Accountancy Forum
High Court Notice of ICAP/CA FIRM Malpractice - Printable Version

+- Accountancy Forum (
+-- Forum: The Profession (
+--- Forum: Firms (
+--- Thread: High Court Notice of ICAP/CA FIRM Malpractice (/showthread.php?tid=7860)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

High Court Notice of ICAP/CA FIRM Malpractice - noman - 04-23-2010

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, san" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The LHC issued a notice to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan (ICAP) and called a report within two weeks on a petition filed against a chartered accountancy firm for not making payment to petitioner for extra working.

Amir Manzoor contended that he was working as an accountancy trainee in M Adil Saleem and Company which was charging fee from their clients on a basis of per hour working.

He said he had to work even after duty time, and when he demanded overtime he was fired on the allegation of misconduct.

The petitioner said he filed a complaint with ICAP, but no action was taken against the company. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">


Comments please

- aimaad22 - 04-23-2010

Phew, one thing I would say is that person is very brave, because what firm will take him after all this? But it is good to see someone taking a stand, I think its wrong to make people work overtime without paying them, although this is a common practice in Pakistan.

- Ubaid15 - 04-23-2010

Why does it even matter ? You're there to learn, the stipend is almost pointless. With the current situation of the economy if a decision on this is taken in the student's favour, I think it's going to have a negative impact on the intake of trainees, because overtime is a normal feature in the firms from what I've heard and this would increase the cost per trainee for the firms, making them more reluctant to take trainees. At least that's what I think.

- aimaad22 - 04-23-2010

Its not about stipend, its about taking unfair advantage of someone. They take advantage of us because they know we are desperate to an extent and need to finish our training no matter what.

Your point is true though, but how much unfairness will we bear?

I personally wouldnt mind training with the minimum stipend. The training is the main thing and the experience. But we dont know the situation of the student, maybe something happened to him which compelled him to take this action.

- kamranACA - 04-23-2010

I guess without knowing the facts nothing precise can be commented. Further, the case is subjudiced in court so we should also hold to pass very specific judgements regarding this particular case.

However, Ubaid has raised a valid point and there are attached certain doubts as to whether or not this is an engineered issue to balance the score with the firm. May the factual issue be altogether different since overtime or stipend thingyy is nothing to take such a step. A student knows what the hell his career would be after doing so. Things would be clear only once the judgement is received from the court.

Generally such cases can arise either where something too bad has been committed or the trainee in fact has no worries for his career.

Let's see the outcome.


- faizicapri - 04-23-2010

yes i also think that any decision in favor of student will cost a lot to the upcoming audit trainees because firm will be keen to take less trainees than their requirement resulting in more anxiety among the CA and ACCA students.
May ALLAH do such which is the best in everybody's interest.

- idiot.boy - 04-23-2010

Talking abt stipends , 6500rs has no worth with reference to the quality of training provided !!

Even if ICAP introduces a policy that TRAINEES should give a certain amount of money as a trainning fee to the firms, it would be then surely like a egg in one's beer ~~ )

- aimaad22 - 04-24-2010

What? Lol, Ive never heard that expression before!! )

- idiot.boy - 04-24-2010

@Aimad , dant under or parhai shuru P .. KPMG ka test tiyar kero beta D hahahaha

- aimaad22 - 04-24-2010

I suppose it will be much the same as AFF right?

- idiot.boy - 04-24-2010

Aimad , Easier than that !! )

- ausmanpk2001 - 04-25-2010

That is a very good news. Something like this was required. I pray that high court orders overtime payment & reinstatement of trainee. This decision then later can be quoted as a precedent in lower courts.

The "istehsal" by CA firms would take some thing to end.

- Schuaeb - 04-28-2010

As far as I know the training of this guy has been terminated by his firm. It is an extreme step and firms usually do not go to this extent as it in addition to spoiling a student's career also does require explanation to the committee of the Institute and eventually entails involvement of court. The matter shown in the petition does not sound enough and may be all the facts have not been disclosed. Yet anything may have happened.

It seems that the said student does not have any provable allegation that could have convinced the committee to go in his favour. The record of late sittings if any is in the possession of the firm and the instance may not be proved to the satisfaction high court through some evidence. I wonder if the students does have filed his time sheets with the Institute vetted by the firm evidencing his late sittings.

Whatever the facts of the case are and irrespective of the outcome, clearly against the instructions of the Institute as promulgated through training regulations late sittings is a common phenomena and very infrequently any compensation against it in the form of credit leaves or otherwise is granted to the students. Many a times such practice is with the initiative of the student considering it a part of his learning stage but on at least a similar number of occasions students are forced for this requiring compromises in social and academic activities. During my training a was very fond of late sittings though at the same time I believe that such practice is reasonlessly made a part of the environments of various firms. Work will not be affected if there are no late sittings at all, they are more a part of culture than being a requirement.

Another important thing pertinent with the subject here is that the Institute issued some policies requiring the updation of students work in its database through time sheets. It was a very good policy to regularize training. If acted upon honestly it in addition to ensuring the proper rotation in all departments of the students could be at the same time be an evidence for late sittings. Very unfortunately it seems that firms and students fail to implement it in letter and spirit and the Institute onces again didn't bother for an adequate follow-up to ensure compliance.

As feared by some here I don't think that this instance will affect the recruitment of training.

- ciapk - 04-30-2010

Agreed with Schuaeb, Following are some suggestion

1. Late sitting should be discouraged by the Institute as matter of policy
2. Office timing of 900 am should be strictly followed.
3. Proper feed back of the work done should be obtained by the student at the end of the day at 600 and target work should be assigned for the next day
2. Late sitting Should be only allowed in extreme cases.
3. Students must be paid hourly charges in respect to their stipend.
4. Students should intimate the firm and the Institute regarding his classes schedule one month in advance with supporting documents of fee submitted for classes etc.
5. Such students should be exempted from late sitting in such tenor.

But again how a student can prove that he was working day and night as he could not have any documentary prove for it?

- NasirAhmed - 04-30-2010

As per ICAP training regulation 3.2 clause d says

" As far as practicable, overtime work by Students should be avoided / minimized so as to allow them adequate time for study. However, where overtime work is unavodable, the Students shall be suitably compensated or given time off in lieu of overtime worked provided the requirments of standards working hours as determined by the Committee are met."

In the light of above clause atleast Students must be compensated for overtimes, as we know an old Law axiom "qoud pro qoud" mean consideration for consideration and ICAP students are not exemptions to this common saying