In my organization, salaries have been deducted for missed punches on biometric devices for many employees, even though there is no such policy in place and no prior warnings were given. The sign-out is recorded in the manual attendance register, and employees have worked full hours for the day/days. This issue could be due to a machine error. However, the management is not open to any communication on this matter; they have promptly deducted salaries, leaving employees feeling cheated and demotivated. What should be the course of action? Is there a legal recourse or can this be challenged in court? Please help.
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Put up a written representation of objections to illegal pay cuts. Give proof of attendance. If management does not accept the appeal, send it by post (speed post).
Is your establishment a factory? Do you have any trade unions?
The last resort is going to the labor officer of the area and seeking intervention.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
3180Is your establishment a factory? Do you have any trade unions?
The last resort is going to the labor officer of the area and seeking intervention.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Nathrao,
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. We have already submitted all proofs (manual attendance register & emails) to management, but they refused and are in no mood to listen to us.
Sir, the employees are mostly executives and managerial cadre and do not fall under labor law. Where can we put our grievances, please suggest.
Regards
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you for your valuable suggestions. We have already submitted all proofs (manual attendance register & emails) to management, but they refused and are in no mood to listen to us.
Sir, the employees are mostly executives and managerial cadre and do not fall under labor law. Where can we put our grievances, please suggest.
Regards
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi Paulsanju,
Even executives and managers, despite working for a salary, must represent matters strictly in writing to management for consideration and resolution.
If the written request is not accepted, all victims should collectively approach the unit head or operations head first. If necessary, the matter can be escalated to higher-ups such as the general manager or CEO until justice is achieved.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Even executives and managers, despite working for a salary, must represent matters strictly in writing to management for consideration and resolution.
If the written request is not accepted, all victims should collectively approach the unit head or operations head first. If necessary, the matter can be escalated to higher-ups such as the general manager or CEO until justice is achieved.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Principle of Payment for Work Done
The principle is that one gets paid for work done. When there is evidence of emails, etc., indicating the presence of an employee, depriving employees (executives and managerial personnel) of their salary is uncalled for. The management must review and reconsider this provision. Management cannot adopt a stance that, regardless of circumstances, payment of salary is strictly based on biometric punch data.
First of all, there must be data accessibility; every employee should be able to view their punch data. Secondly, there should be a provision in the system for cases where punch data is missing, allowing an employee to seek correction, and their controlling officer can manually correct it. It seems ridiculous that an employee who has punched in (data available) has never left the office due to missing punch-out data, and conversely, when there is no punch-in data but they have left the office without coming in. This highlights the inherent improbability the situation creates.
Application to Workmen Category
Has this been made applicable to the workmen category? If so, a representation to the local labor office for violation of the Payment of Wages Act 1936 would suffice. Otherwise, you can only request for good sense to prevail.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(3)
Amend(0)
The principle is that one gets paid for work done. When there is evidence of emails, etc., indicating the presence of an employee, depriving employees (executives and managerial personnel) of their salary is uncalled for. The management must review and reconsider this provision. Management cannot adopt a stance that, regardless of circumstances, payment of salary is strictly based on biometric punch data.
First of all, there must be data accessibility; every employee should be able to view their punch data. Secondly, there should be a provision in the system for cases where punch data is missing, allowing an employee to seek correction, and their controlling officer can manually correct it. It seems ridiculous that an employee who has punched in (data available) has never left the office due to missing punch-out data, and conversely, when there is no punch-in data but they have left the office without coming in. This highlights the inherent improbability the situation creates.
Application to Workmen Category
Has this been made applicable to the workmen category? If so, a representation to the local labor office for violation of the Payment of Wages Act 1936 would suffice. Otherwise, you can only request for good sense to prevail.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
If the biometric is losing punches, then the system is defective and needs to be rectified. Apart from the biometric, it is mandatory for companies to maintain a manual attendance register as part of compliance with local municipal laws in the event of a disaster, etc.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
We have escalated the matter up to the CEO, and he has only granted relief for up to 2 days of missed punches, but for the first and last time. There are employees who have 5 or more days missing. They are very annoyed with this decision, and this is undermining the morale of employees who work with full dedication, sincerity, and honesty.
Please guide.
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
We have escalated the matter up to the CEO, and he has only granted relief for up to 2 days of missed punches, but for the first and last time. There are employees who have 5 or more days missing. They are very annoyed with this decision, and this is undermining the morale of employees who work with full dedication, sincerity, and honesty.
Please guide.
From India, Ahmadabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Take collective legal action agains the company. Unity is strength.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Time Office and Security Failures
I opine that in this case, the time office/security failure is very visible. It seems they are not verifying the data shift on a shift basis and are instead downloading it at the end of the month. If it were verified daily, this issue might not have occurred. Regarding the security aspect, how do they confirm that an employee who entered the premises has left after completing their duties? This remains a billion-dollar question.
Alternative Arrangements for Entry and Exit Systems
The organization should have an alternative arrangement for the entry and exit system, considering potential failures of instruments, power, and backup. In such cases, employees should be allowed to enter manually. Most organizations regularize attendance with a request letter from the employee, duly authorized by their superior. This is necessary because, for various reasons, an employee may forget or be unable to record attendance due to instrument failure, exigencies, or other reasons like an accident. Hence, I strongly opine that there should be an alternative, and deducting salary without due respect or confidence in the employee is not a good sign for any company.
As suggested by some professionals, it's better to escalate this issue to higher management or consider legal action if all the affected employees accept and support this course.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I opine that in this case, the time office/security failure is very visible. It seems they are not verifying the data shift on a shift basis and are instead downloading it at the end of the month. If it were verified daily, this issue might not have occurred. Regarding the security aspect, how do they confirm that an employee who entered the premises has left after completing their duties? This remains a billion-dollar question.
Alternative Arrangements for Entry and Exit Systems
The organization should have an alternative arrangement for the entry and exit system, considering potential failures of instruments, power, and backup. In such cases, employees should be allowed to enter manually. Most organizations regularize attendance with a request letter from the employee, duly authorized by their superior. This is necessary because, for various reasons, an employee may forget or be unable to record attendance due to instrument failure, exigencies, or other reasons like an accident. Hence, I strongly opine that there should be an alternative, and deducting salary without due respect or confidence in the employee is not a good sign for any company.
As suggested by some professionals, it's better to escalate this issue to higher management or consider legal action if all the affected employees accept and support this course.
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.
Salary Break up - After deduction.xls
Responsibilitie s of person who is responsible for deduction of TDS on salary.docx