NEW DELHI: The High Court has ruled that airline pilots, including pilots-in-command, qualify as “workmen” under the Industrial Disputes Act (ID) Act, holding that their primary role is technical and operational rather than managerial or supervisory.
The court clarified that job designations, command authority during flights, or high salary levels do not automatically exclude pilots from the protection of labour laws.
The ruling was delivered by a Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar while deciding a batch of Letters Patent Appeals filed by King Airways against several former pilots, including Captain Pritam Singh, Manjit Singh and N D Kathuria. The airline had challenged earlier directions requiring it to pay unpaid salaries, incentives for additional flying hours and other dues.
At the core of the judgment, the Bench applied the “predominant nature of duties” test, observing that this remains the decisive factor in determining whether an employee qualifies as a workman. While acknowledging that a pilot-in-command is in charge of an aircraft during a flight, the Court found no evidence to show that pilots exercise supervisory or managerial control over crew members in an industrial or administrative sense. Their principal function, the Court noted, remains the skilled and technical operation of aircraft.
Rejecting the airline’s contention that pilots should be excluded due to their high salaries or senior positions, the Bench held that the salary threshold under the ID Act becomes relevant only after it is established that the employee performs supervisory duties. In the absence of such proof, exclusion under Section 2(s)(iv) of the Act does not arise.
The Court also dismissed King Airways’ reliance on the Aircraft Rules and internal operation manuals to argue that pilots supervise cabin crew. It held that any supervisory role mentioned in aviation regulations is incidental to flight safety and cannot be equated with managerial supervision under labour law.