Indian Journal of Industrial Relations: Economics & Social Dev.

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Employment Relations & Managerialist Undercurrents - The Case of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972


Affiliations
1 Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 is an important legislation governing retirement benefits received by workers, and acquires particular significance in the absence of pension and lack of access to adequate social security for a large number of workers. We discuss here case laws pertaining to the Act in the last decade in the light of increasing the upper limit of gratuity payable to Rs. 10 lakhs. Case law pertaining to this important social security benefit suggests three broad areas of concern: inclusion-exclusion dynamics related to access to gratuity rights, the linkage of the denial or grant of payment of gratuity to reward for compliance and punishment for dissent, assertions of managerial prerogatives over the rights of workers in the pursuit of unilateralist dominance over employment relations.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Ackers, P. (2007), “Collective Bargaining as Industrial Democracy: Hugh Clegg and the Political Foundations of British Industrial Relations Pluralism”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 45(1): 77-101.

  • Ainsworth, S. & Hardy, C. (2009), “Mind Over Body: Physical and Psychotherapeutic Discourses and the Regulation of the Older Worker”, Human Relations, 62(8): 1199- 1229.

  • Ainsworth, S. & Hardy, C. (2004), “Critical Discourse Analysis and Identity: Why Bother”, Critical Discourse Studies, 1: 225-59.

  • Butler, J. (2009), Frames of War: When is Life Grievable? London: Verso.

  • Casey, B. (1992), “Redundancy and Early Retirement: The Interaction of Public and Private Policy in Britain, Germany and the USA”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 30(3): 425-43.

  • Clegg, H. A. (1951), Industrial Democracy and Nationalization: A Study Prepared for the Fabian Society. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Clegg, H. A. (1950), Labour in Nationalised Industry, London: Fabian Publications.

  • Duncan, C., Loretto, W. & White, P. (2000), “Ageism, Early Exit, and British Trade Unions”, Industrial Relations Journal, 31(3): 220-34.

  • Erturk, I., Froud, J., Johal, S., Leaver, A. & Williams, K. (2010), “Ownership Matters: Private Equity and the Political Division of Ownership”, Organization, 17(5): 543-61.

  • Fernandes Supports Pension, Gratuity for Navodaya Vidyalaya staff. Retrieved on September 4, 2011 from http:// www.freewebs.com/rajankuttamath/

  • Greenhouse, S. (2008), The Big Squeeze: Tough Times for the American Worker, New York: Random House.

  • Hargie, O., Stapleton, K. & Tourish, D. (2010), “Interpretations of CEO Apologies for the Banking Crisis: Attributions of Blame and Avoidance of Responsibility”, Organization, 17(6): 721-42.

  • Kingdon, G. G. & Muzammil, M. (2000), A Political Economy of Education in India: The case of U.P. Retrieved on September 4, 2011 from http://www.economics.ox.ac.uk/ Members/geeta.kingdon/PublishedPapers/ EPW-polecon-paper-2001.pdf

  • Ministry of Labour and Employment (2011), Annual Report 2010 – 2011, New Delhi: Government of India.

  • Rajya Sabha. (2010 May 5), Debate on the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Bill, 2010

  • Samaddar, R. (2009), “Series Introduction’, in P. K. Bose & S. K. Das (eds), State of Justice in India: Issues of Social Justice, New Delhi: Sage.

  • Supreme Court (2009 December 15), Allahabad Bank and Another versus All India Allahabad Bank Retired Employees Association. Civil Appeal No. 1478 of 2004

  • Supreme Court (2009 February 27), Grand Kakatiya Sheraton Hotel and Towers Employees and Workers Union versus Srinivasa Resorts Limited and Others, Civil Appeal No. 6499 of 2002

  • Supreme Court (2008 July 11), Shivanand Gaurishankar Baswanti versus Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills and Others, Civil Appeal No. 4324 of 2008 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12629/2007.

  • Supreme Court (2007 August 24), M C Chamaraju versus Hind Nippon Rural Industrial (Private) Limited. Appeal (Civil) 3889 of 2007 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 11321 of 2006.

  • Supreme Court (2006 November 10), Jaswant Singh Gill versus M/s. Bharat Coaking Coal Limited and Others, Appeal (Civil) 4770 of 2006 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) 16827 of 2004.

  • Supreme Court (2006 September 29), Beed District Central Co-operative Limited versus State of Maharashtra and Others, Appeal (Civil) 4327 of 2006.

  • Supreme Court (2005 April 20), Secretary, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation and Another versus V U Warrier, Appeal (Civil) 2766- 2767 of 2005.

  • Teacher’s Association Express Concern on SC ruling (2004 January 18), Times of India. Retrieved on September 4, 2011 from http:/ /articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2004- 01-18/bangalore/28337070_1_gratuityteachers- supreme-court

  • Vosko, L. F. (2010), Managing the Margins: Gender, Citizenship, and the International Regulation of Precarious Employment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Vosko, L. F. (2006), “Gender, Precarious Work, and the International Labour Code: The Ghost in the ILO Closet”, in J. Fudge and R. Owens (eds) Precarious Work, Women, and the New Economy: The Challenge to Legal Norms. Portland: Hart.

  • Webb, S. & Webb, B. (1921), The Consumers’ Co-operative Movement. London: Longman, Green and Co.

  • Webb, S. & Webb, B. (1897), Industrial Democracy. London: Longman, Green and Co.

  • (1) SCR 47. Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers’ Association versus Administrative Officer and Others, January 13, 2004. Appeal (Civil) 6369 of 2001.


Abstract Views: 284

PDF Views: 2




  • Employment Relations & Managerialist Undercurrents - The Case of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972

Abstract Views: 284  |  PDF Views: 2

Authors

Jerome Joseph
Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India
Srinath Jagannathan
Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, India

Abstract


The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 is an important legislation governing retirement benefits received by workers, and acquires particular significance in the absence of pension and lack of access to adequate social security for a large number of workers. We discuss here case laws pertaining to the Act in the last decade in the light of increasing the upper limit of gratuity payable to Rs. 10 lakhs. Case law pertaining to this important social security benefit suggests three broad areas of concern: inclusion-exclusion dynamics related to access to gratuity rights, the linkage of the denial or grant of payment of gratuity to reward for compliance and punishment for dissent, assertions of managerial prerogatives over the rights of workers in the pursuit of unilateralist dominance over employment relations.

References