Skip to main content

External Member of ICC under the Prevention of Sexual Harassment Act

 

Provision for an external member for PoSH

As per Section 4 of the PoSH Act:

  • A senior female employee should head the PoSH Committee,
  • At least half of the PoSH Committee members should be women, and
  • One member should be from an NGO or an association that works for women’s empowerment. They can also be a person who is familiar with issues related to sexual harassment.

Many  PoSH Practitioners and organizations have relied on Rule 4 of the Act - The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, shortly known PoSH Act),  according to which , a “person familiar with issues related to sexual harassment” is an expert in such issues, including 

  • A social worker with at least 5 years of experience in social work. Such social work should create favorable conditions for women’s empowerment. It should address workplace sexual harassment.
  • A person who is familiar with labor, service, civil, or criminal law.


However, this is incorrect and has lead to confusion and complex litigations.

The Delhi High Court in the matter of Ruchika Singh vs. Airfrance has settled the position:-

 Air France contended that the independent person appointed is a lawyer with expertise in deciding labour issues. His curriculum vitae is on record for confirming the averments made with regard to the criteria for his selection. According to Air France, the requirement of a person familiar with issues pertaining to sexual harassment under Section 4(2)(c) of the Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act is to be read with Rule 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 which provides that this would be a person who is familiar with labour, service, civil or criminal law. 

However, Air France is clearly in error in relying on Rule 4 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Rules, 2013 which is to be applied only to Section 7(1)(c) of the Workplace Harassment Prohibition Act which deals with the constitution of the Local Complaints Committee and not the ICC as in the instant case.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MCS MAHARASHTRA COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY MODEL BYE LAWS 1 TO 100

MODEL BYE – LAWS OF COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY (Tenant Co‐Partnership Housing Society ) 2014 1 I.PRELIMINARY 3 a. The Name of the Society bye Law no 1. a 3 c. The Society is classification bye Law no 1. c 3 a. The registered address of the Society bye Law no 2. a 3 II. INTERPRETATIONS BY E LAW NO 3 3 III. AREA OF OPERATION BYE LAW NO 4 6 IV. OBJECTS 7 5. The objects of the Society bye Law no 5 7 V. AFFILIATION BYE LAW NO 6 7 VI. FUNDS, THEIR UTILISATION AND INVESTMENT 7 ( A ) Raising of Funds bye law no 7 7 (B)Share Capital bye law no 8 8 (C) Limit of Liabilities bye law no 11 8 (D) Constitution of the Reserve Fund bye Law no 12 8 (E) Creation of Other Funds bye law no 13 a. b. c. d. 9 b. Major Repairs Funds bye law no 13 b. 9 (F) Utilisation of the Funds by the Society bye law no 14 9 a. Reserve Fund bye law no 14 a 9 b. Repairs and Maintenance Fund bye law no 14 b 9 c. Sinking Fund bye law no 14 c 9 (G) Investment of Funds
Post a Comment
Read more

MCS MAHARASHTRA COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY BYE LAWS 101 TO END

MCS BYE LAWS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST 101 TO END 101. If all the business on the agenda of the General Body Meeting of the Society cannot be transacted on the day on which the General Body Meeting is convened, the meeting shall be postponed to any other suitable date as may be decided by the Members present at the meeting, however not later than 30 days from the date of the meeting. 102. The Chairman of the Society shall preside over all General Body Meetings of the Society, in case if the Chairman is absent or if present and is unwilling to preside, the Members present may elect a person from amongst themselves to preside over the meeting. 103. No proxy or a holder of power of attorney or letter of authority shall be eligible to attend a General Body Meeting of the Society on behalf of a Member of the Society. 104. Voting right of a Member and the Associate Member of the Society shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions of Section 27 of
Post a Comment
Read more

Mere Abusive Language not a serious misconduct to inflict capital punishment - Madras High Court in Worker vs Hindustan Unilever Limited

Important Points: Alleged Misconduct: The Worker barged into the shop floor, where the Production Manager and H.R.Executives were holding a meeting with the operators of Hassia Machine;  b) he disrupted the meeting and started abusive language against the Executives and the Manager and scolded the Executive by name Sundaram in a filthy language and c) he also intimidated him by holding him by his shift collar, thereby created an unpleasant atmosphere Long ago, there was prior incident of misconduct. HC's View and reference to series of judgements: - Use of abusive language by itself cannot constitute a serious misconduct fit for capital punishment - The context and the provocations to be borne in mind while determining the punishment - The Class of the work-men and the abuse to be considered from the level where he came from    and also the time lapse which can unwound the harm if any caused - Consider the age of workmen, duration of the dispute  and the feasibility of he getting e
Post a Comment
Read more