Narkara Vs Union of India the court was of the opinion that Article 38 d of the Indian Constitution that the state will endeavour to limit the imbalances in pay and attempt to take out disparities in status, offices and openings among people as well as among gatherings of individuals living in various territories with various livelihood.
In Markendeya vs. State of Andhra Pradesh , difference in pay scale, between graduate supervisors holding degree in Engineering and non-graduate supervisors being diploma and licence holders was upheld. It was held that on the basis of difference in educational qualifications such difference in pay scales was justified and would not offend Article 14 and The Court pointed out that where two classes of employees perform identical or similar duties and carry out the same functions with the same measure of responsibility having the same academic qualifications, they would be entitled to equal pay.
Principle of equal pay for equal work is applicable among equals. It can't be applied to unequal. Thus, daily rated workers can't be equated with regular employees of the State in the matter of wages. There are differences of qualifications, age, and manner of selection between the two categories of employees. The International Labour Organization has, from the outset accepted and, on several occasion, reaffirmed the principle of equal remuneration for men and women doing work of equal value.
The question has been in the limelight particularly during and since the war, although the issue is by no means a new one. During the Second World War, women replaced in a great many occupation or were employed in new occupation, and large numbers of women were drawn into the employment market to meet urgent demands for labour, particularly in war industries.
At that time, the problem of equal remuneration was primarily considered as that of protecting men's wages and of preventing their being leveled down by the employment of women at lower rate. In most countries, female labour forms a substantial proportion of the total labour force, whether the economy of the country is predominantly agricultural or industrial in character.
Moreover, efforts are being made in many countries, where industrialization or economic planning is developing, to make better use of female labour either by drawing new supplies of such labour into the employment market, or by redistributing the existing supply, or by both methods.
Conclusion: In concluding this topic every individual no matter regarding their gender, cast, religion should be given proper pay for the work that they have put in the efforts for and the pay should be reasonable. Please Drop Your Comments. Ask A Lawyers. IPR Law in India. Actionable Claim. Right To Life. Inclusion Of 4th Category O This makes the issue of potential demand for equal pay a matter of concern in recent times. Equal pay here relates not only to basic pay but includes other benefits and allowances too.
This means that, they will serve as guidelines to the Central and State governments of India, which are to be kept in mind while framing laws and policies. Efforts are employed even on legislative fronts - Equal Remuneration Act, being the prime one amongst them. The Act by means of Section 4 not only emphasizes on equal pay for equal work but even bars the employer from reversing the pay scales in order to attain equilibrium.
Union of India 1 in the year where the Supreme Court declared it incapable of being enforced in the court of law. Here the issue of concern was a claim for equal remuneration for Lady Stenographers and Male Stenographers.
Taking all sample workers together, the average monthly wages per worker for males is Rs. The wage differential exists in the unorganised sector only, where female wages are 5. The percentage difference in the unorganised sector in various districts is: Kanpur: 6. Once again, the figures show a large degree of wage differential in Kanpur: it is the only district where a difference exists in almost all types of labour, except temporary regular employment, a category where the only difference is in Moradabad, and that too a very minimal amount: 1.
The rates displayed are very high: 8. Discrimination between males and females can be measured on the basis of other factors apart from wages such as:. Below, is given the amounts of promotions and wage increases awarded to workers: male and female:. The fact that Moradabad reports amount of preferential treatment in terms of promotions may be attributed to the fact that there are promotions only in the organised sector, however in case of salary increases too; it is lower than Kanpur.
Lastly, one may examine discriminatory treatment by employers in terms of benefits provided to male and female workers:. A table showing the different proportions of workers receiving benefits such as bonuses, provident funds, gratuities, annual increments etc. The interesting aspect here is that the differential is roughly the same in all districts, in stark contrast to earlier cases.
There is a difference in the facilities afforded to males and females in all districts. These figures are useful to display the fact that given that the Equal Remuneration Act, covers only wages paid, a discriminating employer may follow discriminatory practices through not providing benefits such as provident fund, gratuity, bonus etc.
To sum up, one observes a certain trend in the differential in wages and other indicators such as promotion, raise in salary, etc. One may attempt to explain the above trend by the fact that in our sample, Kanpur has the highest numbers in the organised sectors, as compared to Moradabad and Nainital. For the unorganised sector to have a higher rate of violations is quite expected. However as Table 3 displays, if one considers solely the unorganised sectors in the three districts, Kanpur still shows the highest rate of violation.
Kanpur is the city which houses the headquarters of all major implementation officials, next one might consider Nainital which is the most developed of the three areas, and hence government presence must be large there, and last in the scale of development and government presence is Moradabad.
This trend may have two possible explanations:. Hence to determine the causal factors behind such difference in wages, it would be useful to examine the implementation of the law. The law is mainly maintained via labour inspectors. Section 9, clauses 3 and 4 lay down their functions as:. Clause 4 : Any person required by an Inspector to produce any register or other document or to give any information shall comply with such requisition. During this tour, if the inspector feels that two workers are performing work of a similar nature, he has full power to order the employer to pay same wages to both workers.
There are therefore, several links in the chain where implementation could break down leading to non-enforcement of the act: the first step obviously being the periodicity and thoroughness of the inspection by labour inspectors. The next step relates to the thoroughness of the check carried out by the inspector.
Labour Inspectors are generally over-burdened with work: they are never large enough in number and they must oversee not only the Equal Implementation Act, but also 28 other laws. The Assistant Labour Commissioner: Mr.
K R Sawhney, Delhi has said that he has only 60 labour inspectors to enforce all of the labour laws in all of Delhi. He claims that he is sorely short-handed, and consequently the quality of enforcement suffers. In the above survey, All workers in the organised sector however, disclosed true facts; consequently the figures in the unorganised sector is much more serious: In fact, many workers who were aware of being exploited did even not approach the employer to demand an equal wage.
Various reasons have been given by female workers for not approaching their employers: fear of losing their job, no hope of positive response from employers and traditional value system among females. To conclude, the enforcement of the Equal Remuneration Act leaves much to be desired. There are numerous stages where the implementation of the act could be and is mishandled. Discrimination in the market could take place through three main devices: discrimination during recruitment of workers, discrimination at the time of giving remuneration, and discrimination while allotting benefits such as pension, provident fund, gratuity, annual increments.
Discrimination in cases where two employees are clearly identified as those performing same work, or work of similar nature, is easy to identify, and perhaps could be checked through frequent and thorough checks by a labour inspector.
If, despite competitive pressures, the employer still continues to follow discriminatory practices, it can only be because he is willing to undergo losses caused by his practise; i.
In this scenario: if the employer is inclined to have lower profits, and follow a restrictive hiring, and wages policy, there can be no decrees or statutes that can effectively prevent him from doing so. Before pronouncing judgement on the act, it would be efficacious to look at the act from the standpoint of the main players involved in the enforcement of the act.
One can identify three sets of such main players in the chain of events that would follow after such an act is enforced: the implementers or labour inspectors, the employers or owners of factories, and the employees or workers in such factories. Labour Departments as mentioned before, are overburdened with work.
There are 30 labour laws in India presently, including the Sick Industries Act, and the responsibility of enforcing all of these lies with labour inspectors. Inspectors must also conduct surprise visits on factories. As mentioned before, in Delhi, Mr. Arya, Assistant Labour Commissioner, Delhi, has said that he has only 60 inspectors to enforce all labour laws.
Furthermore, as regards laws relating to Safety and Health, the government must have a health inspector. In Delhi, there is only one health inspector for all the factories. Arya has said that in such a scenario, where he is severely short-staffed, when inspectors do conduct visits on factories, the focus is not on the Equal Remuneration Act.
In the words of Mr. Arya: "When we have numerous cases of workers being paid wages at sub-minimum levels, how can we give importance cases where women are paid less than men, if they are both being paid wages above the declared minimum wage level. As could be guessed, employers are not in favour of the act.
An employer feels it is restrictive, and creates unnecessary barriers to his aim of profit maximisation. If an employer knows he will be saddled with a worker once hired, and the wages, benefits, working conditions, leave etc. Manmohan Singh, former Finance Minister has said "by denying flexibility in deploying labour, government policies have unwittingly impeded the use of labour in the economy … Measures are therefore urgently needed to reduce the rigidities in the labour force.
As against all the labour laws prohibit him, or at least make it extremely difficult to fire even one worker. In fact, we have the word of a factory manager himself.
0コメント