On behalf of my union members, I would like to clarify and seek a solution for the ongoing harassment from the company. We have been working for the last 26 years in the designations of computer operator and yard supervisors at Buffer CFS (Container Freight Station) in Navi Mumbai, established by JNPT Port, who is the principal owner of the CFS.
Background of Employment
JNPT Port announced a tender to run the CFS for a 20-year contract period, and in their work order, it is clearly mentioned that even if the contractor changes, the workers will remain the same, and the new contractor will have to continue with them until their retirement. Since September 1997, we have been serving there, and there have been three contractor changes: the first contractor from 1997 to 2004, the second from 2004 to 2005, and the third from 2006 to the present.
Current Situation
For the last 26 years, all workers have remained the same, excluding management staff. Currently, there are a total of 429 local workers in our firm. Over the last three years, this contractor has been pressuring us to resign from service. When we refused and filed a complaint with the ALC (Assistant Labour Commissioner) in Mumbai, they issued us a transfer order letter, instructing us to move to another state from our current location in Nhava Sheva, Navi Mumbai, to Gujarat, even though there is no transfer clause mentioned in our three-year agreement, and no appointment letter was provided by the current contractor when taking on this contract.
Seeking Advice
We would like to know if we can challenge this transfer order in court or with the ALC, and what are our rights to defend against this transfer order. Please advise.
From India, Navi Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Background of Employment
JNPT Port announced a tender to run the CFS for a 20-year contract period, and in their work order, it is clearly mentioned that even if the contractor changes, the workers will remain the same, and the new contractor will have to continue with them until their retirement. Since September 1997, we have been serving there, and there have been three contractor changes: the first contractor from 1997 to 2004, the second from 2004 to 2005, and the third from 2006 to the present.
Current Situation
For the last 26 years, all workers have remained the same, excluding management staff. Currently, there are a total of 429 local workers in our firm. Over the last three years, this contractor has been pressuring us to resign from service. When we refused and filed a complaint with the ALC (Assistant Labour Commissioner) in Mumbai, they issued us a transfer order letter, instructing us to move to another state from our current location in Nhava Sheva, Navi Mumbai, to Gujarat, even though there is no transfer clause mentioned in our three-year agreement, and no appointment letter was provided by the current contractor when taking on this contract.
Seeking Advice
We would like to know if we can challenge this transfer order in court or with the ALC, and what are our rights to defend against this transfer order. Please advise.
From India, Navi Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
First of all, the work in which you are engaged seems to be perennial in nature, and the principal employer is responsible for keeping contract workers in such jobs.
Secondly, there have been changes in the contractor, but the workers have remained the same. This situation could render the contract as a sham and merely a camouflage arrangement, which should be challenged.
Thirdly, continuously employing workers as contract workers is an unfair practice under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Fourthly, while the transfer as a service condition is accepted as a managerial prerogative, it cannot be used as a means to prevent employees from challenging the unfair actions of the employer. Since there is no clause regarding transfer in the appointment order or conditions of service, unilateral enforcement is not permissible. This practice is threatening and should not be tolerated.
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
4526Secondly, there have been changes in the contractor, but the workers have remained the same. This situation could render the contract as a sham and merely a camouflage arrangement, which should be challenged.
Thirdly, continuously employing workers as contract workers is an unfair practice under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Fourthly, while the transfer as a service condition is accepted as a managerial prerogative, it cannot be used as a means to prevent employees from challenging the unfair actions of the employer. Since there is no clause regarding transfer in the appointment order or conditions of service, unilateral enforcement is not permissible. This practice is threatening and should not be tolerated.
From India, Kannur
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.
Contract Labor - PPT.ppt
Temporary, adhoc & contract worker also eligible for maternity leave 12102017.pdf
LABOR WELFARE PRACTICES.doc