NEW DELHI: The parliamentary standing committee on labour has sought clarity from the ministry of labour and employment on whether it can be incumbent on employers to pay 50% wages to their employees in cases of natural calamities which have resulted in closure of their establishments , a situation that has some parallels to conditions created by the Covid-19 pandemic though on a much larger scale.The committee, chaired by BJD MP Bhartruhari Mahtab , submitted its report to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on Thursday, and in a first-of-its-kind, received approval online. The report’s observations assume significance as they come in the midst of the pandemic, which not only leaves open the question of whether it can qualify as a natural calamity, but also how industrial establishments are to tackle concerns of retrenchments, lay offs and wage cuts.The report on industrial relations is part of the four codes the government plans to bring in to replace a few dozen labour laws. The Modi government is keenly awaiting the reports of the standing committee so that it can move appropriate bills in Parliament at the earliest.The panel’s report on Industrial Relations Code 2019, has noted that in line with the Industrial Disputes Act, it becomes incumbent on an employer to pay 50% wages to the workers or employees who are laid off as a result of shortage of power, coal or other raw materials. While it agrees with the ministry’s contention that such shortages cannot be attributed to workers and they should be compensated in such events, the committee has expressed its reservations for payment of “prescribed percentage of wages to the workers in the event of closure of an establishment due to natural calamity”.“The Committee are of the considered opinion that payment of 50% wages to the workers for 45 days, which can be extended following an agreement between the employer and the employees, in case of shortage of power, breakdown of machinery may be justified. But in case of natural calamities like earthquake, flood, super cyclone…which often result in closure of establishments for a considerably longer period without the employer’s fault, payment of wages to the workers until the re-establishment of the industry may be unjustifiable,” the panel’s report said.As a result, the parliamentary panel has urged the government to bring in clarity to the existing clauses so that employers not responsible for closure or lay offs are not disadvantaged in case of such natural calamity.In a separate intervention, the parliamentary committee appeared to pay a backhanded compliment to the Rajasthan government for having bumped up the threshold for applying special provisions relating to lay-offs, retrenchment and closure to industrial establishments with not less than 300 workers. Rajasthan increasing the threshold, the ministry said in its submission to the committee, resulted in an increase in employment and decrease in retrenchment. Following this intervention, the panel urged the government to increase the threshold accordingly in the Code itself which is at 100 and is largely applicable to MSMEs.