Presentation - Covid19 & Compliance Risk - No Work No Pay

Covid19 & Compliance Risk - No Work No Pay

Here I'm starting a series of all the queries in relation to COVID19, this is Part-1 on 'No Work No Pay'. You may also write down your queries in comment section, shall  definitely revert  

Why 'NO WORK NO PAY' is not applicable during COVID19 Lockdown?



The Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India vide advisory no. M-11011/08/2020-Media dated 20/03/2020 having title “In this critical time of the coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic, the Ministry of Labour and Employment advises all public and private employers to support their employees and workers” states: -



“In the backdrop of such challenging situation all the Employers of Public/Private Establishments are advised to extend their coordination by not terminating their employees, particularly casual or contractual workers from job or reduce their wages. If any worker takes leave, he should be deemed to be on duty without any consequential deduction in wages for this period. Further, if the place of employment is to be made non-operational due to COVID-19, the employees of such unit will be deemed to be on duty”



The question now remains that even after a non-ambiguous advisory from the government; are - 
  • How advisory got legitimate binding 
  • Some employers have not paid proper remuneration, either partial pay or pay cut, pay hold, paying as loan,  .... No Work No Pay
  • Job Loss for permanent, temporary, contract or casual worker
  • Earned Leave Adjustment or Lay-off
The employers seem to wrongly rely on the legal principle of “No Work No Pay”. Let us now evaluate this from a legal perspective –


“The normal rule of "no work no pay" is not applicable to cases where the employee although he is willing to work is kept away from work by the authorities for no fault of his. This is not a case where the employee remains away from work for his own' reasons, although the work is offered to him.”
- The principle was evaluated by the hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Union Of India Etc. Etc vs K.V. Jankiraman.

To be continue...  

Please comment below your queries

Comments

Unknown said…
Where a small office of 3 staff is there even though it is applicable. If yes what will be the support from goverment.
Anonymous said…
When Employees decide to abstain on their own they take the paycheck hit. When Employers ask Employees to abstain then Employers take the financial hit.
If Govt authorities instruct the employees to abstain then they should also own the financial responsibility.
Can authorities instruct the bank to pay interest on a recurring deposit that has not been deposited because the person was unable to deposit the money due to travel ban and could not travel to the bank ?

Can Govt ask the GST people to give GST refund to people who had not applied for GST refund but give him refund based on last month's refund ?
They why do they want the Employers to pay money for activities that has not been performed?
Because Employer is not equal to RBI they only pay from the money that they get from the employees' activity. This is same as Govt trying to bully the Employers.
Dear

What about applicability of Lay Off.
Sumit Pandey said…
Lay off is applicable only for 50 to 100 employees ( Industrial Dispute Act) but employees count is more than 100 then appropriate government will provide clarification on it. As you aware that central government already issued notification through MHA.