Advice on - Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

Dear Friend

Some one can please help…on Industrial Disputes Act of 1947

On completion of 240 Days of continuous employment under temporary employment, a person can claim for permanent employment.

In the case of any contract can a person claim any right of permanent employment

1. If the contractual period is 240 days or more?

2. If yes, what is alternative?

3. If no, what should the clause of the contract refraining the claim as said above?

Is it safe to have a 11 months contract with employees ? Or suggestion is required for alternative procedure. (Contract between employer and employee)

If no, what days of work (tenure) should be maintained?

Is there any compulsion to have percentage/no of employees on regular employment in an org.? Or all can be on contract ?

Waiting Of Your Fruitful Reply.

Siddhesh

Dear Siddhesh,
Let me intervene here, I am giving hereunder the reply pointwise
On completion of 240 Days of continuous employment under temporary employment, a person can claim for permanent employment.
A Person who has been completed 240 days in a orginasation can/will claim for permanent employment.
In the case of any contract can a person claim any right of permanent employment
They also can claim if they have corossed six months
1. If the contractual period is 240 days or more?
It would not be legal
2. If yes, what is alternative?
Give them break after six months
3. If no, what should the clause of the contract refraining the claim as said above?
nothing

Is it safe to have a 11 months contract with employees ? Or suggestion is required for alternative procedure. (Contract between employer and employee)
It could be
If no, what days of work (tenure) should be maintained?
Six months maximum
Is there any compulsion to have percentage/no of employees on regular employment in an org.? Or all can be on contract ?
No
Hope above will clear you doubt.

Rgds/Jitender

Thank you very much for the valuable judgment

Regards

Siddhesh

Dear Siddhes,
I hope my reply to your post on Contract labour has attempted to answer your ID advice also.Please try this link:

legal-opinion-required-contract-labour-act-1970-t261.html

I do no find any clause in any Act which allows an employee engaged through a contractor ( that employee is presumed to be an employee of such contractor) to claim permanent employment with the Principal employer if he works for six months. Similarly giving a break for one or two days after six months will not have any favourable impact on the right of any employee.

Regards,

Madhu.T.K

As regards with the permanency of the contract labour vis-a-vis principal employer, you may refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Steel Authority of India's Case. 8-)

Hi,

Can anybody please send the draft agreement of Simple Rental Agreement.

Regards,
bviajykk

Dear Friends,

240 days of employment and cessation subsequent shall attarct only retrenchment compensation only. The employee cannot claim permanancy unless he completes 480 days.

for contract employees it is safe to employ them for 6 months or 180 days.

there is no hard and fast rule that determines the percentage of contract and permanant employees.

for instance in an particular chocolate manufacturing co at chennai out of total 550 employees 500 on contrcat and 50 on permanant role.

rgds

Michael Nicholas

240 days of employment and cessation subsequent shall attarct only retrenchment compensation only. The employee cannot claim permanancy unless he completes 480 days
Where you read this, Dear Michael.

Rgds/Jitender

In my view, Once the employee complete the 240 days of employment, then he is entitle to claim the permanancy in the employment and not after 480 days.

Regards
umesh kapoor

Dear Friends,

It may be remembered that in all cases an employee working for more than 240 days may not be considered as permanent. This was clearly pronounced by the Hon. High Court of Bombay in The State of Maharashtra Vs. Narayan Babarao Lonikar (Writ Petition No. 2564 of 1996 Decided On: 25.06.2008). In this writ the Hon. Court observed that “Merely because an employee has worked for 240 days or more in a year is not sufficient to give benefit of regularisation or permanency”.

I completely agree with the comment posted by Mr. Madhu T. K. Giving a break for a few days won’t be of much use when the employee goes before the court of law.

Satori S.