Skip to main content

​Legal Obligations to Pay Wages during Lockdown

 Due to lockdown being imposed as a defence mechanism to keep the public safe from the Coronavirus outbreak, the workforces in various business sectors have also been facing challenges. Being one of the most effective solutions to contain the pandemic, the lockdown is one of the most lucrative measures implemented by the government, however, the same is affecting nearly all business activities putting them on hold due to the restricted movement and shutting down of all non-essential services. Consequentially, this has impacted business entities and economy at large which has further resulted in salary deductions and employees being laid off.


In order to protect the interests of employees, the union and the state governments have asked the industrial establishments to pay wages to its permanent as well as contractual employees for the lockdown period on humanitarian grounds. However, what needs to be considered is whether the Indian law can put such an obligation over private organisations during such hard times. Let’s take a look at the mandates provided by law for an employer to pay wages to its employees during a quarantine situation.


Connect with an expert lawyer for your legal issue

 


What are the legal obligations to pay wages during a lockdown?

As per the Indian law, there is no specific provision that deals with a situation wherein employers are required to pay wages to its employees during a lockdown. However, the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 talks about a similar situation. Under Section 2 (kkk) of the Industrial Disputes Act the term ‘lay off’ has been defined which states that when an employer is unable to provide employment to an employee due to a natural calamity or a similar situation the same would fall under ‘lay off’.




Subsequently, the Act also speaks about the terms on which an employee can be laid off. Under Section 25 C of the Act, the employers laying off workmen are required to pay compensation to the workmen being laid off which shall be equivalent to 50 percent of the wages. Moreover, the Act mandates any industrial establishment with more than 100 workmen to take prior permission before laying off the workmen. Although the permission is not mandatory if the laying off is due to a natural calamity.


However, the question again arises whether COVID-19 can be considered as a natural calamity. The Ministry of Finance through its notification dated 19th February 2020 has stated that the disruption of the supply chain due to the spread of novel COVID-19 will be considered as a natural calamity. Therefore, the workmen can take resort in the above-mentioned Sections on being laid off.


Consult: Top Labour & Service Lawyers in India

 


Can government make it a mandate for private organisations to pay wages during lockdown?

In the absence of any specific law in this regard, the government lacks the authority to mandatorily obligate private organisations to pay wages to their employees. The Central Government has invoked the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 to declare the lockdown and the State Governments have invoked the provisions of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 to frame regulations and issuing guidelines/directions to deal with the pandemic. However, the directions issued by the governments to the employers to pay wages to all the contractual and permanent employees neither comes within the scope of the Disaster Management Act nor the Epidemic Diseases Act. A simple reading of these two Acts makes it clear that neither the Central nor State governments have the powers to direct private employers to pay wages to its employees during a lockdown situation. The Acts merely empower the committees established within its scope to frame strategies to deal with the disaster. Therefore, the directions issued by the governments to pay wages can only be considered as advisory and cannot act as an obligation on private organizations.

 


What can be done to remedy the situation?

Foreseeing that the lockdown could cause a burden on the economy due to the restricted movement and shutting down of all the non-essential services, various governments across the world have taken a slew of measures to tackle this situation. For example, Australia has introduced a “Jobkeeper” wage subsidy plan where an employer can claim a periodic payment of $ 1,500 per eligible employee. Similarly, England has provided for 80 percent of the average earnings to be subsidized. Denmark has announced that 75 percent of the wage bills shall be covered by the government. The Netherlands, on the other hand, has allocated a package that covers compensation of up to 90 percent of the labour costs for organisations that are expecting a reduction in revenues of up to 20 percent or more.


In order to protect the interests of employees among various business sectors, the Indian Government can take similar steps to help employers in providing wages to its employees. The government can also introduce a plan either to subsidize the wages in part if it’s unable to cover the entire wage cost. As in the absence of such a scheme, the private employers, especially the ones running small and medium-size organisations, can be put through hardships that can ultimately result in their bankruptcy.


Connect with an expert lawyer for your legal issue

 


How can a lawyer help?

In circumstances like these, if you are being laid off by your company or your salary is being deducted, it is necessary to understand as to what steps can be taken to retain your job or to get back the deducted salary. This is why it is important to have a labour lawyer by your side who can guide you with the right steps to be taken and help you in doing the needful to restore your rights. A labour lawyer, being an expert in the service sector laws, can help you understand the options available to you in situations like these and can also assist you with the necessary procedures in order to resolve your salary or job-related issue.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more