ON August 23, 2024, the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) voiced strong opposition to the Haryana Contractual Employees (Security of Service) Ordinance, which was promulgated on August 14, 2024. The ordinance, intended to provide security of service to contractual employees across various state departments, boards, corporations, and authorities, has sparked serious concerns from the union, which is calling for its immediate withdrawal.

CITU argues that rather than offering genuine job security, the ordinance establishes a parallel system of contractual employees that could perpetuate the use of contract labour in roles that should be filled by permanent state employees. This is inconsistent with existing laws and undermines the principle of regular employment in government services.

The core of the union’s criticism lies in the ordinance’s failure to align the conditions and compensation of contractual employees with those of regular state government employees. Currently, state employees recruited through the Haryana Public Service Commission and governed by state civil service rules receive fixed pay scales and benefits determined by Pay Commissions. In contrast, the ordinance only provides a consolidated minimum pay for contractual employees, along with a one-time increment based on service weightage. This disparity, CITU contends, not only creates inequity but also institutionalises a lower standard of compensation and benefits for contractual workers.

Section 3(ii) of the ordinance sets eligibility criteria that require candidates to have completed five years of service with at least 240 days of work per year. CITU points out that this could lead to multiple categories of contractual employees with varying service conditions, further complicating the employment landscape.

The ordinance also directs eligible contractual employees to health care benefits under the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY) Chirayu extension Scheme and to the Social Security Code 2020 for other benefits like gratuity and maternity leave. These provisions, CITU argues, fall short compared to the benefits available to regular state employees and are inadequate compared to the benefits provided under existing state government rules.

Contractual employees are governed by the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act of 1970 and the Central Rules of 1971, which stipulate that such employees should not be deployed to permanent and perennial positions, which are meant for regular employees. Additionally, contractual workers are entitled to equal pay for equal work in similar roles. The current ordinance undermines these provisions, potentially eliminating these important protections and entitlements for contractual employees.

The ordinance, by failing to recruit for regular state government positions, will entrench contractual employment in roles that are inherently permanent and ongoing, contrary to the central Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act of 1970 and its Haryana-specific rules from 1975. Contractual employees performing permanent and ongoing roles in state government departments, boards, corporations, or authorities should be granted permanent status and receive the same service conditions and benefits as regular state government employees. However, the current ordinance denies these entitlements.

CITU urges the Haryana government for the immediate withdrawal of the ordinance and urges the implementation of measures to grant permanent status to contractual employees. This should include ensuring they receive equivalent wages and benefits for the same and similar work performed in permanent and ongoing roles within state government departments, corporations, and the private sector, to uphold fairness and propriety.