Legal Framework for the Workforce of the Future

Every economic collapse paves the way to a transformative legacy, the pandemic is no exception. Globally, since 2020, the fluctuating and deliberate government-imposed lockdowns have forced the replacement of traditional work operations with automated labour platforms, virtual collaborations and digitized workforce interfaces[1]. According to International Labor Organization (ILO), the work from home arrangement has become an unexpected experiment that has managed to break the traditional barriers of working life and technology.

As the ‘new normal’ fixes its roots into the traditional office space, it is imperative to structure a regulatory legal framework that governs the ‘workforce of the future.’ Considering 96% of the organizations have successfully switched to work-from-home set-ups domestically since 2020, it is time for India to incorporate the new work culture into its legislative framework, in alignment with countries worldwide[2].

This article deliberates upon the exigency and structure of new work from the home regulatory regime, by mapping the work from home policies across the globe and analyzing the gaps in the present labour laws in the country that demand a more sincere reflection in the backdrop of the ‘new normal.’

Need of Comprehensive Legal Framework for Work from Home in India

 

          Fig: The economist[3]                                                              Fig: Statista[4]

The above two graphs illustrate two different statistics of work from home; graph 1 shows WFH working hours of employees per week in western countries, while graph 2 shows a survey of Indian millennials on lifestyle and work during a pandemic.

As per Graph 1, Britain has the highest percentage of work from home per week, with approximately 40% of the employees’ working-from-home for 5 or more days per week from 9 AM to 5 PM. In stark contrast, the Indian survey shows that work from home increased the office workload of 81% of employees which indicates that Indian employees are utilizing more energy than an average British employee. 

Additionally, 55% of Indian employees claim they do not enjoy work from home and 57% of employees say that work from home has pulled their career back. From these statistics, it appears that the issues outlined hereabove are the specific product of a lack of legislative or contractual conventions surrounding the treatment of employees participating through the Work From Home Model[5], and they indicate the urgent need to implement a compulsory legal framework in India governing work-from-home regime to prevent exploitation and loss of valuable human resource in the country, especially in the very important the service sector.

In this light, the Government of India has proposed to formalize work from home facilities for the service sector, leaving the manufacturing sector beyond the legislative scope. The parameters of the regulation are yet to be ascertained[6].  

Lacunas of the Extant Labour Codes in Dealing with the Work From Home Arrangement

 

  1. The draft Model Standing Orders for Service Sector 2020 – The policy is under the discretion of companies for implementation subject to the appointment of an employee. However, this is a very loosely framed guideline to build a sustainable framework for work from home. There needs to be a strong regulatory framework that recognises the need to work from home, protects the interest of the employees and the employers and deliver resolutions accordingly. However, the draft Model Standing Orders may get complicated with the individual state labour laws.
  2. Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 (OSH Code) – The OSH Code defines the working place of employees as “establishment” refers to the physical working place of employees[7]. The OSH does not recognize work from home as the working place of the employee.[8] This puts relevant questions of safety and health of workers working outside a physical establishment of a company. As work from home becomes the new norm, the term “establishment” shall have to be broadened to normalize and adapt for the workforce of the future. Further, the OSH Code needs to ascertain strict compliance to working hours and leave policy, including making the employer liable to pay double wages for any work done beyond working hours/shifts/during leaves, also, security to employer’s data, equipment, confidential information, reverse engineering, data theft, etc., along with strict provisions curbing moonlighting by employees may be included to protect the interest of all parties concerned in a work from home scenario.       
  3. Code on Social Security, 2020 (CSS) – under the CSS few key definitions of terms that are present significantly digress from the international definitions of ILO[9], for example –“home-based work”, “remote work”, “telework”, “work at home”, “information and communications technology” etc. Categorizing and defining such terms in a unified manner is crucial for policymaking and regulating. For instance, the ILO definition of “work at home” overlaps with “home-based work” defined under CSS, but both terms have different meanings, and they collectively exclude “work from home”. The definition of “establishment”, “employment injury”, and other related provisions may be aligned with the concept of work from home to provide security to the employees in a work from the home setup.
  4. Code on Wages, 2019 (CoW)[10] – Companies has cut the pay of their employees since the economic downturn, particularly during and after the second wave. Several other factors[11] affected the evaluation of wages and allowances of employees working from home. Therefore, it is important to amend the exclusive legal framework for WFH so that employees get the promised salaries, and companies are under the express liability to pay their employees with a contractual obligation.

Additionally, to ensure that the laws pertaining to work from home are effective and efficient, it is pertinent that issues specific to work from home set up, such as the ones detailed below, are thoroughly studied and understood, before framing the regulatory framework:

  • Measurement of the time of work and conduct of work by the employee in a remote environment – The approach legislature takes with respect to the same and how the same may be incorporated into the wage structure.
  • Measures to protect employees from injury, damages, losses, etc., in a work from home set up –  Requirement on employers to provide the necessary equipment, connectivity, seating arrangement, periodic risk assessment, etc.
  • Maintenance of equipment provided to employee in pursuit of work from home, and regulation of use thereof, with consideration to allied privacy concerns.
  • The manner in which misconduct and harassment of various degrees will be evaluated in the remote environment and the application of existing legislation to such scenario.
  • Maintenance of confidentiality, exclusivity and contained environment of the employees during working hours in such remote environment, including restriction on moonlighting, data theft, confidentiality breach, reverse engineering, etc.

With the above concerns in mind, it would be pertinent to explore instances in which comparative jurisdictions where such concerns were addressed.

A Comparative Overview on Formulated and Implemented “Work from Home” Laws Across the World

 

In the recent pandemic “work from home” emerged as a pragmatic approach for employers of most sectors across the world making work feasible for individuals primarily involved in white-collar jobs. However, it did bring major challenges and inconsistencies for employees who were made to work after office hours were overburdened and sometimes exploited. Observing the changing workplace scenario, governments were proactive in finding solutions to make employees dependable and employers accountable.

Spain: Spain legislated on remote work in September 2020. Remote work must be voluntary and reversible, and formalized in a written agreement without prejudice to general employment legislation or existing collective bargaining agreements. The law clarifies whom it applies to, i.e., those under an employment contract, and who have rendered “remote work” for a minimum period of three months, for at least 30% of an employee’s working day, or an equivalent percentage based on the contract. It also differentiates between “telework” and “work from home”. Companies are to provide resources, equipment and consumables necessary to perform and maintain work remotely. Further, employees have a right to payment and compensation for expenses on equipment, the right to privacy and data protection, and a right to digital disconnection, amongst others. At the same time, the law empowers employers to ensure that remote employees fulfil their duties well.

Finland: Finland has provided flexible working opportunities for years. This is partly because of legislation, allowing employees the right to adjust their working hours for maximum flexibility, since the mid-1990s. The Finnish Working Time Act, 2019 was recently amended[12] to introduce key changes towards creating adaptive working arrangements on flexible work hours, flexible working arrangements and the introduction of ‘working time accounts’. The Act has several features affording flexibility. Employers and employees may agree to flexible working hour arrangements, subject to regular working time not exceeding 40 hours and adjustment of excess hours worked. The Act also permits individual flexible work arrangements where employees decide on placement and performance at least half of the working time, setting out a number of aspects such an arrangement must cover (such as days on which working hours may be allocated, weekly rest periods and fixed working hours). The Act enables agreements on working time accounts, where working hours, earned time-off and monetary benefits can be exchanged for time off. Agreements on working time accounts must cover certain elements.

The United Kingdom: Flexible Working Arrangements (FWAs) were allowed via a process of proposal and negotiation in 2002, to assist employees with care-taking responsibilities in requesting FWAs. The UK’s approach to flexible work is predicated on three main pillars viz. qualifying employees proposing changes in relation to hours, time and location of work; an employer’s duty to consider such application in a “reasonable manner” with refusal only on pre-specified grounds (such as additional costs and inability to re-organise work amongst existing employees); and escalation to employment tribunals by employees, in limited circumstances. The UK’s approach is considered “light-touch regulation”, and is based on a foundation of dialogue and negotiation between employers and employees. Australia and New Zealand have also adopted similar legislation.

The European Union: The European Union (EU) has a “Work-Life Balance Directive” adopted in 2019, which provides FWAs for parents and caregivers.

Singapore: Singapore has an interesting alternative to the rights-based approach to FWAs adopted in the UK. Through a set of voluntary “Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements” formulated in consultation with multiple stakeholders, employers can adopt practices that assist employees better managing work-life needs, while enhancing productivity. Such employers are employers of choice, and can use a logo-mark in recruitment and marketing.

Re-evaluation of Laws Necessary to Accommodate the New Work Culture

 

In a nutshell, the present labour and employment laws in India are incapable of addressing the concerns of work-from-home regime. Hence, re-evaluation of the present laws is important to amalgamate the “Work From Home” model into legislation to ensure welfare of the employees, workers and other relevant stakeholders. The above discussed international legislations aim to sustain a healthy and safe working environment for the employees within and outside the “establishment”. Finland and Singapore’s legislation provides flexible working hours and arrangements. The UK approach of “light touch regulation” is also innovative and promotes healthy relations between employees and employers. Taking que from the regulatory frameworks of countries across the world, India should aim to formalize “Work From Home” policies that benefit the employees while balancing the burden on employers. Worker and employee rights should be the central focus of development in the country, in order to fully reap the gains of this transformative legacy!

The present labour and employment laws of India are incapable of addressing the concerns of the work-from-home regime. Hence, re-evaluation of the present laws is important to amalgamate the WFH model into legislation to ensure the welfare of the employees, workers and other relevant stakeholders.

POST A COMMENT

The football transfer: How the Barcelona – Messi matter turned murky

“In Barcelona, on 14 December 2000 and the presence of Messrs Minguella and Horacio (Gaggioli), Carles Rexach, Director of Football of F.C.B., hereby agrees under his responsibility and regardless of any dissenting opinions, to sign the player Lionel Messi, provided that we keep to the amounts agreed upon.”

 

Carles Rexach, the then Director of Football of F. C. Barcelona, scribbled this on a napkin to sign up a young Argentinian wonder kid, Lionel Messi, as he had never seen such a talent before and did not want to lose out on him. Thus, began the fairytale journey of Messi’s tryst with Barcelona and as history suggests this gamble that played out 20 years ago, turned out to be the most profitable for the club and rewarding for Messi.

Messi has been the Messiah for the club on several occasions, wriggling the club out of tough situations with his magic touch. With Messi on their side, Barcelona established itself as a formidable force that won everything that world football could offer. As all good things inevitably come to an end, this fairytale match appeared to have come to an end when Messi formally notified the club of his intention to unilaterally terminate his contract.

The events that transpired after the news broke out of Messi’s intention to leave highlight some troubling issues that are currently plaguing the football transfer market; in particular, the breakdown of relationships between a club and a player at the instance of their squabbling over better wages and contracts. Messi’s dispute with Barcelona revolves around the unique nature of a football contract and the role relationships play in such contracts.

 

In order to understand the dispute better, one must first have a formal understanding of the football transfer market.

 

What is a football transfer? Generally, a transfer in football is like any other business transaction that takes place between two football clubs and involves the transfer of a player who is under a contract with one club to another club in consideration of a fee known as a transfer fee.

 

A transfer is considered complete when the buying and selling clubs agree on the terms of sale and when the buying club enters into a contract with the player.

 

 

How does football transfer work?

If a transfer has to take place, the buying club must first approach the selling club and inform in writing before entering into negotiation with the player. This is legally mandated under Article 18(3) of the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (the ‘Transfer Regulations’).

 

It is important to note however that the ultimate bargaining power in a transfer still lies with the selling club.

 

 

What is a transfer request?

A player, who is dissatisfied with his current club and finds himself in a position wherein the club has rejected all transfer bids from other clubs, may put in an official transfer request to the club. The only drawback is that such a request has no legal bearing and the club may choose to reject the plea.

 

 

When can a football transfer happen?

A transfer can take place during the “registration periods” which are provided by the governing bodies of the respective national associations.

In Europe, there are officially two periods during which transfers can take place – summer (July 1st – August 31st) and winter (January 1st – 31st) transfer window.

 

What is the duration of contracts between the players and the clubs?

The duration of a contract entered into by a player with the club may vary from short term to long-term depending on a variety of factors such as the age of the player, their skill, commercial value, potential growth and injury risk of the player. The term of a contract is determined mostly by these factors.

According to Article 18 (2) of the Transfer Regulations, the minimum term of a contract shall be from its effective date until the end of the season, while the maximum term of a contract shall be five years. Players under the age of 18 may not sign a professional contract for a term longer than three years.

 

Having garnered a basis of what and how a football transfer works, it is necessary to understand the terms of the contract between Messi and FC Barcelona that enables him to leave Barcelona on a free transfer and the reason behind the current situation between two.

 

What enabled Messi to leave Barcelona for free? Messi extended his contract with Barcelona in 2017 for a duration of 4 years, which was a deal that would enable him to retire at the club. However, on the insistence of Messi, an additional clause was added in the contract, which granted Messi the right to unilaterally terminate the contract at the end of each season and leave for free, provided that he notified the club prior to June 10th.

 

 

What was the legal issue involved in their dispute?

The legal issue involved the interpretation of the terms of the unilateral termination clause in light of the unprecedented COVID–19 pandemic that led to the interruption and the subsequent extension of the season.

 

Messi claimed that since the pandemic had suspended the season temporarily and it restarted only after June 10th (La Liga re-started on June 11th, 2020), it was impossible for him to exercise such a right before June 10th. Messi thus wished for the terms of the contract to be viewed liberally in light of the unprecedented events.

 

The Barcelona Board however contested that the terms of the contract strictly mentioned June 10th, hence Messi could not unilaterally terminate the contract post that date. The issue therefore would depend on whether the terms of the contract specifically mention a “specific date” or whether it is termed as the “end of the season”. In any case, according to Article 16 of the Transfer Regulation, a contract cannot be unilaterally terminated during the course of a season.

 

 

Relationship v Contract: what matters more?

The reason behind this issue turning unpleasant is largely due to the long-standing relationship that Messi had with Barcelona ever since he was a young boy. On a deeper analysis, the issue throws light on an important question – what is the nature of a football contract; is it purely a business transaction or does it involve the building of a relationship of trust, faith and respect?

 

Generally, the nature of any football contract is such that a player is associated with a club for a period of 3-4 years. It is unlike a business transaction of sale wherein it involves a single transaction. Instead, football contracts bind a player to the club for a considerable period of time and hence building a definitive relationship with the club is essential for the success of the contract. While the contract may describe the legal relationship, the true essence of the deal is the personal relationship.

 

Therefore, if a football contract failed to build a human connection between the player and the club, it would only increase the chances of the player leaving mid-contract and create a hostile environment for both parties.

 

 

Conclusion

In this case, Barcelona should have gauged the reasoning behind Messi’s intention to include a clause to unilaterally terminate his contract at the end of each season. Adding to the misery, the club management seems to have created a situation, which ultimately drove him to the point of making a decision to leave.

 

Barcelona’s actions, post Messi’s notification to leave, has been criticized as a tactical move to ensure that Messi had no other option but to stay at the club or could only leave provided the Club received his hefty release amount of € 700 million.

 

While Messi decided not to take the matter to Court, Barcelona seems to have made a big commotion out of it by forcing him to change his decision and stay with the club, perhaps until next June, thereby destroying the long-standing relation between the two.

 

Image Credits: Photo by Connor Coyne on Unsplash

If a football contract failed to build a human connection between the player and the club, it would only increase the chances of the player leaving mid-contract and create a hostile environment for both parties.

POST A COMMENT

A New Era of Labour Laws Beginning With The Code of Wages, 2019

 

Over the last few years, there have been talks by the government to reform the existing labour laws, which are mostly archaic, to make them compatible with current issues and needs of the labour market. In the Union Budget 2019, the Government has pushed ahead with such reforms and proposed to streamline over 44 central laws and over 100 State laws pertaining to labour into 4 major Labour Codes, with the objective of increasing the ‘ease of doing business’ and ‘Make in India’ initiatives. The Government hopes that by standardizing definitions, registrations, and filings, there would be less conflict and fewer reasons for disputes.

The proposed Labour Codes are as follows:

 

  1. Code of Wages – The Code of Wages is set to combine and subsume the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976.

 

  1. Code of Industrial Relations – The Code of Industrial Relations seeks to replace the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Trade Unions Act, 1926 and the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

 

  1. Labour Code on Social Security – Labour Code on Social Security is intended to create a comprehensive social security system to provide retirement, health, old-age, disability, unemployment and maternity benefits to a vast majority of the population.

 

  1. Small Factories (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Services) Bill – This Bill had initially been proposed to exempt small factories with less than 40 employees from the applicability of 14 labour legislations. However, this bill is most likely to be shelved on account of issues pertaining to rights of employees.

 

Further, the Government has allocated INR 11,184.09 crores to the Ministry of Labour and Employment which is a significant boost in comparison to the average budget allocation to the Ministry over the past 5 years.

 

Code of Wages, 2019

 

The first in the series of Codes to be approved by the Parliament is the Code of Wages, 2019[i] (“Code of Wages”). The Code of Wages (initially proposed in 2015), which amalgamates and subsumes 4 major legislations, namely the Payment of Wages Act, 1936[ii], the Minimum Wages Act, 1948[iii], the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965[iv] and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976[v], was passed by the Lok Sabha on 30th July, 2019 and the Rajya Sabha on 2nd August, 2019 and has received the President’s assent on 8th August, 2019 and published in the Official Gazette for general information.

 

The Code of Wages, while not changing the provisions of the law themselves substantially has certainly reduced the ambiguity and multiplicity of definitions and compliances as well as broadened the scope of the beneficiaries under the existing laws thus providing benefits to around 50 crore employees. The Code comprises 9 chapters, with minimum wages, payment of wages, equal remuneration and bonus being covered under different chapters.

 

 

 

Salient Features of the Code of Wages

 

This section points out some of the key provisions in the Code of Wages which are different from the existing laws or a welcome clarification of the same.

 

  1. Applicability and Beneficiaries – The Code of Wages is applicable to all establishments regardless of industry. Further, all employees are eligible to be paid minimum wages and paid salary in a timely fashion. This is a vast difference from the existing law, where Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was applicable to only scheduled employments which were approximately 1750 in number and Payment of Wages Act, 1936 which was applicable only to those employees earning INR 24,000 or less per month.

 

  1. Uniform Definition of Wages – One of the most vexing aspects for employers over the years has been the multitude, 12 at present, of definitions for the term ‘wages’. This has led to difficulty in the setting of salary structures as well as determining various payments, contributions and deductions to be made. The current definition of wages provides more clarity on inclusions and exclusions specifically with respect to allowances. Wages now include all remuneration except for certain specific allowances such as conveyance, HRA, overtime, commission, bonus and the consistent social security contributions and gratuity. This definition makes the long paid special allowance a part of wages. Further, the Code of Wages also mandates that the excluded components cannot exceed 50% of the total salary paid. Any exclusions in excess of 50% shall be treated as wages. It will be interesting to see whether this definition remains consistent under the other proposed Labour Codes.

 

  1. Distinction between ‘Employee’ and ‘Worker’ – The Code of Wages makes a distinction between ‘Employee’ and ‘Worker’ with the definition of Employee covering all persons employed, except for apprentices, while ‘Worker’ is defined as similar to the existing ‘workman’ under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Worker is essentially all employees except for those employees in a managerial or administrative capacity or employees in a supervisory capacity earning more than INR 15,000 a month. The Code of Wages references ‘Worker’ mostly in the context of minimum wages.

 

Although the definition encompasses all kinds of workers across industry sectors, uncertainties still remain regarding whether the Code would bring within its purview people working in gig-economy, where there is no fixed place of employment and flexible timings. The apex court has held, in Officer-In-Charge, Sub-Regional Provident Fund Office v Godavari Garments (2019)[vi], that women who worked from home doing piece work would be considered “employees” of the company which had engaged them to do so, for the purposes of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPF Act), even if there was no direct contract of employment between the two. If the same is applied to the Code, it would definitely lead to uncertainties regarding the applicability of provisions in accordance with the nature of the job and lead to unnecessary litigations.

 

  1. Determining Minimum Wages – As it was under the existing laws, both the Central Government and the State Governments have the right to set the applicable minimum wages for central and state establishments.

 

  • The Code of Wages proposes for the Central Government to set a national minimum wage or floor wage, which may change based on regions. Any State Governments fixing their minimum wages shall ensure that the wages are equal to or greater than the floor wage. This would bring some uniformity in the minimum wages across the country and would make all states almost equally attractive from the point of view of labour cost for investment as well as reduce distress migration. However, the floor wage concept might diminish the minimum wage as it only states the lowest possible end of the spectrum and some states might opt to stick to it.

 

  • State Governments while determining the minimum wages shall use only 2 factors – (a) skill level of the employees, namely unskilled, semi-skilled, skilled or highly skilled, and (b) the geographical location. In addition, the arduousness or the danger level of the work may also be considered for the setting of minimum wages.

 

  • The Code of Wages mandates that the minimum wages be revised once every 5 years.

 

  • The Code does not provide any formula for fixation of minimum wages. For calculation of minimum wages, the 15th Indian Labour Conference (ILC) had adopted per capita food intake of at least 2,700 calories for a worker’s family comprising three units (2 adults and 2 children) for the calculation of minimum wages which has also been approved by the Supreme Court. A similar formula would have found more acceptability.

 

  1. Digitization – Payment through electronic and digital means have been introduced as a valid payment mode under the Code of Wages.

 

  1. Overtime – Overtime is fixed at twice the daily rate of wages for any work beyond the prescribed hours. This is similar to the position under various State laws. However, there is no provision for any compensatory off.

 

  1. Appellate Authority – Code of Wages provides for an appellate authority between the claims’ authority and judicial forums for speedier dispute resolution.

 

  1. Inspections – An Inspector-cum-Facilitator shall be appointed by the appropriate governments and the Code of Wages allows for a more structured inspection scheme which shall also include web-based inspections and request for information / documents through electronic means.

 

  1. Documentation – The Code of Wages requires employers to maintain a register containing the details of the persons employed, muster roll, wages and other prescribed information. Employers are also required to display a notice containing the abstract of the Code of Wages, wage rates, wage period, payment dates/days and contact details of the jurisdictional Inspector cum Facilitator.

 

  1. Penalties – Under the previous law the penalties for non-compliance were quite paltry and further was uniform regardless of the offence. The Code of Wages has imposed greater penalties as well as proportioned the said penalties pertaining to the degree of non-compliance. The Code of Wages prescribes the following penalties:

 

  • A maximum fine of INR 50,000 for non-payment of any applicable amounts. Simple Imprisonment of up to 3 months and a maximum fine of INR 1,00,000 for subsequent offences committed within a span of 5 years.

 

  • A maximum fine of INR 20,000 for other non-compliances. Simple Imprisonment of up to 1 month and a maximum fine of INR 40,000 for subsequent offences committed within a span of 5 years.

 

  • A maximum fine of INR 10,000 for incorrect maintenance of records.

 

Companies are also to be given an opportunity to rectify any non-compliances before prosecution at the discretion of the Inspector-cum-Facilitator. There is also an option for compounding of offences in the first instance.

 

  1. Limitation Period – The limitation period for claims by workers has been increased to 3 years, thus offering workers more time to exercise their statutory rights.

 

  1. Discrimination – While the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, prohibited discrimination in wages, recruitment, promotion, training, and transfer for workers performing the same work and required the constitution of a board to promote employment opportunities for women, the Code of Wages prohibits gender-based discrimination only in terms of wages and recruitment. However, the gender-neutral approach has broadened the scope to a certain extent.

 

  1. Bonus – The Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 was applicable only to workers earning wages up to INR 21,000 per month. However, this statutory threshold has not been incorporated in the Wages Code, leaving it up to the discretion of the appropriate government to prescribe the wage ceiling for eligibility of payment of bonus. Further, conviction for sexual harassment has been added as a ground for disqualification from payment of bonus.

 

Most other provisions are the same as under existing laws.

 

Implications of the Code of Wages

 

As stated earlier, the substantive law itself has not seen much amendment under the Code of Wages and for the most part, companies will not see a vast difference in the actual provisions. The Code of Wages is mostly a consolidation of existing laws rather than a true reform of labour laws. However, it is a huge boon in terms of removing the multiplicity of definitions as well as authorities which would improve the ease of compliance and maintenance of records and filings.

 

Further, one of greatest advantages of the Code of Wages is that the benefits contemplated under the legislation is now available to a much larger portion of the workforce with very few categories of employees excluded from the scope. The introduction of a national minimum wage may also help reduce differences between States and skillsets and provide a basic standard of living for all employees across the country.

 

The lack of change in substantive law may be seen as a lost opportunity since the legislature has not truly taken the effort to analyse the need to retain archaic provisions.

 

Specific rules and notifications under the Code of Wages are also awaited before more insight can be gathered on whether the codification will actually improve the ease of compliance and doing business.

The substantive law itself has not seen much amendment under the Code of Wages and for the most part, companies will not see a vast difference in the actual provisions. The Code of Wages is mostly a consolidation of existing laws rather than a true reform of labour laws. However, it is a huge boon in terms of removing the multiplicity of definitions as well as authorities which would improve the ease of compliance and maintenance of records and filings.

POST A COMMENT