Worker M vs Vetrivel Knits

dc.contributor.author	Rights Education and Development Centre
dc.date.accessioned	2022-09-13T05:30:36Z
dc.date.available	2022-09-13T05:30:36Z
dc.date.issued	2020
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14121/3042
dc.description	The worker approached the Labour Commissioner on the advice CITU representative. The commissioner supported the worker initially. However, in the following hearings agreeing with employer's business losses did not accept worker's demand. The worker argued that the management and the officer belonged to the same caste and their affinities lead to the decision against the worker.	en_US
dc.description.abstract	Overview and conciliation process for worker's demand for increase in the bonus amount in the third year of employment.	en_US
dc.language.iso	en	en_US
dc.subject	Provident Fund (PF)	en_US
dc.subject	District Office	en_US
dc.title	Worker M vs Vetrivel Knits	en_US
dc.type	Case Summary	en_US
dc.description.host	Archives of Indian Labour [V.V. Giri National Labour Institute (VVGNLI) - Association of Indian Labour Historians (AILH)]	en_US
dc.description.dis	“All content hosted in this archive has been obtained with prior permission and approval from the institutions, organisations, and individuals who have either published/produced or held these materials as part of their collections. These materials are meant for educational, research and for non-commercial use only.”	en_US
dc.page	3	en_US