Greetings! We have an employee named Babita working as an Assistant Manager in our organization since May 4, 2006. In October 2007, due to her personal reasons, she was allowed to work from home. She came to the office only for two hours daily, and the rest of the time, she was showing as working from home. During that time, her salary was 6000/-.
In January 2008, she received an appraisal, but unfortunately, the manager left the job. Her salary was increased to 15000/-, and she continued to work only two hours. After two months, the manager rejoined the team.
Currently, Babita is on maternity leave for three months, and she has accumulated 30 PLs as well. My concern is that nowhere in the documents is it mentioned that she is a part-time employee. Therefore, my question is: Do part-time employees receive maternity leave, PL benefits, appraisals, etc.?
Kindly clarify the same.
Urgent.
Thanks,
Vineet
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
8In January 2008, she received an appraisal, but unfortunately, the manager left the job. Her salary was increased to 15000/-, and she continued to work only two hours. After two months, the manager rejoined the team.
Currently, Babita is on maternity leave for three months, and she has accumulated 30 PLs as well. My concern is that nowhere in the documents is it mentioned that she is a part-time employee. Therefore, my question is: Do part-time employees receive maternity leave, PL benefits, appraisals, etc.?
Kindly clarify the same.
Urgent.
Thanks,
Vineet
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is no separate rules for part time employees, All the rules applicable for regular employees are equally holds good for part timers.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Oh gosh, Vineet, is the staff boss's daughter or a special case? :-D.
There is no straightforward answer to the question.
1. Part-time employees do not enjoy the benefits and privileges of full-time employees.
2. An appraisal is a purely management decision based on performance, not the type of contract the employee has with the company.
3. PL, SL, and maternity leave are not applicable to part-time staff. Providing these benefits to part-time employees would be unfair to full-time employees.
4. Please immediately add an addendum to the employee's original appointment letter regarding her wages and benefits as a part-time employee, clearly listing all non-standard benefits.
5. You did not mention if you are paying her salary in full. If that is the case, the employee may claim full-time employee status and all associated benefits since there is no written agreement.
6. Note that in many organizations, one distinction between full-time and part-time employees is eligibility for benefits such as health insurance, paid time off, vacation days, and sick leave. Some organizations provide pro-rated benefits to part-time employees. In other organizations, part-time status makes an employee ineligible for any benefits. Your company needs to make this decision.
7. Part-time employees benefit from employers' willingness to consider work schedule options such as flexible schedules and job sharing, freeing them from the pressures of being in the office and commuting, which regular employees experience.
I hope the above insights help with your decision-making. I will try to include some actual cases later.
All the best,
Ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There is no straightforward answer to the question.
1. Part-time employees do not enjoy the benefits and privileges of full-time employees.
2. An appraisal is a purely management decision based on performance, not the type of contract the employee has with the company.
3. PL, SL, and maternity leave are not applicable to part-time staff. Providing these benefits to part-time employees would be unfair to full-time employees.
4. Please immediately add an addendum to the employee's original appointment letter regarding her wages and benefits as a part-time employee, clearly listing all non-standard benefits.
5. You did not mention if you are paying her salary in full. If that is the case, the employee may claim full-time employee status and all associated benefits since there is no written agreement.
6. Note that in many organizations, one distinction between full-time and part-time employees is eligibility for benefits such as health insurance, paid time off, vacation days, and sick leave. Some organizations provide pro-rated benefits to part-time employees. In other organizations, part-time status makes an employee ineligible for any benefits. Your company needs to make this decision.
7. Part-time employees benefit from employers' willingness to consider work schedule options such as flexible schedules and job sharing, freeing them from the pressures of being in the office and commuting, which regular employees experience.
I hope the above insights help with your decision-making. I will try to include some actual cases later.
All the best,
Ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Vineet,
Whether the employee is a part-time or a full-time employee, the company is supposed to give the employee various benefits, which are mandatory immediately after appointing him/her. In your case, as you have mentioned, she is entitled to receive maternity benefits.
Regards,
Ravinder Kumar.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whether the employee is a part-time or a full-time employee, the company is supposed to give the employee various benefits, which are mandatory immediately after appointing him/her. In your case, as you have mentioned, she is entitled to receive maternity benefits.
Regards,
Ravinder Kumar.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Both the replies here are contradictory again by Ukmitra and Ravinder. If somebody else can throw some more light on this issue. It will be very helpful. Thanks, Vineet
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Since there is no separate rules for regular & part-time employees the exising rules are applicable for both.
In this connection, I wish to draw you attention on a Judgment of Delhi High Court, dated.1st Aug. 2006.
Back ground of the case : A workman used to sweep ½ hr in an office for Rs.60/- pm since 1976. Two years later, on his request the office manager agreed to pay Rs.130/pm for additional work of dusting. So he was dusting and sweeping the office. He had also been doing the similar works in some other offices. Four months later, he was removed from his services, when he demanded as per Minimum Wages Act.
(Literally speaking, the workman was not under the control of any organization and was free to leave his job at his free will & pleasure and hence he was not an employee of any organization. He was only a self employed.)
The dispute between the sweeper and the employer passed through Labour Court and High Court. Extracts from judgment is as follows
Decision of Labour Court: “The Labour Court held that a part time employee was covered by the definition of workman as given in section 2(s) of Industrial Disputes Act, and had awarded reinstatement with full back wages.”
“Delhi High Court considered that looking into the definition of section 2(s) and cateria of judgments, a part time workman is equally a workman and is entitled for protection available to a full time workman.”
“The interest of justice will be served if he is paid a compensation of Rs.25000/-. The award of the Industrial Tribunal is modified and the respondent/workman be paid compensation of Rs.25,000/- in lieu of reinstatement and back wages. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.”
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In this connection, I wish to draw you attention on a Judgment of Delhi High Court, dated.1st Aug. 2006.
Back ground of the case : A workman used to sweep ½ hr in an office for Rs.60/- pm since 1976. Two years later, on his request the office manager agreed to pay Rs.130/pm for additional work of dusting. So he was dusting and sweeping the office. He had also been doing the similar works in some other offices. Four months later, he was removed from his services, when he demanded as per Minimum Wages Act.
(Literally speaking, the workman was not under the control of any organization and was free to leave his job at his free will & pleasure and hence he was not an employee of any organization. He was only a self employed.)
The dispute between the sweeper and the employer passed through Labour Court and High Court. Extracts from judgment is as follows
Decision of Labour Court: “The Labour Court held that a part time employee was covered by the definition of workman as given in section 2(s) of Industrial Disputes Act, and had awarded reinstatement with full back wages.”
“Delhi High Court considered that looking into the definition of section 2(s) and cateria of judgments, a part time workman is equally a workman and is entitled for protection available to a full time workman.”
“The interest of justice will be served if he is paid a compensation of Rs.25000/-. The award of the Industrial Tribunal is modified and the respondent/workman be paid compensation of Rs.25,000/- in lieu of reinstatement and back wages. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.”
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear parasurampur,
Good quote from law and an excellent example. This is an excellent case of Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment for Part-time employees which should be avoided in all instance. And in both the cases the judgement is approrpiate. One needs to understand in both case as what was demanded by the labor and then we will have a proper understanding. If you have the details ruling, I would love to read them. There are various ruling by the Labour act especially for unorganised sector. And in this case we are delaing with an Executive who is already working from home and puts only few hours at office.
I feel that it would be an injustice towards a full time employee if one gives the same benefits as full time employees to a part-time emplyees. We need to have a distinction between two.
Ofcourse, since in vineet case the company has failed make any provision of the case, they will be obliged to pass on all the benefits to staff if she demands since nothing of her job in question of working part-time is in writing. Very weird.
Regards
ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Good quote from law and an excellent example. This is an excellent case of Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment for Part-time employees which should be avoided in all instance. And in both the cases the judgement is approrpiate. One needs to understand in both case as what was demanded by the labor and then we will have a proper understanding. If you have the details ruling, I would love to read them. There are various ruling by the Labour act especially for unorganised sector. And in this case we are delaing with an Executive who is already working from home and puts only few hours at office.
I feel that it would be an injustice towards a full time employee if one gives the same benefits as full time employees to a part-time emplyees. We need to have a distinction between two.
Ofcourse, since in vineet case the company has failed make any provision of the case, they will be obliged to pass on all the benefits to staff if she demands since nothing of her job in question of working part-time is in writing. Very weird.
Regards
ukmitra
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Parsurampur,
I completely agree with the case you have mentioned. However, if we place full-time and part-time employees on the same footing, how can we differentiate between them?
My primary concern is regarding leaves. If a full-time employee is entitled to 12 SL/CL and 15 earned leaves in one year, does a part-time employee also deserve the same benefits?
Thanks,
Vineet
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I completely agree with the case you have mentioned. However, if we place full-time and part-time employees on the same footing, how can we differentiate between them?
My primary concern is regarding leaves. If a full-time employee is entitled to 12 SL/CL and 15 earned leaves in one year, does a part-time employee also deserve the same benefits?
Thanks,
Vineet
From India, Chandigarh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Part-time employees also have the right to receive these benefits. In the case of a part-time employee, who works for the company for fewer hours (e.g., 4 hours/day), their leave is automatically restricted to 4 hours/day.
In your current situation, Ms. Babita is not a part-time employee. According to your statement, she was a full-time employee, and due to personal reasons, your management allowed her to work from home. Later, you may request her to return to the office. Therefore, the question of a "part-time employee" does not arise at all.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In your current situation, Ms. Babita is not a part-time employee. According to your statement, she was a full-time employee, and due to personal reasons, your management allowed her to work from home. Later, you may request her to return to the office. Therefore, the question of a "part-time employee" does not arise at all.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)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.
SC-21-2-2014 reg Part-Time employees.pdf
Maternity Leave Policy - posting.doc