Advocates are supposed to speak up about "law". This whole thing about lawyers or retainers under labour laws is ridiculous.If your law firm treats you like a slave,grow a spine and speak up.If it gets worse,take legal action.
This is the case law where SC held that no law firm falls under the ambit of establishment, V. Sasidharan Vs. M/s. Peter and Karunakar (1984) 4 SCC 230.
But they should. If they are independent practitioners then yes each man for himself. But if you are running a sweatshop in the name of law firm, then labour laws should apply (I already know they aren't applicable currently). Point is when you are running a law firm like a company, when retainers for all practical purposes are working like your corporate slave employees (and not like independent professionals) and when they are getting a fixed salary per month and it's not like they can free lance or take their own matters (which some litigation offices of senior advocates allow you to do)...in all these cases labour law should apply. I know posh applies. So why not extend other laws as well!
But you clearly couldn't clear advance even after "specifically" preparing for it. So that way I can also say you must be dumb. Baaki there is no proof whether or not you are in NALSAR. Assuming you did get in, you still needed three months of thorough prep. May be 2.1.3 didn't have that much time in his/her first attempt. Isliye use drop karna para. Either ways since you are the original instigator here, with that bullshit of a comment in 2.1, I guess you are actually a pathetic human being.
Hi, request people to provide translations when they use Hindi or other regional languages on LI. This is a very important conversation for some of us, and it is very annoying to be excluded because some people assume everyone else can understand them.
Lol then you must be dumb. Kyuki mujhe toh 3 mahina ka preparation mey NALSAR milgaya tha and I joined NALSAR because mujhse Advance clear nhe hua tha. Kaha kaha sey low IQ log ajate hain.
Under the Advocates Act and Bar Council Rules, if you are an employee you can’t have a Sanad and need to suspend it. An advocate is considered a professional and not a worker or employee or labour.
Not an expert here, but my limited understanding is NONE of the regulations, whether Municipal or labour, apply to Law Firms.
Shops and Establishments Act does NOT apply to a Law Firm office. In fact there are Judgements stating so. Moreover, Lawyers can run their business from their home "chambers" without paying commercial rates of Municipal taxes.
Guess what, when fat cat Lawyers have dominated their Legislature since 1950, this is what you get. Most of the laws are drafted by people who have had a decent law practice.
I know that Provident Fund and ESI etc are not applicable on law firms. Will request the experts to let us know which labour laws (Shops and Establishments Act?) would generally apply on firms. And do the incoming new laws change anything on this subject?
If people in other fields are subjected to these laws and are earning way better than us along with work to life balance. Why should we miss out? Halwa nahi hai, zindgi hai
Waah bete, tax bhi nhe dena aur kaam bhi nhe karni and bachpan mey parhai bhi nhe ki warna law chose he nhe kartey aur crore bhi kamana hain. Zindagi ko halwa samjha hain kya?
Bump and follow up question to anyone who has read the bare text of the OSHW Code - wouldn’t us retainers be covered under it? and therefore also be subject to the 40 hours a week working hours limit after which overtime should apply? Feel free to explain otherwise
So I understand from various case laws that even if it is a contractual arrangement and you have hired a bunch of independent contractors for a small office (say a small company or LLP), inspite of you hiring them as contractors it will be the test of integrity and control as laid down by Supreme Court that will determine whether or not these people can be treated as an employee or as a contractor. So question is why can't same logic be extended to retainers of a Big 6. Also generally asking which labour laws does a law firm needs to comply with??
Hence the saga of exploittaion starts
Hence labour laws don’t apply.
Sidenote: who tf writes "nahi" as "nhe"?
Shops and Establishments Act does NOT apply to a Law Firm office. In fact there are Judgements stating so. Moreover, Lawyers can run their business from their home "chambers" without paying commercial rates of Municipal taxes.
Guess what, when fat cat Lawyers have dominated their Legislature since 1950, this is what you get. Most of the laws are drafted by people who have had a decent law practice.
I know that Provident Fund and ESI etc are not applicable on law firms. Will request the experts to let us know which labour laws (Shops and Establishments Act?) would generally apply on firms. And do the incoming new laws change anything on this subject?
It’s a simple question, scope of all the codes is very wide. I’m just trying to understand why we wouldn’t be covered under the Code.
Anyone bringing up the retainer tax treatment may remember that tax and labour laws are two different domains and as such do not interrelate like that