Engagement models
Most relationships begin with a review and continue as a monthly engagement. You are not required to move payroll software, change accountants, or commit to a package before we have looked at your actual position.
Ongoing monthly compliance
We hold the statutory calendar for you: monthly EPF and ESIC contributions, Professional Tax and Labour Welfare Fund filings, and the registers that go with them. Most clients start here.
One-time compliance review
An independent assessment of your current position — registrations, recent filings, employee data and registers — producing a written view of where you stand and what needs attention.
Multi-establishment management
For employers operating across districts, we manage each establishment against its own jurisdiction and reconcile the employee population across all of them.
Notice and inspection support
When a notice arrives, we reconstruct the relevant records, assess what the position actually is, and help you respond from documented evidence.
What we ask for at the start
An assessment is only as good as the data behind it. To review your position properly we need the following. Where you do not have something, that is itself a finding worth knowing.
- Current registrations and certificates you hold
- Most recent EPF and ESIC filings, with acknowledgements
- Employee master with dates of joining and exit
- Payroll data for the recent months under review
- Status of Professional Tax and Labour Welfare Fund
- Any notices, queries or inspection correspondence received
We document what we file, and why
When a question is raised eighteen months after a filing, the answer has to come from a record — not from recollection. For every material conclusion we reach, we keep the source behind it: which file, which sheet, which row, which figure, and what rule or threshold was applied at the time.
We also draw a line that matters. Finding an inconsistency between two datasets is a statement about the data. It is not a statement that a violation has occurred. Where the position depends on facts we do not own, we say so and ask rather than assert.
Client outcomes — pending verified material
This section is intentionally empty. Client names, testimonials, headcounts, years of service and outcome statistics have not been published here, because none have been supplied and verified for publication.
To complete this page, GHR should supply client references that consent to being named, or anonymised case studies describing a real compliance problem and how it was resolved. Once verified, they will appear here with attribution.
How to evaluate a compliance consultant
These questions apply equally to us and to anyone else you are considering. A provider that cannot answer them plainly is worth a second look.
Will you review my data before filing, or file whatever I send?
Filing is clerical. Reviewing is where errors are caught.
Can you show me which records support a figure you filed?
Without provenance, a position cannot be defended later.
How do you verify current thresholds and rates?
Statutory limits and rates are revised. Working from memory is how stale figures get filed.
What happens if an inspection notice arrives?
The answer should be a process, not a reassurance.
Who owns my records, and what do I get if we part ways?
Your data should never be hostage to the relationship.
Will you tell me when you are not certain?
A consultant who never says "I need to check" is not checking.
Start with a review, not a contract
Tell us your establishment type, headcount and which registrations you currently hold. We will confirm what applies to you before you commit to anything.