Thread by @barandbench

Supreme Court begins hearing a batch of petitions challenging the March 29 MHA notification compelling payment of wages by employers to employees during #lockdown

MHA in reply has stated it was a temporary measure for 54 days and in public interest

#SupremeCourt

J Bhushan - when its a governmental authority, then you can issue directions

Attorney General KK Venugopal- people were migrating in crores, they wanted the industries to continue. The notification was to stop the workers which they only would if they are paid

AG: The entirety of the March 29 notification needs to be looked at. It was brought in force to prevent human suffering. Keeping aside the validity, this is a matter between employers and employees.

J Bhushan: but what is required is payment of 50 percent of salary

J Bhushan: But your notification compelled the payment of 100% of salaries..it can be around 50 to 75%.

So the question is do you have power to get them to pay 100 per cent and on their failuire to do so, prosecute them?

J Kaul: Govt has not invoked the provisions of industrial dispute act. Required to pay is 50% but you directed 100%

AG: Under the industrial dispute act, onciliation and settlement is there. But the most appropriate thing would be to consider the humanitarian situation

J Bhushan: Some negotiations have to happen between employers and workmen to iron out what has to be done for the salary for these 54 days

J Kaul: On one hand you say you’re trying to put money in the pocket of worker. So now some negotiation is required for a solution

Adv Jeetender Gupta for Ficus Pax: Labour Ministry's advisory is not under DM Act.

J Bhushan: Do you agree with AG that there needs to be negotiation with the employer

Adv Gupta: Interim order of no coervice action should be extended to us as labour officers are harassing us

J MR Shah: You tell us, can you run an industry without labour. Therefore you have to strike a balance and this should not be tilted either on side of the employer or the employee.

Adv: I am essential service & my work was going on. I am only concerned with contract workers

Adv: all the in house workers have been paid salaries but why should I pay the 800 contract workers when no work is happening

There is a separate ESI fund which has 80,000 to 90,000 crores as surplus fund.

Adv: The govt could have utilized 30,000 crores and pay the entire minimum wages to all workforce in the country.. but they speak of 20 lakh crore.

Senior Advocate Indira Jaising: Reads the definition of disaster under Disaster Management Act. Lockdown was brought in force, a new word altogether. Even if I am willing to go to work, how will I go to work when I was prohibited by law to do so

Jaising: we all stayed in homes and are in lockdown not only for us but for everyone else. Are they challenging the lockdown order? Are they saying COVID19 is not a national disaster?

Jaising: Who Is the affected community? Adv Gupta says he does not want to pay the contract workers. But they are the those who were prevented from eating with no roof on their head. Ask them how much do they pay to their contract workers? What is their financial liability?

Senior Adv CU Singh for workers organization: If they have means, why should Supreme Court under Article 32 be called upon to interfere? As of now no prosecution has been initiated against any employer.

J Bhushan asks AG to answer two queries: What about submissions made regarding ESI fund. Whether can be utilised for helping workers?

AG - ESI funds cannot be redirected, but they can borrow from it.

J Bhushan: There is a submission that this order was issued only for migrant workers, what do you say to that?

AG - It was not restricted. The main objective was that if they get paid then they need not migrate

Adv Amit Pai: These cases need to be tested on the same principles of the great depression in the USA

Supreme Court reserves order for June 12. No coercive action will be taken against any employers pursuant to March 29 MHA order

AG Venugopal permitted to submit a short note regarding validity of the March 29 MHA notification

Breaking: No coercive action to be taken against employers pursuant to March 29 MHA order on payment of wages, Supreme Court #COVIDー19 @PIBHomeAffairs #SupremeCourt

bit.ly/2XxyAqh

Employers not willing to pay wages during Lockdown cannot cite financial incapacity to challenge Govt Notification: MHA tells Supreme Court
@HMOIndia #SupremeCourt
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…