The Shift in Judicial Approach to Labor Legislation in India
In India, during the period from 1970 to 1990, the courts repeatedly negated the doctrine of laissez-faire and the theory of hire and fire. However, of late, there has been a visible shift in the courts' approach to dealing with labor cases involving the interpretation of labor legislation. The mantras of globalization and liberalization are fast becoming the raison d'être of the judicial process, creating an impression that the courts are no longer sympathetic to the plight of industrial and unorganized workers. In many cases, relief has been denied to employees falling into the category of workmen who are illegally retrenched from service, by creating bylanes and sidelanes in the jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court over three decades.
The Influence of Liberal Policies on Judiciary
The attitude of our judiciary has undergone a directional change under the influence of liberal policies adopted by successive governments since 1991, resulting in an erosion of the workmen's rights. Labor regulations are now being interpreted with a pro-employer orientation. This shift is sharply manifested in the subtle introduction of the principle of hire and fire by refusing reinstatement and granting back wages, as well as denying regularization of daily-wage, casual, and temporary workers employed for years. Through several verdicts in the era of liberalization, the judiciary has legitimized 'hire & fire' and contractualization of the workforce with fewer obligations of the contractors and principal employers towards job security of the people they employ for years.
Balancing Rights and Duties in 2014
In 2014, there has been a remarkable trend in balancing the rights and duties of employers and employees. On one side, when the Supreme Court cautions the lower courts to exercise a high amount of care while invoking the discretionary powers under Section 11A of the I.D. Act for replacing the punishment of dismissal and not using this discretion in a casual fashion, on the other side, the Supreme Court decides that disobeying unlawful instructions to do additional work will not be misconduct and dismissal would be illegal. The Court also curtailed the employer by declaring dismissal as illegal when it was excessively reliant on the apology of the workman. The Court also protected the economic rights of the working class by holding that retirement benefits like gratuity and pension cannot be withheld by the employer, and if done so, interest is payable. Such payments are no longer considered as bounty.
Disputes on Dismissal and Absenteeism
Many disputes have arisen regarding dismissal based on the absence of employees from duties. Following the earlier trend, this year too, the Supreme Court held that the employer is duty-bound to conduct an inquiry as per standing orders to prove the charge of absenteeism. Dismissal without following due procedure would be deemed illegal.
Business Manager Magazine's Compilation
In continuation of our yearly compilations, the Business Manager Magazine February issue covers about 600 one-liner important labor judgments from various high courts and the Supreme Court capable of impacting employee relations and employers' obligations. These judgments are selected from thousands of pages from various journals published in 2014 by our research team.
Regards,
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
181In India, during the period from 1970 to 1990, the courts repeatedly negated the doctrine of laissez-faire and the theory of hire and fire. However, of late, there has been a visible shift in the courts' approach to dealing with labor cases involving the interpretation of labor legislation. The mantras of globalization and liberalization are fast becoming the raison d'être of the judicial process, creating an impression that the courts are no longer sympathetic to the plight of industrial and unorganized workers. In many cases, relief has been denied to employees falling into the category of workmen who are illegally retrenched from service, by creating bylanes and sidelanes in the jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court over three decades.
The Influence of Liberal Policies on Judiciary
The attitude of our judiciary has undergone a directional change under the influence of liberal policies adopted by successive governments since 1991, resulting in an erosion of the workmen's rights. Labor regulations are now being interpreted with a pro-employer orientation. This shift is sharply manifested in the subtle introduction of the principle of hire and fire by refusing reinstatement and granting back wages, as well as denying regularization of daily-wage, casual, and temporary workers employed for years. Through several verdicts in the era of liberalization, the judiciary has legitimized 'hire & fire' and contractualization of the workforce with fewer obligations of the contractors and principal employers towards job security of the people they employ for years.
Balancing Rights and Duties in 2014
In 2014, there has been a remarkable trend in balancing the rights and duties of employers and employees. On one side, when the Supreme Court cautions the lower courts to exercise a high amount of care while invoking the discretionary powers under Section 11A of the I.D. Act for replacing the punishment of dismissal and not using this discretion in a casual fashion, on the other side, the Supreme Court decides that disobeying unlawful instructions to do additional work will not be misconduct and dismissal would be illegal. The Court also curtailed the employer by declaring dismissal as illegal when it was excessively reliant on the apology of the workman. The Court also protected the economic rights of the working class by holding that retirement benefits like gratuity and pension cannot be withheld by the employer, and if done so, interest is payable. Such payments are no longer considered as bounty.
Disputes on Dismissal and Absenteeism
Many disputes have arisen regarding dismissal based on the absence of employees from duties. Following the earlier trend, this year too, the Supreme Court held that the employer is duty-bound to conduct an inquiry as per standing orders to prove the charge of absenteeism. Dismissal without following due procedure would be deemed illegal.
Business Manager Magazine's Compilation
In continuation of our yearly compilations, the Business Manager Magazine February issue covers about 600 one-liner important labor judgments from various high courts and the Supreme Court capable of impacting employee relations and employers' obligations. These judgments are selected from thousands of pages from various journals published in 2014 by our research team.
Regards,
From India, Delhi
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.