Bombay High Court orders Tata Motors to pay the temporary employees

Bombay High Court orders Tata Motors to pay the temporary employees

Under the Industrial Employment Act, a worker acquires the status of a permanent employee after working for 240 days continuously

The Bombay High Court recently directed Tata Motors to compensate 52 of its former temporary employees. It held that the company had indulged in unfair labor practices.

Justice RV Ghuge observed that the employees were terminated strategically to ensure they were not employed continuously to be deemed, permanent employees. The court said, "It was done to paint an imperfect picture that the work had come to an end and, therefore, these temporaries were disengaged by efflux of time."

As per the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, completing 240 days in employment entitles a worker to permanent status and thus higher wages.

The petitioners had contended that the automobile manufacturing company had deliberately avoided conferring such a status to them. They raised the issue under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, making efforts to reach an agreement through conciliation. But the conciliation officer had submitted a failure report.

Thereafter, the government referred the dispute to the Labour Court in Pune. The outcome was negative. The aggrieved petitioners then moved the Bombay High Court.

The petitioners claimed that the company was giving permanent-level work to them by paying roughly one-third of the salary entitled to the permanent workers. They sought that the respondent be declared as having indulged in unfair labor practices, along with directions to the management to reinstate them as permanent workmen with full back wages.

On the other hand, Tata Motors claimed that the demands of the workers were not bonafide. It maintained that the company engaged temporary workmen only to meet the demands of momentary rise in work. They were terminated, once the allotted work was over.

Finding the submission of the respondent weak, the court ruled, "Most of them had reached in between 230 days to 238 days. This demolishes the case of the management that the temporaries' engagement was strictly co-related to the rise and fall of the manufacturing activities exactly after completing seven months in employment."

The respondent argued that since none of them had completed the 'magical' number of 240 days, they were not entitled to permanency. But the court stated that the petitioners were deliberately given breaks to avoid conferring a permanent status to them.

The single-judge bench directed Tata Motors to compensate the workers within two months. The computation would be as follows: 211 days and above (Rs.75,000); 180 to 210 days (Rs.65,000); 150-179 days (Rs.55,000); 120-149 days (Rs.45,000); 90-119 days (Rs.35,000); 60-89 days (Rs.25,000); and below 60 days (no compensation).

The petitioners were represented by senior advocate Sanjay Singhvi who was assisted by advocate Rahul Kamerkar.

Senior advocate CU Singh with advocate Kiran Bapat appeared for the respondents. They were counseled by Haresh Mehta & Co.