Pilots Also Qualify as ‘Workmen’ Under Labour Law, Status Not Determined by Pay or Rank: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that pilots are also covered under labour laws as ‘workmen’, and that their employment status cannot be determined solely on the basis of high salary, designation, or professional prestige. The court clarified that the true test lies in the nature of duties performed and not in remuneration or position held by an employee.

 

The ruling came while dismissing appeals filed by an airline challenging earlier orders directing payment of pending wages and dues to its pilots. The airline had argued that pilots, including those holding the position of pilot-in-command, do not fall within the definition of ‘workman’ under the Industrial Disputes Act due to their senior rank, high pay, and specialised technical role.

 

Rejecting this contention, the High Court observed that high salary or an elevated designation does not automatically exclude an employee from the protection of labour legislation. The court noted that the definition of ‘workman’ under labour law is linked to the actual functions and responsibilities performed by an employee, and not to status, hierarchy, or compensation.

 

The bench held that pilots are primarily engaged in operating aircraft in accordance with technical, operational, and regulatory instructions, and do not perform managerial, administrative, or policy-making functions. The court further clarified that although a pilot-in-command is responsible for the safe operation of an aircraft during flight, this responsibility does not amount to managerial or supervisory control in the sense contemplated under labour laws.

 

Addressing the argument related to aviation regulations, the High Court stated that regulatory control exercised under aviation laws is focused on flight safety and cannot be equated with managerial or supervisory authority under employment law. Compliance with safety regulations does not transform a pilot’s role into that of a managerial employee.

 

The court also took note of the fact that the pilots’ services had been terminated improperly. It held that since the termination was not carried out in accordance with law, the airline could not deny reinstatement, continuity of service, or payment of outstanding wages and benefits.

 

Emphasising the purpose of labour welfare legislation, the High Court stated that such laws are intended to protect employees from unfair labour practices and arbitrary actions by employers. Excluding employees merely on the basis of professional skill, prestige, or pay would defeat the very objective of social welfare laws.

 

The judgment reinforces the principle that labour rights are determined by substance rather than form, and that highly skilled professionals are not automatically excluded from statutory protection under labour laws. The ruling is expected to have significant implications for employment disputes involving specialised professionals across sectors.