output?"
Many industries now have this policy in vogue, taken from the practices in the IT industry. The best thing for the worker would be 'what he/she earns is mostly in his/her control.' The Management shouldn't have any trouble accepting it since it enhances the overall output and consequently the profits.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Many industries now have this policy in vogue, taken from the practices in the IT industry. The best thing for the worker would be 'what he/she earns is mostly in his/her control.' The Management shouldn't have any trouble accepting it since it enhances the overall output and consequently the profits.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Wage Ceiling Under The Payment Of Wages Act Increased From 18,000 To 24,000.pdf