ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW AND

GOVERNANCE

Protection of Managerial Employees under Ethiopian Law

By- Kalkidan Seifu

Date- Saturday, October 14, 2017

 Table of content

Acknowledgment

Abstract

Chapter one; Introduction

1.1 Background
1.2 Problem statement
1.3 Research question
1.4 Objective of the study
1.5 Significance of the study
1.6 Research methods and methodology

Chapter two; Review of concepts and legal instruments

2.1 Definition; who are managerial employees?

2.2 Historical background
2.3 Laws regulating managerial employees
2.4 Comparative analysis
Chapter three; Managerial employees in the eyes of the law
3.1 Rational behind the exclusion
3.2 Legal protections in the civil code versus the Labor proclamation
3.3 Decisions of the cassation bench in cases which involve managerial employees
Chapter four; Analysis on the position of Managerial Employees under our legal system
4.1 Legal protections in light of employment contracts of managerial employees
4.2 Advantages and disadvantages of the existing labour laws for managerial employees
4.3 Practical challenges
Chapter five; Recommendation and conclusion
5.1 Conclusion
5.2 Recommendation
 CHAPTER ONE

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1Background

Employment is one form of special contractual relations that is governed by law. Employer-
employee relationships are common in the world as well as in Ethiopia. We have the labor law in
order to govern this relationship. Since employment is contractual relation between
economically unequal parties it needs to be governed. Minimum labor conditions are imposed in
the laws which are considered as implied terms of the contract.

Among the labor relations, managerial employees form employment relation with their
employers. The definition given to them may differ from country to country. But it is common
for all that managerial position is a position of trust. Due to this there is the understanding that
they should be treated different from other employees. It is evident that they play very important
role in overall activities of the organization. Their job description is of the very essential
activities that need to be done for the organization to exist. Given their important position, the
law needs to give them enough protection in order to ensure smooth undertaking of the activities
of the organization.

Under Ethiopian law determining whether an employee is a managerial employee or not is done
by looking at the actual activities he/she performs. It is important to determine whether or not
he/she has managerial position because managerial employees are excluded from the ambit of
the current labor proclamation1. This means if an employee has managerial position he/she will
not be entitled to the protections listed under the labor proclamation.

The exclusion from the labor proclamation is detrimental to managerial employees. This is
because the labor proclamation provides for minimum labor conditions and it protects employees
from being manipulated by the employer. Managerial employees are not beneficial of this. In
addition the existing laws do not give protection to them to the possible extent. It is assumed that
they can bargain to protect their rights since they are usually literate and aware of their rights.
1
Labor Proclamation, 2004, Article 3(2)(c), Proclamation no. 377/2003, Neg. Gaz., year 10, no 12 as amended,
Labour (Amendment) Proclamation, 2006, Article 2(1), Proclamation no.494/2006
In order to examine the laws regarding managerial employees one has to refer mainly the civil
code. The contract of employment, cassation decisions and sometimes collective agreements and
the company’s rules on managerial employees are relevant in dealing with issues in relation to
managerial employees.

1.2Problem statement

The first issue with regards to managerial employees is the question “who are managerial
employees?” The amendment proclamation tries to give definition to managerial employees. But
still we need to look at the list of activities given to the employee in order to determine his
position. Different organizations have different working system. Accordingly the powers and
responsibilities of the managerial employees differ from one organization to another. In a
number of cases presented to court, the issue of the case is whether the employee is managerial
employee or not.

Determining whether or not an employee is managerial employee is very important because it

involves two conflicting interests. On one hand there is the interest of the employer. If the
employee belongs to the category of “managerial employees” then the employer will not be
obliged to his/her obligation listed under the labor proclamation as the employee will be
excluded from the ambit of the proclamation. So the employer will be beneficial if that employee
is a managerial employee. For this reason in most labour cases presented in court employers
claim that the employee in the case is a managerial employee. On the other hand there is the
interest of the employee not to be regarded as a managerial employee. This is because if he/she is
regarded as managerial employee, then he/she will not be entitled to the protections listed in the
labour proclamation.

The other issue is in connection with the exclusion of managerial employees from the labor
proclamation. Since they are excluded from the proclamation they are not accorded with the
protection given to other employees. In regulation of managerial employees and specifically with
regards to their protection one has to look for laws other than the labor proclamation. This means
that we need to refer to other laws. Aside from the provisions of the civil code we don’t have law
in one instrument which deals with managerial employees in detail.
In addition the existing laws don’t give enough protection to them. It is evident that dispute may
arise in any relation. Whenever a dispute arises between the employer and one managerial
employee, the law is not usually on the side of the employee. As a result managerial employees
lose a lot of things due to the exclusion.

1.3Research questions

 Who are managerial employees?

 What are the laws that govern managerial employees in Ethiopia?
 Why are they excluded from the labor proclamation?
 How are they protected under the legal system?
 What protections do they lose as compared to other employees?
 Is the assumption behind the exclusion realistic?
 Do we need to adopt a new law?

1.4 Objective of the study

The main objective of this study is to examine the status of managerial employees under
Ethiopian legal system. There will be critical examination of the exclusion of managerial
employees from the ambit of the labor proclamation. One of the focuses of this research is with
regards to the definition of managerial employees. Providing clear definition is one of the
objectives of this research. This research intends to examine the existing laws in relation to
managerial employees. By doing so clear picture will be provided on whether or not they are
getting enough protection from the law. Having better understanding of the law and the status of
managerial employees is the objective of this research.
1.5 Significance of the Study
Employment law governs the relationship between employer and employees. It tries to make sure
that one party is not manipulated by the other party. Usually, given the economic inequality,
employees are those who are found to be adversely affected by the employment relationship. The
labor law aims at giving protection to the employees and it provides minimum labor conditions
that employers must comply with. However, the labor proclamation excludes managerial
employees from those protections with the assumption that they can bargain to protect their
rights. The exclusion needs to be critically examined so that the very objective of the labor
proclamation is not overlooked.
In addition to this a great deal of attention has to be given for managerial employees. This is
because they assume an important position in the organization. One organization will not stand
properly if they fail to perform their activities properly. Hence, failing to give them protection is
not just detrimental to them but also to the employer and the whole organization.
This research is intended to give clear picture on the existing laws of Ethiopia which deal with
managerial employees. Rights and protections given for them will be addressed which enable us
to know how they are being treated. The effect of excluding them from protections of the labor
proclamation will be examined by looking at the practical aspect. This will enable us to test
whether or not the assumption behind the exclusion is practical and if not it will help us to make
a decision on adoption of a new law which gives a better protection for managerial employees.
Being aware of the problems at hand will enable us to come up with a solution. Making a
comparative analysis in the area will enable us to come up with the best possible solution. In
addition clear definition of managerial employees will avoid the confusion on deciding whether
or not one employee is managerial employee or not.

1.6 Research Method and Methodology

Qualitative research design will be employed in this research. The focus in this research is on
protection of managerial employees. Therefore analysis will be made on the existing laws of
Ethiopia with regards to protection of managerial employees. In addition contracts of
employment, acts, case law, internet and other secondary sources will be used in this research. A
comparative study on Ethiopian laws governing managerial employees and laws of other
countries will be conducted. In this part of the study critical examination of the laws will be
made. This research employs doctrinal type of research in that the authorities are established
from both primary and secondary sources of law.

CHAPTER TWO
 2. Review of Concepts and Legal Instruments
2.1 Definition
When we look in to definition of the term “managerial employee”, we do not find universal
definition whereby everyone agrees with. The laws of different countries define the term in
different manner. The term actually is comprised of two words i.e. manager and employee.
These two words are conferred with their own meanings. By defining the two words we can get
the clear meaning of the term.

Manager is a person who is responsible for directing and controlling the work and staff of a
business, or of a department within it. When we say someone is a manager it means that he is
organizer of somebody’s business or business affairs. Likewise, Employee means a person who
works for his employer for payment. Therefore from the two word’s definition we can see that
managerial employee does not work for himself rather he takes responsibility for the activities of
the owner’s business2.

In the same manner Black’s law dictionary gives meaning to the term managerial employee. It
defines manager as; a manager who has overall control of a business, office, or other
organizations; including authority over other managers. It further says that managerial employees
are included in the group of executive employees as they are active participants in management
activities3. They are also given different names such as high-managerial agent, superior agent,
and supervisor.
Different scholars have said a lot in identifying who managers are. An author named J. penc
defines manager as; “a person employed for managing, fulfilling all his function and making use
of all or some part of organization’s resources in order to achieve goals of the whole organization
or its given part”. Another scholar named R.W.Griffin defines manager as; “a person who makes
plans and decisions, organizes, supervises and controls human, finance and information
resources.4
Managers have important role in the overall activities of the organization. Their functions are
many and may vary from organization to organization. Some of their activities are; hiring and

2
Encarta
3
Blacks law dictionary
4
Katarzyna Cieslinska, The Basic Role of Manager in Business Organization, (2007), p. 4
staffing, dealing with performance problems and terminations, supporting problem resolution
and decision making, conducting timely performance and evaluation, monitoring and controlling
budget and expenses, planning and goal setting for future periods and so on.
Defining managerial employees in light of the labor laws of Ethiopia
The 1960 commercial code tries to answer the question; who are managers? Under title two
which says “Auxiliaries and Agents” the second chapter deals with managers. Article 33(1) of
the commercial code defines manager by saying; “A manager is a person who has been
authorized, expressly or tacitly, to carry out acts of management and to sign in the name of the
trader”. Under sub article 2 it goes on by saying “A manager is not a trader”. Hence, under
Ethiopian law managers are those employees who work for the benefit of the trader and in return
they get payment for their work.

With regards to the powers of managers, article 35 of the commercial code says that they have
full power to carry out all acts of management in connection with the exercise of the business.
Compared to other employees they are empowered with caring out a lot of activities and most of
their work is similar with what the owners of the business do.

The commercial code provides for six forms of business organizations. These are: ordinary
partnership; joint venture; general partnership; limited partnership; Share Company; and private
limited company5. In dealing with each business forms the code provides provisions for
managers of the respective business organization.

In Ordinary partnership, all partners have the right to act as manager or by their agreement they
can appoint a third party to be the manager. This third party is what we call a managerial
employee6. Article 241(1) the code talks about rights and duties of managers of partnership. It
says that the provisions relating to agency shall apply to the rights and duties of managers. Our
civil code has a separate chapter which deals with agency. Rights and duties of managers of
partnership can be referred from article 2203 to article 2218 of the civil code.

Under article 276(1) of the commercial code it is stated that manager(s) of a joint venture need
not be partners. Sub article 4 of the same article states that powers of the manager shall be
specified in the memorandum of association. Hence, in a joint venture, there can be a managerial
5
, Commercial code of the empire of Ethiopia, proclamation no. 166 of 1960, may 5 1960, negarit gazzeta, art 212
6
Id, article 236
employee who is conferred with managerial powers specified under the memorandum of
association.

For general partnership also the manager(s) need not be partners 7. The scope of the duties of
managers is to perform binding activities in accordance with the law 8. Similar with the above
two forms of business organizations; in general partnership there could be a manager who is
employed to perform binding acts for the organization.

The provisions mentioned for general partnership in relation to managers is to be applied for
limited partnership9. Thus, in general partnership there could be a managerial employee who is
empowered to do activities which binds the organization in accordance with the law.

For the fifth form of business organization that is Share Company, the law provides for the
existence of a general manger who is an employee of the company and who may not be director
of the company10. It also states that the provisions of the civil code which deal with powers of
manger and publicity apply for managers of a share company.

In private limited company manager(s) is/ are appointed by the members by the memorandum of
association with the requirement of being non-member11. They are given full powers with limits
of the objects of the company12. Thus, in any private limited company we find at least one
managerial employee who is vested with full power of management in relation to the objects of
the company.

From the above discussion one can observe the presence of managerial employee(s) in all the six
forms of business organizations. It is common for all that powers of managerial employees are
not to be set up against third parties.

Under international law we have different laws with regards to labor relations. However, we
don’t find a precise or clear definition for the term “managerial employees”. It recognizes the
role of manager for employment relations in general.

7
Id, article 287
8
Id, article 289
9
Id, article 303
10
Id, article 348(3)
11
Id, article 525,526
12
Id, article 287528
When we come to current labour laws of Ethiopia, the labor amendment proclamation; under
article 2(1) tries to define managerial employees by listing the types of power that they are
vested with. It says “ managerial employee who is vested with powers to lay down and execute
management policies by law or by delegation of the employer depending on the type of activities
of the undertaking with or without the aforementioned powers an individual who is vested with
the power to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, assign or take disciplinary measures against
employees and include legal service head who recommend measures to be taken by the employer
regarding managerial employer regarding managerial issues by using his independent judgment
in the interest of the employer”.

In order to define who managerial employees are it is important to see the labor amendment
proclamation in addition to what is stipulated under the commercial code. This is because first it
tries to list down the powers given to managerial employees. It gives more clear answer to the
question. Second, it adds legal service head to the group of managerial employees.

The cassation bench also uses this definition in order to determine whether or not the person in
the case is managerial employee or not13. In one case the cassation bench in determining whether
or not the respondent is managerial employee the court cited article 3(2) c of the labor
proclamation with article 2(1) c of the labor amendment proclamation and further explains that;
“in order to determine whether or not an employee is managerial employee or not we need first
to examine each activities and authorities given to the employee. And then we have to evaluate
them in accordance with the list of activities under article 2(1) c of labor amendment
proclamation”14. This definition is also used by the lower courts.

There are two approaches which are used to identify whether or not an employee is managerial
employee or not. The first one is structural approach. Here the organizational structure of the
company is to be seen. Any official who is accountable to the general manager or the deputy will
be considered as manager. Proclamation no 64/ 1975 which was the proclamation during the
13
Commercial Bank of Ethiopia v Ato Mulat Tarekegn, (Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division, January 8, 2009),
Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division, vol. 8, P. 141.
Stationery Materials Production and Distribution Company v W/ro Nigist Letyebelu, (Federal Supreme Court
Cassation Division, July 28, 2009), Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division, vol.8, p.225.
SNNP Regional Government’s Housing Enterprise v Ato Yohannes Bizuneh, (Federal Supreme Court Cassation
Division, February 7, 2016), Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division, vol. 19, p. 29.
14
Saigen Textile Building Construction Trading Industry Ink Ethiopia v Ato Tesfaye Tilahun, (Federal Supreme Court
Cassation Division, January 10, 2014), Federal Supreme Court Cassation Division, vol.15, p.41.
Derg period follows this approach15. The second approach is called functional approach. The
content, the function, the actual activity is to be considered. The question is; is he engaged in
what is listed? The current proclamation follows functional approach.

2.2Historical Background of Managerial Employee’s Protection

Since managerial employees are part of the general employees, their history is somehow similar
with the development of employment law. Employment law is the law which regulates
employment relations. In order for the labor law or labor relation to exist capital and labor need
to be there. Freedom of contract is also an important factor to create employment relationship. Of
the international social developments, Capitalism is first to introduce many “freedoms” such as
freedom of expression, freedom of movement, freedom of contract and so on. During the
primitive communal society; slave owning society and feudal society there was no such thing as
“freedom of contract”. 16

At first labor- capital relationship was contractual relation which was to be governed by contract
law. Terms of the contract including wage, duration of employment, working hours, and safe
working condition were determined by the parties. The government did not intervene because of
freedom of contract. Its part was only to enforce the contract when necessary. But later on this
freedom resulted in labor dissatisfaction which caused many strikes. Therefore the governments
started to intervene and set minimum labor conditions. In short this was how labor law start to
develop internationally.17

In Ethiopia labor law development was weak and slow because of reasons such as low capital;
negative social attitude towards industrial development and slavery. Different attempts were
made to abolish slavery in the country. With the promulgation of the civil code of the 1960 the
state began to intervene in employment relation18. The code has a chapter on employment
relation from article 2510 to 2526. As a result employees start to get some protection. The civil

15
Labour Proclamation No.64,Negarit Gazeta, 35 th Year,No.11,Addis Ababa,1975, Art 2(27)
16
Mehari Redae, Employment and Labour Law,2009, p 3
17
Id, p 4
18
Id, p5
code doesn’t make distinction by having different provisions for managerial employees with that
of the general employment provisions.

After promulgation of the civil code emperor H/Sellase came up with the first labour relations
decree no 49/1962. The decree under article 2(f) clearly mentions that it would not be applicable
on workers holding managerial post. Later in 1963 the decree was renumbered as proclamation
no 210/1963. The proclamation did not make any significant change in the decree aside from
renumbering it. Thus, under this proclamation also managerial employees were excluded.

During the Derg period another proclamation was promulgated that is proclamation no. 64/1975.
It follows socialist ideology as can easily be inferred from the preamble of the proclamation.
Article 2 (27) of the proclamation states that, the proclamation does not apply to manager and
deputy manger of an undertaking or any of its branches and all those officials accountable to the
manager or deputy manager.

After the down fall of the Derg regime the transitional government of Ethiopia came up with a
proclamation i.e. labour proclamation no 42/1993. Article 3(2) (c) states; “ This proclamation
shall not be applicable to contracts relating to persons holding managerial posts who are directly
engaged in major managerial functions of an undertaking and giving decisions within the power
delegated to them by law or the employer depending on the type of activities of the undertaking”.
Thus, managerial employees were excluded from the ambit of the then proclamation.

Similar to the previous proclamation, the current labor proclamation, proclamation no. 377/ 2003
excludes managerial proclamation from the protections listed in the proclamation. Sub article
2(c) of article 3 clearly states that the proclamation will not apply to managerial employees. The
amendment proclamation doesn’t make a change on their exclusion rather it makes minor
amendment with regard to ‘recommendation’.

2.3Existing Laws Regarding Protection of Managerial Employee

2.3.1 International Laws

At the international level there are ILO instruments which regulate labour relations. There are
ILO conventions, recommendations and some declarations. Basically ILO is not against
excluding managerial staff from labour proclamation. Its main concern is in narrowing the
definition of managerial staff. ILO 1994, paragraph 66 states; “scope for managerial staff should
not be defined so widely as to weaken trade unions by depriving them of a substantial proportion
of their potential membership”.

There are also international human right instruments, non- discrimination principles, freedom of
expression, association and so on. Managerial employees, by the mere fact that they are human
beings, they are entitled to all protections of the human rights law. Hence, the employer is
obliged to respect all the human rights of his employee no matter in any position the employee is.

Article 9(4) of the FDRE constitution states that “All international agreements ratified by
Ethiopia are an integral part of the law of the land”. This implies that all the international legal
instruments ratified by Ethiopia whether it is ILO convention or Human right instruments, will
have binding effects under Ethiopian legal system.

2.3.2National Laws

When we come to national laws the first law we find in the hierarchy of laws is the FDRE
constitution. Article 42 of the constitution is the most important provision which is related to
labour relation. It provides for rights of labour. Sub article 1(a) of the article says that factory and
service workers have the right to form association which includes the right to form trade unions
and other associations to bargain collectively. They have also the right to express grievances,
including the right to strike under sub article 1(b). sub article 2 states that those workers have the
right to reasonable limitation of working hours, to rest, to leisure, to periodic leaves with pay, to
remuneration for public holidays as well as healthy and safe work environment. In addition to
this provision the constitution provides for other provisions such as the provision for non-
discrimination, freedom of association, expression and such.

In the second place there is the labour proclamation with its amendment which regulates labour
relation with a great detail. The labor proclamation gives a lot of protection for employees.
Under article 3 which deals with the scope of application, sub article 2(c) says that the
proclamation is not applicable to employment relation arising out of a contract of employment
with managerial employee. It further explains that a managerial employee is a person who is
vested with the power to lay down and execute management policies by law or by the delegation
of the employer. Regarding the type of activities, the provision provides for lists of activities.
These are; hiring, transferring, suspending, laying off, assigning or taking disciplinary measures
against employees. The list includes professionals who recommend measures to be taken by the
employer regarding managerial issues by using independent judgment in the interest of the
employer.

The amendment proclamation has an amendment in this provision. Article 3 sub article 2(c) is
deleted and replaced by a new provision. The difference between the two provisions is with
regards to the part which says “… include professionals who recommend measures to be taken
by the employer regarding managerial issues by using his independent judgment in the interest of
the employer.” The amendment proclamation says “…include legal service head who
recommend…” However, the amendment proclamation does not change the exclusion of
managerial employees from the ambit of the labor proclamation.

Since managerial employees are excluded from the labour proclamation we have to see other law
which regulates their labor relation. In the first place there is the civil code. The civil code is not
expressly repealed so far so it means it is still in force. In the civil code, under the title contract
for the performance of services only public servants has been excluded19. This means managerial
employees are not excluded from this section of the civil code.

In the second place there is the contract of employment as a source of law. Article 1731(1) of the
civil code, under the provisions of general contract, says that “the provisions of a contract
lawfully formed shall be binding on the parties as though they were law”. Hence, the terms of the
contract of employment can be used as another source of law.

There is also decision of the cassation bench as another source of law. A decision or
interpretation of the cassation bench is binding 20. The bench has entertained a number of cases
19
Civil Code of the Empire of Ethiopia, Proclamation no. 165 of 1960, May 5th 1960, Negarit Gazzeta, art 2513
20
Federal Courts Proclamation Reamendment Proclamation, 2005, Article 1, Proclamation no.454/2005, Negarit
Gazzata, 11th Year, no. 42 ; Interpretation of a low by the Federal Supreme Court rendered by the cassation division
with not less than five judges shall be binding on federal as well as regional council at all levels. The cassation
division may however render a different legal interpretation some other time.
which involve managerial employees. These decisions can be used by lower courts in
entertaining the same cases. Private acts can also be used as a source of law in order to regulate
employment relations. Collective agreement which is the result of collective bargaining; work
rule or company policy can be cited here.

2.4Comparative Analysis
We find exclusion of managerial employees in many countries labor codes as they are primarily
there for the benefit and interest of the owner. Almost all countries agree that they should be
excluded. Now, labor laws of United States of America, India from the common law legal
system and France from the civil law legal system will be discussed in relation with protection of
managerial employees.
Generally, under Indian law, employees working mainly in managerial or administrative capacity
do not fall under the definition of employees who are works man. They are ordinarily governed
by the terms and conditions of their contracts of employment. Persons employed mainly in
managerial or administrative capacity, or persons employed in supervisory capacity but drawing
in excess of 1,600 Rupees per month, are excluded from the definition of workmen. 21Hence, we
can see that managerial employees are excluded from the ambit of the labor laws of India.
In determination of whether or not an employee is managerial employee or not, the courts of
India held that; the mere nomenclature or having the title “manager” or “supervisor” is not
sufficient to determine whether an employee is a workman under their ID act, and what is
relevant is the actual nature of work performed. This means that if a person performs some
managerial work and other clerical work, the primary or dominant functions will be determining
factor for asserting whether the employee is a workman or not. 22 Here, we can see that Indian
courts follow functional approach of determining managerial employees.

When we come to United States of America, the labour code of US also excludes managerial
employees. There is a slight difference between managerial employees and supervisors under the
law. However, they are both excluded from labor protection. In defining supervisors the US

21
Amarchand Managaldas, Report on Labour Laws in India, p.3
22
Id, p.4
national labor relations act states that; “ any individual having authority , in the interest of the
employer, to hire, transfer, suspend, layoff, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward or
discipline other employees, or responsibility to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or
effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such
authority is not of a merely routine of clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judge.23
With regards to determination of whether or not a person is a supervisor the US court has come
up with three questions that need to be answered positively. The first question is that “does the
employee have the authority to engage in one of the twelve listed activities in the definition?” .
Second, “does the exercise of that authority require the use of independent judgment?” And
finally “does the employee hold the authority in the interest of the employer?” . If the answer to
these three questions is “yes” then it means that the employee is a supervisor. 24
Similarly managerial employees are defined as “those who formulate and effectuate management
policies by expressing and making operative the decision of their employer”. Even if it is not
specifically stated in the statute, managerial employees are excluded.
From the above discussion we can see that there is exclusion of managerial employees and
supervisors from protection listed under the labor law and that it follows functional approach in
determination.
It is important to see the laws of a country which follows the same type of legal system as
Ethiopia. France is one of the countries which follow the civil law legal system. When we see the
labor code of France, it defines managerial employees as; “those employees who at individual
management levels are authorized to determine and give tasks to subordinate employees, to
organize, manage, and supervise their work and to give them binding instructions or orders for
this purpose”. Additional to this, head of a government agency is also regarded as a managerial
employee.25
The 2012 labour code of France gives a lot of attention to managerial employees. It starts by
defining managerial employees and then further goes to other details such as trial period for
managerial employees, discharge or resignation from managerial position, salary of managerial

23
Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt and Michael D. Ray, The Definition of “Employee” in American Labour and
Employment
Law, p. 122
24
ibid
25
Labour Code of France, no. 262/2006, as amended, section 11
employee, and obligations of a managerial employee. By looking at the provisions we can see
that the labour laws of India gives better protection for managerial employees.