Indian woman wins gender discrimination lawsuit against Wipro in London

May 5, 2016

Bengaluru, May 5: Shreya Ukil, a 40-year-old Indian woman who was formerly a senior techie at the Wipro back office in London, claimed to have won a lawsuit in a British tribunal against the IT major for sacking her on the grounds of gender discrimination, unequal pay and victimisation. Wipro, however, said the tribunal upheld the dismissal as appropriate and rejected claims of adverse cultural attitude towards women in the organisation.

Wipro“Wipro leadership team, including its (then) chief executive T.K. Kurien, conspired to push Ukil out of her job and her role in Britain,” her lawyers Slater & Gordon said in a joint statement from London on Wednesday.

The judgment of the London Employment Tribunal found that the direction (to sack her) had come from the very top and was followed through with considerable resolve.

“Ukil was victimised by Wipro’s leadership for speaking up about sex discrimination, unequal pay and a culture of sexism,” the statement asserted.

Wipro, however, contradicted Ukil’s claim, and said in a statement later that “it was pleased the tribunal had upheld the dismissal of the complainant from the services of the organisation as appropriate and rejected claims of adverse cultural attitude towards women in the organisation”.

In an e-mail response to Wipro’s statement, Ukil said that she had won on her claim for equal pay, as she did same work as her male peers in same grade and that she was paid significantly lower than her male colleagues.

“The court also ruled in my favour on sex discrimination, victimisation and unfair dismissal,” Ukil reiterated, adding that the verdict on her charges was published on April 18, while the verdict on equal pay was published on July 7, 2015.

Enclosing parts of the judgment’s operative portion to contest Wipro’s counter-claim, Ukil said the tribunal found that the company’s rejection of her resignation in September 2014 was an act of victimisation and that she was dismissed unfairly.

“The tribunal found that I was a victim of acts of sexism and racism, as the company did not upheld the well-founded complaints of discrimination against me,” Ukil said.

The tribunal also accepted that Ukil was asked to sign an indemnity to prevent from bringing claims against the company in October 2013 as an act of victimisation.

“The court verdict is in public domain. There is no out-of-court settlement,” she affirmed.

Ukil, who worked with Wipro for almost 10 years and won multi-million-dollar contracts for it, started raising concerns in 2012, which went unheeded.

Instead of addressing Ukil’s concerns, a series of decisions were made by the management behind the scenes, including chief legal counsel Inderpreet Sawhney, human resources global head Saurabh Govil and Kurien in a bid to remove her from her role in London.

Ukil sued the Bengaluru-based outsourcing firm in October 2015, seeking one million pounds compensation for gender discrimination, unequal pay and harassment.

“Compensation (referred to as ‘remedy’) will be decided at a later date,” Ukil noted.

Sacking Ukil and her superior Manoj Punja, 54, the company said then that they were relieved from service after an internal inquiry established that they were into a relationship but did not report about it to the company as a policy.

Ukil, who was sales and market development manager for the back office operations in London, filed the lawsuit with the tribunal, claiming she was forced into an affair by Punja, a married man, who was head of its business process outsourcing (BPO) office in London.

Having lost all faith, Ukil raised her final grievances with Wipro chairman Azim Premji, who assured her of a fair and impartial investigation.

When she resigned from her role in September 2014 in an e-mail to Premji, her resignation was not accepted and she was fired four days later whilst still on sick leave.

The tribunal found that comments made by Wipro employees, Sid Sharma and George Joseph on separate occasions reflected an “extra undercurrent of sexism in their attitudes” towards Ukil, with remarks that aceplainly conveyed a sexist innuendo”.

“I hope that following this judgment, companies will again reconsider their treatment of female employees, ensuring they are treated fairly and equally,” Ukil added

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 6,2020

New Delhi, Mar 6: Shares of YES Bank and State Bank of India came under huge selling pressure on Friday as developments unfolded regarding SBI picking stake in the private lender. Shares of the lender hit record low of Rs 5.55, plunging 85 per cent, and were trading below its previous low of Rs 8.16 hit on March 9, 2009.

SBI, on the other hand, slumped 11 per cent to Rs 257.35 on the BSE. The benchmark S&P BSE Sensex was trading with a cut of over 3 per cent at 37,251.37 level.

In the past three months, share price of the private lender has plunged 41 per cent, while the state-owned lender has slipped 14 per cent. In comparison, the S&P BSE Sensex has dipped 5.6 per cent till Thursday.

On Thursday, the Reserve Bank of India superseded the board of troubled private sector lender YES Bank and imposed a 30-day moratorium on it “in the absence of a credible revival plan” amid a “serious deterioration” in its financial health.

During the moratorium, which came into effect from 6 pm on Thursday, YES Bank will not be allowed to grant or renew any loans, and “incur any liability”, except for payment towards employees’ salaries, rent, taxes and legal expenses, among others.

This is the first time that a bank of this size will be put under a moratorium by the RBI.

“The financial position of YES Bank had undergone a steady decline “largely due to inability of the bank to raise capital to address potential loan losses and resultant downgrades, triggering invocation of bond covenants by investors, and withdrawal of deposits,” RBI said in a statement.

“After the moratorium, the next step will be to infuse to money and keep the bank afloat. So from shareholders’ point of view, the future is certainly hazy as the capital requirement is huge. The good part, however, is that the RBI has stepped in and depositors don't have to worry,” says Siddharth Purohit, a research analyst at SMC Securities.

Meanwhile, analysts at Nomura believe that placing the Bank under moratorium implies that equity value in the bank would be negligible, and that the chances of private capital participating in future capital raising plan are near zero.

"Any resolution for Yes Bank is more proposed from the perspective of deposit holders and systemic stability, and not from the perspective of Yes Bank equity investors or even perpetual bond holders," they wrote in a note dated March 6.

In another development, SBI’s Board Thursday gave in-principle approval to consider an “investment opportunity” in YES Bank, even as it said “no decision had yet been taken to pick up stake in the bank”.

According to a  report, highly-placed sources indicated a rescue plan involving SBI and Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) was being discussed and an announcement in this regard might be made soon.

“While the finer details of the deal are being worked out, it is anticipated that both SBI and LIC together will take a 51 per cent stake in the bank, with a one-year lock-in period,” the report said.

Most analysts believe it is a positive step for the Indian financial sector as the government has tried to avoid a repeat of IL&FS-like crisis.

“The move is a positive step for the financial sector as a whole. By this, the government has tried to avoid a repeat of IL&FS-like crisis and has saved the depositors,” said AK Prabhakar, Head of Research at IDBI Capital. While we know that YES Bank has a huge pile of bad loans, SBI is the only bank that has the capacity to absorb it, he added.

However, the valuation at which YES bank would be taken over remains a cause of concern.

Global brokerage firm JP Morgan Thursday cut its target price for YES Bank on Thursday to Rs 1 per share, taking into account the potential fall in the lender’s net worth due to stressed assets.

“We believe forced bailout investors will likely want the bank to be acquired at near-zero value to account for risks associated with the stress book and likely loss of deposits. We think the bank will need to be recapitalised at nominal equity value and could test dilution of additional tier 1 (AT1) capital. We remain underweight and cut our target price to Rs 1 as we believe net worth is largely impaired,” JP Morgan said in a note.

Global brokerage firm Nomura estimates a need of Rs 25,000-44,000 crore and adjusted for Rs 7,400 crore of current coverage, if the current stress of Rs 65,000-70,000 crore faces 70 per cent loss given default (LGD).

"It implies Rs 18,000-37,000 crore needed for provisioning against the current net worth of Rs 25,700 crore Also, to run as going concern, the bank would require over Rs 20,000 crore of CET-1 capital as well," the note said.

YES Bank has registered slippages of Rs 12,000 crore so far in FY20, while it has placed Rs 30,000 crore of loan assets under the watch list. Its deposits stood at Rs 2.09 trillion on September 30, 2019, while its advances totalled Rs 2.24 trillion. The bank has delayed publishing its December quarter results by a month to March 14.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 27,2020

New Delhi, May 27: Professor Johan Giesecke of the Karolinska Institute, Sweden, on Wednesday claimed that India will ruin its economy very quickly if it had a severe lockdown.

Claiming that a strict lockdown may disrupt India's economic growth, Giesecke during an interaction with Congress leader Rahul Gandhi said: "In India, you will do more harm than good with strict lockdown measures. India will ruin its economy very quickly if it had a severe lockdown."

While calling for a soft lockdown approach in India, he suggested that India has to ease restrictions one by one. It may, however, take months to completely come out of lockdown, he said.

He further criticised countries across the globe for having no post-lockdown strategy.

Emphasising on the disease, the Swedish health expert said that coronavirus is spreading like a wildfire across the world. "It is a very mild disease. Ninety-nine per cent infected people will have very less or no symptoms," he added.

Meanwhile, Ashish Jha, Director Harvard Global Health Institute and a recognised public health official, in interaction with Gandhi, called for a need to go in for an 'aggressive' COVID-19 testing to create confidence among people.

"When the economy is opened post-lockdown, you have to create confidence. There is a need for aggressive testing strategy in high-risk areas," he said.

He asserted that COVID-19 is not the last pandemic in the world, adding that "We are entering the age of large pandemics".

Jha further said that countries like South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong have responded the best to COVID-19 pandemic, while Italy, Spain, the US and the UK have responded the worst.

A few days ago, the Gandhi scion had interacted with former Reserve Bank of India Governor Raghuram Rajan and Nobel Prize Winner Abhijit Banerjee to discuss various issues related to the COVID-19 crisis.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 28,2020

Jan 28: After Union minister Anurag Thakur, on Tuesday, BJP MP Parvesh Verma has stoked a controversy by saying that "Shaheen Bagh protesters will enter houses and rape sisters, daughters." The BJP MP even went on to say that if BJP is voted to power in Delhi, they "will clear Shaheen Bagh protest within an hour."

"If the BJP comes to power in Delhi on February 11, we will clear Shaheen Bagh of all protests and protesters within one hour. Not a single person will be visible," Parvesh Verma said during a meeting at Vikaspuri assembly constituency.

"Lakhs of people gather there [Shaheen Bagh]. People of Delhi will have to think and take a decision. They will enter your houses, rape your sisters and daughters, kill them. There's time today, Modi ji & Amit Shah won't come to save you tomorrow..." the BJP MP told news agency ANI.

"If our government is formed, then give me just a month after February 11, and I will remove all mosques built on government land in my Lok Sabha constituency," the BJP parliamentarian added.

Well, these statements didn't go down well with the netizens, who took to Twitter to express what they felt about the BJP leader's comments. A user wrote, "This is pure, unadulterated hate speech." While other user said, "Only when you thought BJP couldn't stoop any lower."

Earlier, on Monday, BJP leader and Union Minister Anurag Thakur triggered a row after he led the crowd to raise an incendiary slogan that "traitors should be shot". At the rally, Thakur, the Minister of State (MoS) for Finance, shouted: "desh ke gaddaron ko" to which the crowd responded, "goli maro saalo ko" (shoot down the traitors).

Addressing the meeting in support of BJP candidate from Rithala, Manish Chaudhary, Thakur raised the pitch of nationalism as he linked opposition parties with anti-CAA protests in Shaheen Bagh and with alleged anti-India slogans, and then asked the crowd to raise the controversial slogan.

For more than a month, over 200 women have been joined by hundreds of others every day at South East Delhi's Shaheen Bagh at a sit-in protest against the CAA which promises citizenship to only non-Muslim refugees from three neighbouring countries.

Protests have been ongoing in different parts of the country against the amended Citizenship Act (CAA) which grants citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Buddhists and Christians fleeing religious persecution from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh if they entered India on or before December 31, 2014.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.