Can a Courier Contractor work as an employee himself under the same contract?
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Without the clear substance on the subject difficult answer your query. Would you specify what exactly the case is?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my opinion, it cannot be, for one cannot have a dual relationship as that of a contractor and a contract laborer to the same principal employer. Of course, the contractor can take a portion of the contract amount towards his services rendered along with his contract labor. However, he cannot perform the dual role of contractor cum contract laborer.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If I understand correctly, you are asking if the courier contractor can do part of the courier work himself.
I don't see a problem with that. The contract is generally to deliver a service. There is nothing wrong with the contractor doing a part of the service himself.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I don't see a problem with that. The contract is generally to deliver a service. There is nothing wrong with the contractor doing a part of the service himself.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
An example offered to understand, whether is the same as per your query?
We engaged Mr. X as the contractor for Repairing & Erector of Boiler. The contract was given to him because he was a Govt Certified High-Pressure Welder, and he was doing all welding work for the project. There is nothing wrong; a contractor can be an employee in his own firm.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We engaged Mr. X as the contractor for Repairing & Erector of Boiler. The contract was given to him because he was a Govt Certified High-Pressure Welder, and he was doing all welding work for the project. There is nothing wrong; a contractor can be an employee in his own firm.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you, @Umakanthan.M, Sir. In my opinion, one cannot be both an employer and an employee simultaneously. Additionally, the master-servant relationship should be carefully managed under Contract Labour, along with ensuring compliance with statutory deductions.
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, Ms. Meenaxi,
I think that our friends have answered the query in a general perspective of a proprietor working in his own establishment along with his employees. It is correct, but it cannot confer him the legal status/position of an employee.
Very particularly under the CLRA Act, 1970, the terms 'contractor', 'contract labor' and 'principal employer' do not stand in absolute terms but in relation to one another only. For the purpose of licensing of a contractor under the Act, the same person cannot be a 'contractor' and a 'contract workman'. In addition, the question of coverage of that contractor cum contract labor under the EPF and ESI Acts or EC Act would also arise. One cannot be a 'contractor' and a 'contract labor' under the CLRA Act, 1970.
Therefore, my above negative answer to the query is from such a legal perspective only and not the contractor's stepping into the shoes of any one of his contract labor for the sake of expediency of the contract work.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think that our friends have answered the query in a general perspective of a proprietor working in his own establishment along with his employees. It is correct, but it cannot confer him the legal status/position of an employee.
Very particularly under the CLRA Act, 1970, the terms 'contractor', 'contract labor' and 'principal employer' do not stand in absolute terms but in relation to one another only. For the purpose of licensing of a contractor under the Act, the same person cannot be a 'contractor' and a 'contract workman'. In addition, the question of coverage of that contractor cum contract labor under the EPF and ESI Acts or EC Act would also arise. One cannot be a 'contractor' and a 'contract labor' under the CLRA Act, 1970.
Therefore, my above negative answer to the query is from such a legal perspective only and not the contractor's stepping into the shoes of any one of his contract labor for the sake of expediency of the contract work.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In India, there are contractors who are also contract labor. Those contractors are covered under PF & ESIC. They have a labor license and submit half-yearly returns under the CLRA Act regularly, including the contractor's name as contract labor and the contractor signing the returns. This is a reality even in MNCs.
In my career, I have faced inspectors from both PF & ESIC who have advised to deposit the contribution of the contractor as he is also considered contract labor. An ESIC inspector made a valid point that in the event of an accident, who would be responsible. However, I have observed such activities mostly in specialized engineering jobs and not so much in courier services.
It is a conflicting situation, but reality is reality.
S K Bandyopadhyay (WB, Howrah)
CEO-USD HR Solutions
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In my career, I have faced inspectors from both PF & ESIC who have advised to deposit the contribution of the contractor as he is also considered contract labor. An ESIC inspector made a valid point that in the event of an accident, who would be responsible. However, I have observed such activities mostly in specialized engineering jobs and not so much in courier services.
It is a conflicting situation, but reality is reality.
S K Bandyopadhyay (WB, Howrah)
CEO-USD HR Solutions
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Shree Bankyopadhyay,
I think your solution is more feasible in case the contractor is running a non-proprietary business. If he is a company or a partnership, then he can be an employee of the organization and therefore the contract labor. If he is a proprietor since he cannot be an employee of himself, he cannot pay himself a salary.
In such a case, the problem for ESIC remains. There is nothing wrong per se for an employee of the contractor to sign the returns as a manager can sign if authorized. So the contractor signing, being an employee, is also not wrong in law.
Unfortunately, the original post does not give any details, so we are all guessing here...
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think your solution is more feasible in case the contractor is running a non-proprietary business. If he is a company or a partnership, then he can be an employee of the organization and therefore the contract labor. If he is a proprietor since he cannot be an employee of himself, he cannot pay himself a salary.
In such a case, the problem for ESIC remains. There is nothing wrong per se for an employee of the contractor to sign the returns as a manager can sign if authorized. So the contractor signing, being an employee, is also not wrong in law.
Unfortunately, the original post does not give any details, so we are all guessing here...
From India, Mumbai
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.
Kami Export - Negative Covenant in Contract of Employment.pdf (1).pdf