As per our company policy, the workmen are covered under the Standing Order, and an officer is covered under the CDA Rules. Can a workman, after getting promoted to an officer grade, be charged under CDA rules for any misconduct charges leveled against him during the period when he was a workman.
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think it is strange that a workman gets promoted to an officer while facing pending charges of misconduct. Can you please clarify whether the individual was charged before the promotion, or if the charges were brought against him after the promotion due to later discoveries?
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your reply.
Regarding the query, no charges are pending against him when he is a workman. He is charged for misconduct after his promotion as a result of later findings for things he has done when he was a workman.
As per our company policy, a workman does not have any supervisory power, and he is not covered under the Conduct Discipline and Appeal (CDA) rules. He is covered under the Standing Orders. However, here the employee, after becoming an officer, is charged under CDA rules for misconduct done during the period he was a workman.
Thanks & regards,
Raj
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your reply.
Regarding the query, no charges are pending against him when he is a workman. He is charged for misconduct after his promotion as a result of later findings for things he has done when he was a workman.
As per our company policy, a workman does not have any supervisory power, and he is not covered under the Conduct Discipline and Appeal (CDA) rules. He is covered under the Standing Orders. However, here the employee, after becoming an officer, is charged under CDA rules for misconduct done during the period he was a workman.
Thanks & regards,
Raj
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sir,
I just wanted to know whether the employee can be charged now (after becoming an officer) under CDA Rules for charges of misconduct done during the period when he was a workman and governed by the standing orders.
Thanks & regards, Raj
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I just wanted to know whether the employee can be charged now (after becoming an officer) under CDA Rules for charges of misconduct done during the period when he was a workman and governed by the standing orders.
Thanks & regards, Raj
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sir,
I believe that the misconducts in the Standing Orders and CDA rules are the same. Therefore, the employee should be charged under CDA rules (under which he is currently governed) for the misconduct committed when he was a workman (under the Standing Orders).
Thank you.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I believe that the misconducts in the Standing Orders and CDA rules are the same. Therefore, the employee should be charged under CDA rules (under which he is currently governed) for the misconduct committed when he was a workman (under the Standing Orders).
Thank you.
From India, Calcutta
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It depends on the charges leveled against him. Since he is an officer now, only CDA rules apply to him. If the misconduct committed is covered under CDA rules, he may be tried under it. It doesn't matter whether it was committed during a non-executive period.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your reply.
Case history: "The Officer is charged for technically recommending a party and also accepting the change in quoted price during the tendering process when he was a Workman."
Being a Workman, he does not have the competence, technical know-how, or the authority to make technical recommendations. The Workman does not have any authority to decide on any matter, including financial matters, but only facilitates the functioning of the office as per the directives of the superiors. The entire tendering process was conducted under the direct supervision and directions of the higher authorities.
As a Workman, he is governed by the Certified Standing Order, and the misconduct charges leveled against him do not fall under any of the provisions of the said Standing Order.
Standing Order and CDA Rules are different. According to the Standing Order, a Workman is a person employed directly by the company in its factory or any of its establishments to perform manual, technical, operational, clerical, or other work for hire or reward, excluding those performing supervisory duties.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your reply.
Case history: "The Officer is charged for technically recommending a party and also accepting the change in quoted price during the tendering process when he was a Workman."
Being a Workman, he does not have the competence, technical know-how, or the authority to make technical recommendations. The Workman does not have any authority to decide on any matter, including financial matters, but only facilitates the functioning of the office as per the directives of the superiors. The entire tendering process was conducted under the direct supervision and directions of the higher authorities.
As a Workman, he is governed by the Certified Standing Order, and the misconduct charges leveled against him do not fall under any of the provisions of the said Standing Order.
Standing Order and CDA Rules are different. According to the Standing Order, a Workman is a person employed directly by the company in its factory or any of its establishments to perform manual, technical, operational, clerical, or other work for hire or reward, excluding those performing supervisory duties.
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
CDA rules are applicable to officers holding supervisory posts. It seems the company waited until the workman got promoted to officer level and then implicated charges on him as per CDA rules. Can the employee appeal against the disciplinary action as he did not have any supervisory power during the time of tendering, and he had acted on the advice/instruction of his seniors?
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
It is not ethically right to charge a person with rules and regulations prevailing at the time of the offense and not as per management's convenience. In such a case, you should not have considered him for elevation at all.
In my view, he needs to be left alone.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my view, he needs to be left alone.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Can the management now take disciplinary action as a result of recently discovering misconduct charges against the Officer, who has refuted the allegations, during the time he was an employee without any supervisory authority based on his current grade?
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"The officer is charged for technically recommending a party and also accepting the change in the quoted price during the tendering process when he was a workman. A workman does not have any such authority. It looks like he is being made a scapegoat. The case has no legal strength in its present form."
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whatever offense may be committed in whatever position during service is punishable as per the conduct and discipline rules applicable to the position held by the employee at the time of serving the charge sheet.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sorry for my last careless post with the wrong sentence. PLEASE READ THE SAID POST AS FOLLOWS:
Whatever offense may be committed in whatever position during the service of an employee is punishable as per the conduct and discipline rules applicable, as per the position held by him at the time of serving the charge sheet.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whatever offense may be committed in whatever position during the service of an employee is punishable as per the conduct and discipline rules applicable, as per the position held by him at the time of serving the charge sheet.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello,
What if a senior officer is neither terminated on account of self-abandonment of her service (just company settled her dues including Gratuity as per CDA rules, not issued a termination letter) nor company conducted an inquiry as per the public sector organization's CDA rules? Any provision to remove her from attendance/role/company as per Indian law, or must the company have obtained approvals from the Board/vigilance/ministry to exercise unethically? Is there very high legal risk for the company? Any such reference cases in India, please give your views and consequences to the company and employee.
Thank you for your time.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What if a senior officer is neither terminated on account of self-abandonment of her service (just company settled her dues including Gratuity as per CDA rules, not issued a termination letter) nor company conducted an inquiry as per the public sector organization's CDA rules? Any provision to remove her from attendance/role/company as per Indian law, or must the company have obtained approvals from the Board/vigilance/ministry to exercise unethically? Is there very high legal risk for the company? Any such reference cases in India, please give your views and consequences to the company and employee.
Thank you for your time.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rajmrpl,
I fully endorse the view of Mr. Nathrao. Having said so, I also have to add that it is purely managerial politics in that the very promotion of the individual might be a ploy to make him a scapegoat in order to save someone else actually responsible and accountable as well for the alleged lapse. Any act of omission or commission that could be brought within the four corners of the term "misconduct" so defined in the rules, regulations, etc., applicable is the precursor to the disciplinary proceeding.
When you are so sure that it was not at all an enumerated misconduct in the Standing Orders by virtue of his employment position at the time of the occurrence, why is the management bent upon fixing him after his promotion? From an ethical perspective, it is certainly not correct. However, in the legalistic approach, if the impact of the alleged lapse has several and long-lasting ramifications that compel disciplinary action on all involved, it is immaterial whether it is an enumerated misconduct or not for the reason that it could be an act of negligence on the incumbent's lower position and as such he cannot resist it successfully. But what is important is that he alone shall not be punished just for hushing up the matter. In such an exercise satisfying both legal and moral norms, I would subscribe to the suggestion of Mr. Dhingra.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I fully endorse the view of Mr. Nathrao. Having said so, I also have to add that it is purely managerial politics in that the very promotion of the individual might be a ploy to make him a scapegoat in order to save someone else actually responsible and accountable as well for the alleged lapse. Any act of omission or commission that could be brought within the four corners of the term "misconduct" so defined in the rules, regulations, etc., applicable is the precursor to the disciplinary proceeding.
When you are so sure that it was not at all an enumerated misconduct in the Standing Orders by virtue of his employment position at the time of the occurrence, why is the management bent upon fixing him after his promotion? From an ethical perspective, it is certainly not correct. However, in the legalistic approach, if the impact of the alleged lapse has several and long-lasting ramifications that compel disciplinary action on all involved, it is immaterial whether it is an enumerated misconduct or not for the reason that it could be an act of negligence on the incumbent's lower position and as such he cannot resist it successfully. But what is important is that he alone shall not be punished just for hushing up the matter. In such an exercise satisfying both legal and moral norms, I would subscribe to the suggestion of Mr. Dhingra.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Join Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Notification-Sa les Promotion Employees Amendment Rules .pdf
China Rules On Terminating An Employee.docx