Good morning [%first_name |Dear Reader%],

It isn’t just for an alleged data breach that HDFC Bank is in the news this week. The country’s largest private lender has also faced a legal setback in a dispute with an ex-employee. 

If upheld by higher authorities and courts, the ruling in this case can have implications not just for HDFC Bank, but also other employers and their employees. 

But first, a little catch-up. A government official in Kerala—who is responsible for the administration of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972—has told HDFC Bank to pay an additional sum as gratuity to P V Unnikrishna Pillai, an ex-employee. Why? Because the official found merit in the argument put forth by Pillai that gratuity calculations must include not just ‘basic pay’ but also ‘personal pay’. It’s essentially a question of what should be included and excluded from the definition of ‘wages’ in the Payment of Gratuity Act. 

If you think this is just semantics, you’re right. But the semantics matter here, because the amount of gratuity long-time employees get when leaving a company depends on what ‘wages’ mean exactly.