Dear Experts,
Please suggest whether trainees (not covered under the Apprenticeship Act) engaged for a duration of 4 to 6 weeks in a garment industry should be paid 75% of the minimum wage or just a stipend of Rs. 3000 for the training period.
Regards,
Mahadev N
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1Please suggest whether trainees (not covered under the Apprenticeship Act) engaged for a duration of 4 to 6 weeks in a garment industry should be paid 75% of the minimum wage or just a stipend of Rs. 3000 for the training period.
Regards,
Mahadev N
From India, Bengaluru
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mahadev,
"Trainee" will certainly be an ambiguous term when persons are employed at any posts in an industrial organization where no scheme of apprenticeship or training is available as per the provisions of any law or its own standing orders. I think that you have taken the cue for the stipend mentioned in your post from the Central Govt Notification in GSR 680(E) dated 22-09-2014, fixing the minimum rate of stipend for the trade apprentices.
Already, a trainee is entitled to bonus, gratuity, and employees' compensation in case of employment accidents if he satisfies the eligibility conditions prescribed under the respective enactments as per various case laws. Similarly, if the trainees are not under any apprenticeship scheme, they would be "employees" for the purpose of the EPF Act, 1952. In addition, your statement "trainees (not under Apprenticeship Act) engaged for a duration of 4 to 6 weeks in a garment industry" confirms the absence of any scheme of institutional apprenticeship or training and raises the suspicion whether the designation is a camouflage for temporary employees employed in peak seasons only. Even if it is a kind of "on-the-job training" following the incumbents' regular appointments, paying at a particular rate for the period less than the minimum rates, if any fixed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, will be an offense.
Therefore, there cannot be any positive comment on your proposal unless you disclose all the relevant details.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
"Trainee" will certainly be an ambiguous term when persons are employed at any posts in an industrial organization where no scheme of apprenticeship or training is available as per the provisions of any law or its own standing orders. I think that you have taken the cue for the stipend mentioned in your post from the Central Govt Notification in GSR 680(E) dated 22-09-2014, fixing the minimum rate of stipend for the trade apprentices.
Already, a trainee is entitled to bonus, gratuity, and employees' compensation in case of employment accidents if he satisfies the eligibility conditions prescribed under the respective enactments as per various case laws. Similarly, if the trainees are not under any apprenticeship scheme, they would be "employees" for the purpose of the EPF Act, 1952. In addition, your statement "trainees (not under Apprenticeship Act) engaged for a duration of 4 to 6 weeks in a garment industry" confirms the absence of any scheme of institutional apprenticeship or training and raises the suspicion whether the designation is a camouflage for temporary employees employed in peak seasons only. Even if it is a kind of "on-the-job training" following the incumbents' regular appointments, paying at a particular rate for the period less than the minimum rates, if any fixed under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, will be an offense.
Therefore, there cannot be any positive comment on your proposal unless you disclose all the relevant details.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(1)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.
Minimum Wage of UP & UK.pdf