I had sent a legal notice through a lawyer to the company regarding illegal termination. I demanded reinstatement of employment and recovery of unpaid salary. However, the company did not reply within the timeframe mentioned in the legal notice, so I filed a complaint with the labor department. The management was not present at the first hearing. The labor department then sent another notice, stating that if the management did not appear on May 11, 2018, the labor department would take unilateral action against them.
Suddenly, I received a reply to the legal notice after 50 days, in which the management informed me that they had appointed a sole arbitrator to resolve the issue. The date has not been finalized yet.
What should I do now?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1Suddenly, I received a reply to the legal notice after 50 days, in which the management informed me that they had appointed a sole arbitrator to resolve the issue. The date has not been finalized yet.
What should I do now?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
Are you sure that you were formally terminated, i.e., by means of written orders by your company? If "yes," you can simply write back to the company that since the dispute raised by you is being handled by the Labor officer/Assistant Commissioner of Labor, a competent authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, you are not interested in any alternative redressal through a third party. If you are not skeptical about the current actions of the company or need an immediate resolution of the dispute at any cost, irrespective of its nature, you can cooperate with the management. It is up to you to decide.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Are you sure that you were formally terminated, i.e., by means of written orders by your company? If "yes," you can simply write back to the company that since the dispute raised by you is being handled by the Labor officer/Assistant Commissioner of Labor, a competent authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, you are not interested in any alternative redressal through a third party. If you are not skeptical about the current actions of the company or need an immediate resolution of the dispute at any cost, irrespective of its nature, you can cooperate with the management. It is up to you to decide.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
Please provide your designation, nature of duties performed, last drawn gross salary, contents of your termination letter, and whether your appointment letter includes a clause for arbitration. Also, share details about your employer.
Thank you.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please provide your designation, nature of duties performed, last drawn gross salary, contents of your termination letter, and whether your appointment letter includes a clause for arbitration. Also, share details about your employer.
Thank you.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your reply. My appointment letter includes a clause on arbitration. Can I communicate to management via email that I am not interested in any alternative redressal through a third party, i.e., a sole arbitrator, as the matter is pending with the Labour Department?
What actions can the Labour Department take if the management does not appear at the hearing after receiving multiple notices?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What actions can the Labour Department take if the management does not appear at the hearing after receiving multiple notices?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
I believe that your correct response to the pertinent question raised by our knowledgeable friend Srinath regarding the classification of your employment status, whether as a workman, supervisor, or manager, will dictate the subsequent actions in light of the recent decisions made by your management, especially considering the presence of an arbitration clause in the employment contract. It is a standard practice of the Labor Department to notify the management upon receiving any complaints of unemployment, initiating a preliminary inquiry. Fortunately, should the management opt for a peaceful resolution of the matter, the Labor Officer may facilitate the parties in resolving the issue, even if the complainant is not classified as a workman. Conversely, if the management responds negatively, presenting evidence regarding the complainant's employment status and questioning the Officer's jurisdiction on that basis, they would likely suggest that you seek recourse from the appropriate authority and close the case.
Please let me know if you need further clarification or assistance.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I believe that your correct response to the pertinent question raised by our knowledgeable friend Srinath regarding the classification of your employment status, whether as a workman, supervisor, or manager, will dictate the subsequent actions in light of the recent decisions made by your management, especially considering the presence of an arbitration clause in the employment contract. It is a standard practice of the Labor Department to notify the management upon receiving any complaints of unemployment, initiating a preliminary inquiry. Fortunately, should the management opt for a peaceful resolution of the matter, the Labor Officer may facilitate the parties in resolving the issue, even if the complainant is not classified as a workman. Conversely, if the management responds negatively, presenting evidence regarding the complainant's employment status and questioning the Officer's jurisdiction on that basis, they would likely suggest that you seek recourse from the appropriate authority and close the case.
Please let me know if you need further clarification or assistance.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Madam,
I think we are not hitting the bull's eye in our replies due to the absence of relevant information such as your designation, responsibilities, and the exact clause relating to the so-called arbitration in the appointment letter. The Industrial Disputes Act provides for an arbitration process, and the appointment of an arbitrator requires joint consent; no single party can unilaterally appoint an arbitrator in labor disputes. However, all of this can be addressed after receiving the above and other related information.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think we are not hitting the bull's eye in our replies due to the absence of relevant information such as your designation, responsibilities, and the exact clause relating to the so-called arbitration in the appointment letter. The Industrial Disputes Act provides for an arbitration process, and the appointment of an arbitrator requires joint consent; no single party can unilaterally appoint an arbitrator in labor disputes. However, all of this can be addressed after receiving the above and other related information.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you all for the response. I worked as a process associate in a BPO. The arbitration clause states, "Any and all disputes arising in connection with the appointment letter and service shall be referred to arbitration, which shall be conducted following the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by a sole arbitrator appointed by the General Council of the company. The venue of the arbitration shall be Delhi, and the language shall be English. You agree to submit yourself to the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the courts in Delhi.
Can I reply to management via email, stating that I am not interested in any alternative redressal through a third party, i.e., the sole arbitrator, as the matter is pending with the Labour Department?
What action can the Labour Department take if the management does not appear at the hearing after receiving multiple notices?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Can I reply to management via email, stating that I am not interested in any alternative redressal through a third party, i.e., the sole arbitrator, as the matter is pending with the Labour Department?
What action can the Labour Department take if the management does not appear at the hearing after receiving multiple notices?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
Well, you were a "Business Associate" in a B.P.O. Still, we are not able to understand from that nomenclature whether the incumbent of the post would be a "workman" as defined u/s 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or not. Simply speaking, a BPO organization performs any process or part of any process of another organization through its own employees. Therefore, right from the General Manager down to the entry-level employee performing the outsourced process activities in such a BPO would be its "business associate" only; hence decide for yourself where and how you fit in.
Interestingly, nowadays, in the private sector, particularly in the IT and ITES companies, the designations are rendered more attractive and fashionable by the usage of catchy phrases like business associate, sales executive, Team lead, etc., though the duties they discharge are either basically technical or clerical or simply with some incidental supervisory functions. It is not the designation but the predominant nature of the work performed by the employee that is the decisive factor in deciding whether he is a workman or not to seek redress under the ID Act, 1947.
Coming to the arbitration clause in your appointment orders, you've not mentioned whether such a clause is included in the appointment orders issued to all employees in the B.P.O. The objective of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, as I understand, is to comprehensively cover international commercial arbitration and conciliation as well as domestic arbitration and conciliation.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Well, you were a "Business Associate" in a B.P.O. Still, we are not able to understand from that nomenclature whether the incumbent of the post would be a "workman" as defined u/s 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or not. Simply speaking, a BPO organization performs any process or part of any process of another organization through its own employees. Therefore, right from the General Manager down to the entry-level employee performing the outsourced process activities in such a BPO would be its "business associate" only; hence decide for yourself where and how you fit in.
Interestingly, nowadays, in the private sector, particularly in the IT and ITES companies, the designations are rendered more attractive and fashionable by the usage of catchy phrases like business associate, sales executive, Team lead, etc., though the duties they discharge are either basically technical or clerical or simply with some incidental supervisory functions. It is not the designation but the predominant nature of the work performed by the employee that is the decisive factor in deciding whether he is a workman or not to seek redress under the ID Act, 1947.
Coming to the arbitration clause in your appointment orders, you've not mentioned whether such a clause is included in the appointment orders issued to all employees in the B.P.O. The objective of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, as I understand, is to comprehensively cover international commercial arbitration and conciliation as well as domestic arbitration and conciliation.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have sent an email to the HR manager yesterday stating that this matter is pending in the Labour department, so I am not interested in resolving the dispute through a sole arbitrator. However, there has been no response from the management yet.
Is a lawyer allowed in the Labour department during the hearing?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Is a lawyer allowed in the Labour department during the hearing?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
No lawyer is allowed in labour department conciliation.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friends,
An Associate in a BPO is considered a workman under Section 2(s) of the ID Act, and therefore falls under the jurisdiction of the Labour Department. This means that an industrial dispute can be raised by such an employee.
Warm Regards,
Bharat Gera
HR Consultant
9322404765
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
An Associate in a BPO is considered a workman under Section 2(s) of the ID Act, and therefore falls under the jurisdiction of the Labour Department. This means that an industrial dispute can be raised by such an employee.
Warm Regards,
Bharat Gera
HR Consultant
9322404765
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi All,
Management submitted a reply to the Labour department. They challenged the jurisdiction of the Labour office, stating that "there were no documents annexed with the summons despite there being specific averment in this regard in the summons signed by the Labour inspector. It is submitted that this seems to be a regular practice of this department of issuing summons without providing documentation of the case, leaving the management at a total loss to understand why the summons have been sent before it.
The summons are also completely silent about the provision of law under which they have been sent and the nature of the enquiry that is contemplated. It is submitted that if these summons are for conciliation proceedings, the management is not interested in any such conciliation, and the matter ought to be closed and dismissed on this date of the hearing itself.
I need a response to this reply from the management along with the format.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Management submitted a reply to the Labour department. They challenged the jurisdiction of the Labour office, stating that "there were no documents annexed with the summons despite there being specific averment in this regard in the summons signed by the Labour inspector. It is submitted that this seems to be a regular practice of this department of issuing summons without providing documentation of the case, leaving the management at a total loss to understand why the summons have been sent before it.
The summons are also completely silent about the provision of law under which they have been sent and the nature of the enquiry that is contemplated. It is submitted that if these summons are for conciliation proceedings, the management is not interested in any such conciliation, and the matter ought to be closed and dismissed on this date of the hearing itself.
I need a response to this reply from the management along with the format.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
What is described in the post is indicative of the haphazard manner notices are sent to the parties to disputes by certain Labor Officers. Whenever a notice for enquiry is sent to the employer, it is essential that the copy of the complaint is enclosed so as to enable the employer to offer his remarks. Otherwise, one cannot find fault with such response from the employers. However, at the same time, the stand of the management about the maintainability of the complaint as well as the jurisdiction of the Labor Officer is totally wrong. The arbitration clause in the appointment orders cannot take away the jurisdiction of conciliation under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In the case of a dispute raised under the ID Act, 1947, the very question of whether the complainant is a workman or not is, in sum and substance, a dispute which should be decided in adjudication only.
Therefore, I would advise you to file a rejoinder setting forth the above position and request the conciliation officer to issue a conciliation notice under section 12(1) of the ID Act. If the Management is not forthcoming with any other option, he can declare that the conciliation failed. Upon receipt of that failure report, you can file a case under section 2-A(2) of the Act before the Labor Court for the area.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What is described in the post is indicative of the haphazard manner notices are sent to the parties to disputes by certain Labor Officers. Whenever a notice for enquiry is sent to the employer, it is essential that the copy of the complaint is enclosed so as to enable the employer to offer his remarks. Otherwise, one cannot find fault with such response from the employers. However, at the same time, the stand of the management about the maintainability of the complaint as well as the jurisdiction of the Labor Officer is totally wrong. The arbitration clause in the appointment orders cannot take away the jurisdiction of conciliation under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In the case of a dispute raised under the ID Act, 1947, the very question of whether the complainant is a workman or not is, in sum and substance, a dispute which should be decided in adjudication only.
Therefore, I would advise you to file a rejoinder setting forth the above position and request the conciliation officer to issue a conciliation notice under section 12(1) of the ID Act. If the Management is not forthcoming with any other option, he can declare that the conciliation failed. Upon receipt of that failure report, you can file a case under section 2-A(2) of the Act before the Labor Court for the area.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Management mentioned in their reply that the Labour department did provide a reason for the summons. The Management requested to terminate the conciliation proceedings by stating, "Respondent management is not aware of the reason for the summons." However, they did provide a detailed response based on the complaint lodged by me. Additionally, there is always a reason given in the notice.
1. Can the Labour department take action against the management in this case?
2. What will happen to the Arbitration proceedings as the hearing is currently ongoing in the labour department? Will it be automatically canceled after a specific time?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Can the Labour department take action against the management in this case?
2. What will happen to the Arbitration proceedings as the hearing is currently ongoing in the labour department? Will it be automatically canceled after a specific time?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Management mentioned in their reply that the Labour department did provide a reason for the summons. The management requested to terminate the conciliation proceedings by stating, "Respondent management is not aware of the reason for the summons." However, they did reply in detail as per the complaint lodged by me. Moreover, there is always a reason given in the notice.
Can the Labour department take action against the management in this case? What will happen to the arbitration proceedings as the hearing is ongoing in the labour department? Will they be automatically cancelled after a specific time?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Can the Labour department take action against the management in this case? What will happen to the arbitration proceedings as the hearing is ongoing in the labour department? Will they be automatically cancelled after a specific time?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friend,
The duty of a Conciliation Officer under the ID Act of 1947 is to bring the parties to the dispute together, discuss the points of their differences in his presence, and help them reach an acceptable solution. When it is not possible due to the intransigence of anyone or both parties, he has to declare that conciliation has failed and submit his report to the Appropriate Government, setting forth the reasons for failure and recommending further action, such as referring the dispute for adjudication. Therefore, it is an administrative function only. No Conciliation Officer can take any penal action against any party to the dispute for their rigid stance or non-cooperation.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The duty of a Conciliation Officer under the ID Act of 1947 is to bring the parties to the dispute together, discuss the points of their differences in his presence, and help them reach an acceptable solution. When it is not possible due to the intransigence of anyone or both parties, he has to declare that conciliation has failed and submit his report to the Appropriate Government, setting forth the reasons for failure and recommending further action, such as referring the dispute for adjudication. Therefore, it is an administrative function only. No Conciliation Officer can take any penal action against any party to the dispute for their rigid stance or non-cooperation.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The Respondent management submitted a written reply to the notice sent by the Labour department. I also submitted a response to that reply in detail with supporting documents during the next hearing. Now, they have denied to submit any further reply to my response.
1. Is this a fair practice to not provide a response to the Claimant? What could be the reasons behind this?
2. Should I write a letter to the Assistant Labour Commissioner stating that the Respondent management denied to provide a response?
3. Is there any option left to settle the dispute outside of the court?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1. Is this a fair practice to not provide a response to the Claimant? What could be the reasons behind this?
2. Should I write a letter to the Assistant Labour Commissioner stating that the Respondent management denied to provide a response?
3. Is there any option left to settle the dispute outside of the court?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
Proceedings before a forum for resolution of any dispute are not a seesaw game for the disputants to file a complaint, counter, rejoinder, additional counter, and so on endlessly for each and every imputation. You have raised a dispute, and the management filed their counter statement for which you filed a rejoinder - that's all. Now, you have to allow the Conciliation Officer to suggest alternative solutions if any from his side to bring down the points of dispute and persuade you both for an amicable settlement or declare his conciliation failed. Amicable settlement does not mean a win-win situation but a both-gain situation which implies certain sacrifices on both sides. Therefore, do not try to hang on to empty formalities. Decide for yourself what you want finally - reinstatement or compensation for the wrongful termination. Only that can pave the way for an out-of-court settlement at any stage.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Proceedings before a forum for resolution of any dispute are not a seesaw game for the disputants to file a complaint, counter, rejoinder, additional counter, and so on endlessly for each and every imputation. You have raised a dispute, and the management filed their counter statement for which you filed a rejoinder - that's all. Now, you have to allow the Conciliation Officer to suggest alternative solutions if any from his side to bring down the points of dispute and persuade you both for an amicable settlement or declare his conciliation failed. Amicable settlement does not mean a win-win situation but a both-gain situation which implies certain sacrifices on both sides. Therefore, do not try to hang on to empty formalities. Decide for yourself what you want finally - reinstatement or compensation for the wrongful termination. Only that can pave the way for an out-of-court settlement at any stage.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
Please clarify whether your application is in Petition Stage or the same is treated as "ID" with reference Number. If it is in Petition Stage, later on Conciliation Officer will convert the same as ID & hold conciliation proceedings & send Failure Report. The matter will be referred to Labour Court for adjudication by framing issues & relief entitled to the Petitioner.
Just because proceedings are held in Conciliation Officer's office, it cannot be construed that Conciliation proceedings are held. What stand has Management taken regarding your Termination? Do they consider you as an Employee under ID Act, or have they denied that you are not a Workman?
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please clarify whether your application is in Petition Stage or the same is treated as "ID" with reference Number. If it is in Petition Stage, later on Conciliation Officer will convert the same as ID & hold conciliation proceedings & send Failure Report. The matter will be referred to Labour Court for adjudication by framing issues & relief entitled to the Petitioner.
Just because proceedings are held in Conciliation Officer's office, it cannot be construed that Conciliation proceedings are held. What stand has Management taken regarding your Termination? Do they consider you as an Employee under ID Act, or have they denied that you are not a Workman?
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Respondent management had submitted their reply in writing that the Labour department did mention the reason for the summons. Management had requested to terminate conciliation proceedings by stating "Respondent management is not aware of the reason for the summons." However, they replied in detail as per the complaint lodged by me. Moreover, there is always a reason in the notice.
Despite Respondent management's request to terminate proceedings, the hearing is still ongoing according to the complaint lodged by me. I was told that maybe in the next hearing, the Labour officer will make the final decision. Respondent management didn't mention any ID Act in their reply. However, they stated that "Respondent is unwilling to take her back on their rolls."
1. Can the Labour department take action against the management as they made very serious allegations against the Labour office?
2. Will the Labour department refer this dispute to the Labour court, or would it be my prerogative?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Despite Respondent management's request to terminate proceedings, the hearing is still ongoing according to the complaint lodged by me. I was told that maybe in the next hearing, the Labour officer will make the final decision. Respondent management didn't mention any ID Act in their reply. However, they stated that "Respondent is unwilling to take her back on their rolls."
1. Can the Labour department take action against the management as they made very serious allegations against the Labour office?
2. Will the Labour department refer this dispute to the Labour court, or would it be my prerogative?
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Rupal,
The allegation by the management against the Labour Office has nothing to do with your petition. If conciliation ends in failure, the Conciliation Officer will submit a failure report to the government. Thereafter, the matter will be referred to the Labour Court for adjudication.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The allegation by the management against the Labour Office has nothing to do with your petition. If conciliation ends in failure, the Conciliation Officer will submit a failure report to the government. Thereafter, the matter will be referred to the Labour Court for adjudication.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Very interesting discussion.
If I am not mistaken, in another post by the same poster, I had suggested her to trust the advocate appointed by her and proceed as per his advice. In this matter, I could see that the management is attempting to establish that the poster is not a Workman as defined under the ID Act and that she is governed by the clause of the contract on the arbitrator. Always keep in mind that the management is usually more knowledgeable than the individual employee. If I were in the place of the poster, I would opt for an amicable settlement by skillfully attending arbitration.
Is there any potential for the poster to establish that she is a Workman as defined in the ID Act? If so, she should present her case in conciliation. However, it is important to note that the conciliation officer does not have the authority to decide on this matter, and he must refer this dispute to adjudication.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If I am not mistaken, in another post by the same poster, I had suggested her to trust the advocate appointed by her and proceed as per his advice. In this matter, I could see that the management is attempting to establish that the poster is not a Workman as defined under the ID Act and that she is governed by the clause of the contract on the arbitrator. Always keep in mind that the management is usually more knowledgeable than the individual employee. If I were in the place of the poster, I would opt for an amicable settlement by skillfully attending arbitration.
Is there any potential for the poster to establish that she is a Workman as defined in the ID Act? If so, she should present her case in conciliation. However, it is important to note that the conciliation officer does not have the authority to decide on this matter, and he must refer this dispute to adjudication.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Gathering data for an AI comment.... Sending emails to relevant members...
Stuck with an HR fire? Get a verified answer before your next coffee. - 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.
SBT Vs Asst. Labour Commissioner- Gratuity dismissed employee-LTS.PD F