How employment lawyers use Justis AI
Employment work since 21 November 2025 means reading old paper against new law. The four labour codes replaced twenty-nine statutes, but the offer letters, handbooks and standing orders your clients rely on were written for the old ones. Add the state shops and establishments rules, the POSH Act and a termination file assembled in a hurry, and the question is rarely what the law says. It is whether this client's documents agree with it, and with each other.
Justis reads the documents with you. Upload the contracts, the policies or the disciplinary file to a project and it reads every page, scans included, checks each clause against the code and the state rules that apply, and drafts in your style. Every conclusion carries the clause, the page or the section it rests on, and anything it could not confirm, such as a state rule that has not been notified, is marked rather than assumed.
01
Auditing a contract set against the labour codes
The problem
A client has four hundred employment contracts on three templates written over ten years. Since the codes came into force, the wage definition drives gratuity, social security contributions and retrenchment cost, and a basic pay set at thirty per cent of CTC now has consequences. Nobody knows which contracts still carry a post-exit non-compete or a notice period below what the rules allow.
Reading them one by one takes a team a fortnight, and the summary that comes out is a spreadsheet nobody can check because it has no page references.
How Justis handles it
Upload the contracts to a project and tabular review asks the same questions of every one: wage components and whether allowances cross the fifty per cent line in the Code on Wages, notice period, non-compete and non-solicit, fixed-term status, and termination grounds. Each cell cites the clause and page it came from.
Justis then groups the contracts by risk, explains each flag against the provision behind it, and drafts the replacement clauses, so the client gets both the finding and the fix. The grid exports to Excel.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Contracts read | 412 contracts on 3 templates, 37 scanned |
| Wage structure | 288 contracts where allowances exceed 50% of remuneration, so the excess counts as wages under the Code on Wages |
| Non-compete | 61 contracts with a post-exit non-compete, void after employment under s.27 Contract Act |
| Fixed-term staff | 44 fixed-term contracts silent on pro rata gratuity after one year under the Code on Social Security |
| Deliverables | Grid in Excel with a cited cell for each answer, and replacement clauses in Word |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Run a tabular review of every employment contract in this matter. For each, extract the wage components, notice period, non-compete, non-solicit, fixed-term status and termination grounds, flag anything inconsistent with the labour codes or the state rules, and cite the clause and page for every answer.
02
Rewriting the handbook for the codes
The problem
The handbook still cites the Industrial Disputes Act, the Payment of Gratuity Act and the Maternity Benefit Act, all now subsumed in the codes. The leave policy, the grievance procedure and the misconduct list were written for the old law, and the client operates in five states with different shops and establishments rules on working hours, leave and women working at night.
Updating it means knowing which parts changed in substance and which only changed their citation, and getting the state variations right.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the handbook and every policy together, and marks each provision as unchanged, recited to the new code, or changed in substance. It checks the state variations for each location you name and says where a state has not notified its rules under a code.
Your positions go into a playbook once, such as what a POSH policy must say or how you handle notice pay, and every policy that comes in is read against them. The revised handbook comes back as tracked changes in Word.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Documents read | Handbook of 64 pages and 11 standalone policies |
| Changed in substance | Grievance procedure: a Grievance Redressal Committee is required under the Industrial Relations Code for 20 or more workers |
| Citation only | Maternity leave of 26 weeks, now under the Code on Social Security |
| State variation | Night shifts for women in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu: consent and safeguards differ, both listed |
| Deliverable | Revised handbook in Word with tracked changes and a table of what changed and why |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Read this handbook and the policies in the project. Mark each provision as unchanged, needing only a new citation to the labour codes, or changed in substance, check the state rules for Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, and redraft the handbook as tracked changes.
03
Running a POSH inquiry to the timetable
The problem
A complaint reaches the Internal Committee, and the POSH Act sets the clock: a complaint within three months of the incident, extendable by three more, an inquiry completed within ninety days, the report within ten days of completion, and the employer's action within sixty days of the report. Miss a step and the outcome is challenged on process, whatever the merits.
The committee members are not lawyers, the witness statements arrive as WhatsApp screenshots and handwritten notes, and the report has to be reasoned on the evidence.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the complaint, the reply and the evidence, including scans and images, and builds the timetable from the date of the complaint with every statutory step. It checks the committee's constitution under section 4, with the presiding officer and the external member.
It prepares the notices, the questions for each witness, and a draft report that sets each allegation against the evidence for and against it with the page. The findings stay with the committee: Justis organises the record they decide on.
| Step | Example |
|---|---|
| Complaint | Received Tuesday 4 August 2026; incident of 20 June 2026, within three months under s.9 |
| Committee | Presiding officer and external member in place; one member's term expired, flagged for reconstitution |
| Inquiry to finish | Within 90 days under s.11(4): by Monday 2 November 2026 |
| After the report | Report within 10 days of completion; employer acts within 60 days of receiving it under s.13 |
| Deliverables | Notices, witness questions and a draft report with each allegation tied to the evidence |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Read the complaint, the reply and the evidence in this matter. Check the Internal Committee's constitution under the POSH Act, build the inquiry timetable from the date of the complaint with every statutory step, and prepare the witness questions and a draft report structure tied to the evidence.
04
Checking the disciplinary file before the order
The problem
A dismissal for misconduct is usually lost on process. The chargesheet was vague, the documents relied on were never given to the employee, the enquiry report was not shared before the penalty, or the misconduct is not one the certified standing orders list.
By the time the file reaches the lawyer, the order is drafted and management wants it issued the same week.
How Justis handles it
Upload the file. Justis lays out every step in sequence, from complaint to show cause, reply, chargesheet, enquiry, findings and penalty, each with the document behind it, and checks it against the standing orders and the principles of natural justice.
It marks the gaps a tribunal would find, says which can still be cured before the order issues, and drafts the curing step, such as the notice sharing the enquiry report and inviting a reply on penalty.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| File read | 23 documents, 3 sets of handwritten enquiry minutes read by OCR |
| Sequence | 12 steps from complaint of 03.02.2026 to the draft order |
| Gap | Enquiry findings not shared with the employee before the penalty |
| Gap | Chargesheet cites 'gross misconduct' without the clause of the standing orders |
| Curable now | Share the report and invite a reply on penalty; draft notice ready in Word |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Lay out every step of this disciplinary file in date order with the document behind each. Check it against the certified standing orders and natural justice, mark every gap a tribunal would find, and tell me which gaps can still be cured before the termination order issues.
05
Pricing and papering an exit or a retrenchment
The problem
The client wants to let twelve people go by the end of the month and asks what it costs and what could go wrong. The answer depends on who is a worker under the Industrial Relations Code, how long each has served, what counts as wages, the size of the establishment and whether prior permission is needed.
The full and final settlement then has to be paid within two working days under the Code on Wages, and the settlement agreement has to release the right claims without overreaching.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the appointment letters, salary records and attendance, sorts each person as a worker or not, and computes the cost line by line: notice pay, retrenchment compensation, the re-skilling fund contribution, gratuity and leave encashment, each with the provision behind it.
It checks the retrenchment conditions, including notice to the appropriate government and last come, first go, drafts the notices and the settlement agreements, and exports the cost table to Excel.
| Line | Example |
|---|---|
| Employee | Technician, a worker under the IR Code; 6 years 8 months' service; monthly wages ₹39,000 |
| Notice pay | One month: ₹39,000 |
| Retrenchment compensation | 15 days' pay for 7 years, part year over six months counted: ₹1,57,500 |
| Re-skilling fund | 15 days' last drawn wages paid to the fund: ₹22,500 |
| Gratuity | 15 days' wages for 7 years under the Code on Social Security: ₹1,57,500 |
| Timing | Terminated Wednesday 9 September 2026; wages due by Friday 11 September under the Code on Wages |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
From the appointment letters and salary records in this matter, tell me who is a worker under the Industrial Relations Code, compute the cost of retrenching each person line by line with the provision for each, say whether prior permission is needed, and draft the notices.
06
A senior employee leaves for a competitor
The problem
The head of sales resigns and joins a competitor a week later. The client wants an injunction on the non-compete, and the question is what will actually hold. A restraint after employment is void under section 27 of the Contract Act, but confidentiality, non-solicitation and garden leave during the notice period are different questions.
The evidence that matters is on the laptop and in the email logs, and the client has sent a folder of four hundred exported files.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the contract, the policies the employee signed and the exit evidence, and separates the covenants that hold from the ones that will not. It searches the case law on each and quotes the paragraph, with a link to the judgment.
It builds the evidence table, such as what was downloaded and when, drafts the cease and desist notice for you to send, and drafts the suit and the interim application if the client wants to go to court.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Non-compete | Clause 14: 24 months after exit; unenforceable under s.27 Contract Act |
| Non-solicit | Clause 15: customers and staff for 12 months; arguable, with authorities |
| Confidentiality | Clause 12: enforceable, no time limit on trade secrets |
| Evidence | Customer list exported on the last working day, from the access log at p. 38 |
| Deliverables | Cease and desist notice, and a draft interim application on clauses 12 and 15 |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Read the employment contract, the signed policies and the exit evidence. Tell me which restrictive covenants are enforceable, with authority for each, set out the evidence of any breach with the page, and draft a cease and desist notice on the covenants that hold.
07
Answering a claim before the conciliation officer or tribunal
The problem
A dismissed worker raises an industrial dispute claiming reinstatement with back wages. The claim statement is long on grievance and short on dates, and the client's file is spread across HR, payroll and the plant.
The reply has to take every averment, raise the preliminary objections, such as whether the claimant is a worker at all, and build the record the employer will lead evidence on.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the claim statement against the employer's file and builds a paragraph-wise reply table: admitted, denied or not within knowledge, with the document supporting each. It tests the preliminary objections on the record, including the claimant's duties and wages for the worker question.
It drafts the reply in your format with the list of documents, and prepares the list of dates the tribunal will want.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Claim read | 31 paragraphs, 9 annexures, 2 in Hindi |
| Paragraph-wise reply | Admitted 7, denied 19, not within knowledge 5 |
| Preliminary objection | Claimant supervised a team and drew ₹42,000 a month, above the IR Code's ₹18,000 line for supervisors |
| Record | Appointment letter, three warning letters, enquiry file, F&F receipt |
| Deliverable | Reply in Word with list of dates and list of documents |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Read the claim statement and the employer's documents in this matter. Prepare a paragraph-wise reply table with the supporting document for each, test whether the claimant is a worker under the Industrial Relations Code, and draft the reply with a list of dates.
08
Appointment letters from an HR data sheet
The problem
HR sends a sheet of new joiners with salaries and dates and wants the letters the same day. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code requires a letter of appointment for every employee, and since the codes came into force each letter has to state wages on the Code on Wages definition, treat fixed-term staff on par, and say correctly whether the Standing Orders apply.
The data sheet is where the mistakes start: a salary built on a low basic, a supervisor treated as a worker, a joining date nobody has confirmed. Copying it into the template carries every one of them into a signed letter.
How Justis handles it
Attach the data sheet with your appointment letter template. Justis drafts one letter per joiner in Word on the template, choosing the template's options from each person's facts: permanent or fixed-term, worker or supervisory.
It computes the statutory wages figure for each person, flags where the sheet's numbers conflict with the codes, and leaves a missing fact bracketed and listed rather than invented.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Data sheet | 4 joiners at the Chakan and Sriperumbudur units |
| Wages | Quality engineer at ₹45,000: HRA and conveyance are ₹24,750, 55% of pay; the ₹2,250 above half is added back, so wages are ₹22,500, not the ₹13,500 basic payroll uses for PF |
| Fixed term | 18-month contract: letter states parity with permanent staff and pro rata gratuity after one year under section 53 of the Code on Social Security |
| Not a worker | Shift supervisor with wages of ₹21,600 who approves leave and overtime: outside 'worker' in section 2(zr) of the IR Code, so the conduct clause uses the Code of Conduct, not the Standing Orders |
| Missing | HR executive's joining date is blank in the sheet; left bracketed in her letter and listed for HR |
| Deliverable | Four appointment letters in Word and a one-page note of what HR must confirm or change |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Draft an appointment letter in Word for each joiner in this HR data sheet, on our APT-2026 template. Pick the permanent or fixed-term option and the worker or supervisory option from each person's facts, compute wages under section 2(y) of the Code on Wages from the salary break-up, flag anything in the sheet that conflicts with the labour codes, and leave missing facts bracketed with a list for HR.
09
Redlining a senior employee's separation agreement
The problem
A senior executive is leaving by mutual consent and her lawyer has sent back the separation agreement. The counter-draft reads reasonably until it is checked against the numbers: the gratuity is on the wrong base, the tax falls on the company, and the stock options include a grant that was never made.
The client's instructions are in a note from the CHRO, the facts are in HRMS and the ESOP plan, and the redline has to go back before the signing date.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the counter-draft against the client's instructions, the service and pay facts and the ESOP plan, and redlines the draft as tracked changes with a comment on each change giving the reason and the figure.
It recomputes each payment from the record, separates what the law requires from what is negotiable, and writes a short note for the CHRO on what is still open.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Gratuity | Clause 3.2 computes ₹12,92,308 on CTC of ₹3,20,000; on wages of ₹1,60,000 for 7 completed years it is ₹6,46,154 |
| Tax | Clause 3.4 makes every payment net of tax with the company grossing up; instructions are ₹18,00,000 gross, subject to TDS |
| Stock options | Clause 4.3 vests 10,000 more options, including 6,000 the committee never granted; instructions allow the 4,000 due on 01.12.2026 |
| Release | Clause 6 releases only the executive; redrafted as a mutual release with carve-outs for fraud and confidentiality |
| Also marked | Notice pay of ₹9,60,000 for a notice already served (cl. 3.1), laptop kept as a gift (cl. 8), confidentiality limited to 12 months (cl. 9), one-sided non-disparagement (cl. 7) |
| Deliverable | Tracked changes with comments on the counsel's .docx, and a half-page note for the CHRO |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Redline the employee's counter-draft of the separation agreement in this matter against the CHRO's instructions, the service and pay facts and the ESOP extract. Recompute every payment from the record, mark up the draft as tracked changes with a comment giving the reason and the figure for each change, and write a short note for the CHRO on what is still open.
10
Completing EPF nomination forms for new joiners
The problem
Every new joiner fills EPF Form 2, the nomination and declaration under the EPF Scheme and the Employees' Pension Scheme. HR collects family details at induction and someone types them into the form, usually exactly as the employee gave them.
A nomination that breaks the Scheme's rules is discovered only when the member dies and the family's claim is held up: a married member who nominates his brother, a minor nominee with no guardian, shares that do not add up.
How Justis handles it
Attach the blank Form 2 in Word and the induction declarations. Justis completes one form per joiner in the form's own layout, Parts A and B and the employer's certificate details, from the declarations.
It checks each nomination against paragraph 61 of the EPF Scheme and the family definitions, and marks what the employee must correct before signing instead of writing an invalid nomination into the form.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Forms | Form 2 (Revised) completed for 3 joiners in Word, Parts A and B and the employer's certificate details |
| Invalid nominee | Married operator nominates his brother for 100% of PF; with a family, a nomination outside it is invalid under paragraph 61, so Part A is left for him to re-nominate |
| Minor nominee | Engineer's son, born 03.02.2022, nominated for 50%; column 6 needs a guardian and none is named |
| Shares | HR executive's nomination gives her mother 60% and father 30%: 90% in all, to be corrected before signing |
| Pension | Part B lists spouse and children only; the unmarried joiner has no family for Part B, so the no-family certificate applies and her widow-pension nominee is recorded |
| Deliverable | Three completed forms in Word and a list of corrections for HR to take to each joiner |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Complete EPF Form 2 (Revised) in Word for each joiner in the induction declarations in this matter, using the blank form's own layout for Parts A and B and the employer's certificate. Check each nomination against paragraph 61 of the EPF Scheme, 1952 and the family definitions, do not write in a nomination that would be invalid, and give me a list of the corrections each joiner must make before signing.
11
Reading exit interviews for what HR missed
The problem
Exit interviews are filed and forgotten. HR reads them for attrition reasons, but the forms also record allegations about a supervisor, claims for unpaid overtime and an engineer leaving for a competitor with drawings on a personal drive.
Each of those is a legal issue with a clock running: a POSH complaint window, a wage claim that will reach the inspector, a confidentiality breach that needs a letter now.
How Justis handles it
Upload the month's exit interviews and run a tabular review. Each form is a row; the columns ask the same questions of every one: the reason for leaving, any allegation of harassment or unfair treatment, dues claimed, the next employer, company data still held, and whether the form is signed.
Every cell quotes the form. Sort by the issues column and ask Justis to draft the follow-up for the rows that need one.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Forms read | 4 exit interviews from September 2026 |
| Harassment | Quality inspector names her line supervisor for remarks and two requests in August to stay back alone; HR's remark covers transport only. She has not complained; the Internal Committee route is to be put to her |
| Dues | Maintenance technician says overtime was paid at the single rate: ₹5,750 short in each of July and August, ₹11,500 in all |
| Data | Design engineer joining a competitor holds fixture drawings FX-200 to FX-260 on a personal drive; HR marked the exit cleared |
| Unsigned | One form has no employee signature |
| Deliverable | Grid with the quote in every cell, and draft follow-up letters for the three issues |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Run a tabular review of every exit interview in this matter. For each, give the reason for leaving, any allegation of harassment, discrimination or unfair treatment with the person named, any dues or payments claimed with the amount, the next employer and whether it is a competitor, any company data or property the employee still holds, and whether the employee signed the form. Quote the form in every cell.
12
Checking the wage register before the inspector does
The problem
An Inspector-cum-Facilitator under the Code on Wages asks to see the wage, overtime and deduction registers for the last three months. The notice follows a workers' complaint, and the registers will be read for exactly what the complaint alleges.
The plant's payroll may have changed a practice to save cost without anyone asking legal, and by the inspection date the arrears and the explanation both need to be ready.
How Justis handles it
Justis reads the registers and payroll circulars against the Code on Wages and the OSH Code: the overtime rate, the date wages were paid, and the deductions as a share of each worker's wages. Each finding cites the register row and the provision.
It computes the arrears worker by worker, prepares the list of records the notice asks for with what is missing, and drafts the reply to the inspector for you to settle. The computation exports to Excel.
| What comes back | Example |
|---|---|
| Records read | August 2026 register for 8 workers, the overtime circular of 01.07.2026 and the inspector's notice |
| Overtime | 3 workers paid overtime at the single hourly rate under the July circular; section 27 of the OSH Code requires twice the rate of wages. August shortfall ₹11,525, ₹5,750 of it for one technician |
| Timing | August wages credited on 10.09.2026; under section 17 of the Code on Wages monthly wages are due before the end of 7 September |
| Deductions | One operator's deductions are ₹14,200 of ₹24,000, 59%: above the 50% limit in section 18, and the ₹2,000 damage recovery has no order on file |
| Inspection | Records for June to August to be produced on 12.10.2026; attendance in-out times and the advance schedule are not in the file |
| Deliverable | Arrears sheet in Excel, a compliance note for the client and a draft reply to the inspector |
Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.
Read the wage and overtime register, the payroll circular and the inspector's notice in this matter. Check the overtime rate, the date of payment and the deductions for each worker against the Code on Wages, 2019 and the OSH Code, 2020, citing the register row and the provision for every finding. Compute the arrears worker by worker in a spreadsheet, list the records the notice asks for and what is missing, and draft a reply to the inspector.
Make it repeatable
Each client or matter lives in its own workspace. Every contract, policy and letter you add is read as it lands, so the question asked at the next restructuring is answered across everything the client has sent, not the part someone remembered.
When the same work comes back, save it once. A playbook carries your positions on non-competes, notice pay or POSH; a workflow carries the steps for a contract audit or an exit; a skill carries a method, such as the way you compute retrenchment cost, and you can attach it to any message.
- A contract audit grid with the same questions for every new client
- A policies playbook applied to every handbook that comes in
- A POSH timetable built from the date of every complaint
- A retrenchment cost sheet with the provision behind each line
- Enquiry hearings, in English or Hindi, transcribed into the file
