HC questions legality of excluding private-sector managers from 'workers' definition
The court asked why the relevant provisions of the Bangladesh Labour Act should not be declared unconstitutional for denying legal protections to a large group of private-sector employees.
Highlights
- High Court questions excluding private-sector managers from "workers" definition
- Rule challenges Sections 2(49)(b) and 2(65) of Labour Act
- Labour secretary and respondents must reply within four weeks
- Petition says excluded employees lack labour-law protections and remedies
- Up to eight million private employees may be affected
- Petitioners say exclusion violates constitutional rights and equal protection
The High Court has issued a rule asking why provisions of the Bangladesh Labour Act that exclude employees working in managerial, administrative and supervisory positions at private organisations from the definition of "worker" should not be declared unconstitutional.
A High Court bench comprising Justice Ahmed Sohel and Justice SM Iftakhar Uddin Mahmud issued the rule today (23 August) after hearing a writ petition challenging the legality of Section 2(49)(b) and the proviso to Section 2(65) of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
The court directed the labour secretary and other respondents to respond to the rule within four weeks.
Barrister Mohammad Humayun Kabir Pallab appeared for the writ petitioners, according to court sources.
Under Section 2(49)(b) of the Bangladesh Labour Act, an "employer" or "owner" in relation to an establishment includes the manager or any person responsible for the management, supervision or control of the enterprise.
Section 2(65) defines a "worker" as any person, including an apprentice, employed directly or through a contractor in any establishment or industry to perform skilled, unskilled, manual, technical, trade promotional or clerical work for hire or reward.
The rule asks why the provisions, which classify people appointed in writing to managerial, administrative or supervisory positions at private organisations as "owners" and exclude them from the definition of "worker", should not be declared illegal and inconsistent with Articles 7, 27, 28, 31, 32 and 44 of the Constitution.
According to the writ petition, the provisions leave employees in these positions without legal protections, benefits and remedies available under labour law.
The petitioners cited data from the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics' Labour Force Surveys for 2022 and 2024, claiming that around 6.5 million to 8 million private-sector employees are affected by the provisions – more than 10% of the country's total workforce.
They argued that excluding such a large number of citizens from legal protection violates their fundamental constitutional rights.
The petition also argued that Articles 27, 28, 31 and 44 of the Constitution guarantee equal protection of the law and the right to seek legal protection.
As these employees are excluded from the jurisdiction of labour courts under the existing provisions, they have no appropriate forum to seek remedies for employment-related disputes, the petitioners said.
