People's Democracy

M K Pandhe

THE thirty seventh session of the Indian Labour Conference (ILC), held in New Delhi on May 18-19, brought together all the trade unions to oppose the NDA central government’s policy of following the path of globalisation and privatisation and its attempts to introduce anti-labour bills in parliament. The conference concluded without making any major recommendations concerning the policies of globalisation and its impact on the working class. The trade unions refused to accept the government’s naked support to globalisation at the cost of the workers’ sufferings and the country’s security.

One week before the ILC, the prime minister invited the leaders of central trade unions to discuss the issues agitating the minds of the workers. All the trade unions opposed the economic policies of the government of India and the attitude of the NDA government to unilaterally take major policy decisions without consulting the trade unions. The central trade unions pointed out that the government has regular dialogue with the employers’ organisations but the prime minister had no time to meet the trade unions. They strongly objected the announcement made by the union finance minister in his budget speech regarding amendments to the Industrial Disputes Act and the Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, without any discussion with trade unions. These two bills, taken together, will drastically cut the regular jobs of workers and increase the number of low paid contract workers all over India.

The central trade unions also demanded adoption of a comprehensive law for agricultural workers, enlargement of social security measures including unemployment insurance, amendment to the Bonus Act and removal of ceilings in the Act, restoration of 12 per cent rate of interest on provident fund (PF) and consultation with unions on all policy matters concerning national economy, industry and labour. The prime minister had indicated that would react on these issues in his inaugural address to the ILC.

PM CHOOSES CONFRONTATION

However, the prime minister’s inaugural address displayed an approach of total confrontation vis-à-vis the trade union movement. Though he did not read out his speech, his oral presentation was worse than the written speech. Instead of agreeing to discuss the proposed amendments to the labour laws, he stated: "I urge all of you to view the proposed amendments to the labour laws in the broader perspective of how we can make our economy grow faster at a sustainable rate of 8 to 9 per cent.…… They seek to protect Indian industries and business by enabling them to become more competitive, more profitable, grow faster, and hence employ more people both directly and indirectly." He observed that employment has grown and poverty has been down in the last 10 years. He said: "I do not know if any worker has lost job because of globalisation."

He further asserted: "To term these labour reforms as anti-labour, as some people are doing, is misleading. They are pro-labour because they are pro-employment."

The trade unions, however, were not prepared to accept these observations because the practical experience of 10 years of the so called economic reforms shows that they have resulted in more unemployment and downsizing of manpower. The so called voluntary retirement scheme (VRS) has become the key word for every undertaking, in both public and private sectors. The prime minister’s claim that poverty has declined due to economic "reforms" had takers only in the employers camp; all trade unions asserted that poverty has gone up due to globalisation and liberalisation.

In his oral speech, Vajpayee brushed aside all objections and reiterated that privatisation would be carried forward despite the trade unions’ opposition.

The unions unanimously observed that India has not benefited from its membership of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) as our exports did not grow much. On the other hand, India has become a dumping ground and therefore our industry and agriculture are in a serious crisis that is bringing misery to industrial and agricultural workers, peasants and even many owners. Some unions demanded that India should come out of the WTO. The prime minister defended India’s remaining in the WTO and said that such hardships are to be tolerated to woo foreign capital.

The prime minister called upon the trade unions to "reform" themselves and accept the economic "reforms" of the NDA government. He categorically stated that the government would implement all international commitments under the WTO regime, and there will be no review in the matter.

The prime minister was visibly annoyed with the speech of BMS general secretary Hasmukhbhai Dave who, while speaking in the conference, pointed out that the working class of India was a victim of the government’s economic policies. He talked of large-scale closure of units and growing unemployment, and termed the government’s policies as anti-labour, anti-industry and anti-nation. He characterised the arbitrary reduction in the rate of PF interest by the government as loot of the workers’ money. In the end, he demanded a complete review of these policies to ensure growth of employment and elimination of poverty in the country. In his speech, the prime minister ignored all these observations.

The CITU was represented at the conference by M K Pandhe (general secretary), T K Rengarajan (vice-president) and Chittabrata Majumdar (secretary) as delegates and S K Baksi (vice-president), A Dakshi (secretary) and Badal Saroj (general secretary, MP state committee of the CITU).

The conference had a 3-point agenda for consideration and the delegations were divided into 3 commissions: 1) On the impact of globalisation on working class, industry and employment; 2) On social security system for the workers; and 3) On the tripartite consultation with social partners.

Pandhe, while participating in the general debate, criticised the prime minister’s approach as anti-working class. He noted that 10 years have elapsed after the commencement of economic reforms, but the government of India has not made any objective review of the impact of globalisation on the country. Multinational corporations from western advanced countries are capturing Indian market, gobbling up of our industrial base.

The CITU representatives criticised the private companies for the non-performing assets (NPA) of the banks as these companies are using bank money to purchase the undertakings at throwaway prices. They condemned the scandalous BALCO and Modern Food deals that have harmed the national interests. After withdrawal of quantitative restrictions from April 1 this year, our agriculture is facing a serious crisis while foreign goods are flooding the Indian market.

The CITU attacked the government’s decision to privatise the defence production industries which threatens our national security. The union labour ministry is making tripartite machinery defunct by not convening the meetings of many of the committees for several years.

The CITU welcomed the growing unity among the trade unions as reflected during the Maharashtra bandh on April 25, when even the constituents of the NDA like BMS and Shiv Sena joined the strike against the economic policies of the central government. This unity, they said, would culminate in the nationwide unity of all the trade unions and big protest actions would emerge all over the country against the policies of globalisation.

Representatives of the BMS, INTUC, HMS, AITUC, UTUC and UTUC (LS) criticised the policies of privatisation and economic reforms and condemned the unilateral step of the NDA government to amend the labour laws to the detriment of the interests of the working class. The employers’ representatives, however, welcomed these policies and demanded immediate amendments to the labour laws. While trade unions wanted that the bill on workers’ participation in management be passed without any delay, the employers wanted that workers’ participation in management cannot be introduced in view of the policies of globalisation and hence it should not be brought through a statute, it should be purely voluntary in character. The representatives of the state governments were divided. Some were critical of globalisation while others strongly advocated it.

After the general debate, the conference divided into three groups to discuss the agenda items separately. From the CITU, Chittabrata Majumdar and Badal Saroj joined the group on globalisation. T K Rengarajan and A Dakshi were in the group on social security while M K Pandhe and S K Baksi were in the group on tripartite consultation. Dakshi was a member of the drafting committee on social security.

The drafting committee’s conclusions were drawn in a hurry. The members of the group did not have copies of the draft recommendations so that they could give their comments in depth. The government was in extreme hurry to finish the conference in only a day and a half though there were important issues for discussion. Since the time was not sufficient to draw definite conclusions, the conference acquired the character of just a debating society.

The conclusions were drafted in such a manner that even the members of the drafting committee were not clear about the final position of the conclusions. There were sharp differences among the workers’ and employers’ representatives and practically no agreement could be arrived at on any of the issues. At times, it appeared that the conclusions were drawn by officials in advance with some minor changes made at the eleventh hour in the light of the discussion. There was systematic attempt to ignore the criticisms made. The resolutions were in no way conclusive. It is futile to think that issues of such nationwide importance could be concluded in so short a time.

There was no discussion on the Action Taken Report about the decisions of the last ILC since practically no worthwhile action was taken by the labour ministry on any of the issues. This was a mockery of tripartism in India.

On the plea of arriving at consensus, vague conclusions were drawn which did not have any specific meaning. Naturally such conclusions do not get implemented and the situation remains unchanged. The ILC thus becomes a fruitless exercise without any perceptible change in the situation. Even though trade unions pointed out these facts, the attitude of the union labour ministry continues to remains unchanged. The ILC has thus been reduced to a mere ritual by the union labour ministry.

As expected, the concluding session of the ILC was a sheer farce. Trade unions protested at non-availability of the written drafts of conclusions for the delegates. These were only read by government officials for adoption. A number of suggestions given by trade unions in the group meetings were not incorporated in the drafts. Delegates were asked by the union labour minister to give their dissent or suggestions in writing, to be considered later on. This non-serious approach to drawing conclusions was opposed by trade unions. But the chairman was in a hurry to conclude the conference somehow.

Regarding the draft on the impact of globalisation, the CITU rejected the basic approach which upholds globalisation and seeks to give some relief to workers within the globalisation framework. The CITU’s viewpoint was supported by other trade unions who stated that the draft in the present form could not be amended; it should be totally withdrawn. But the employers fully endorsed the draft since it in essence strengthened their point of view.

The union labour minister concluded the ILC without even making any concluding remarks. It marked the failure of the government and the employers to force the trade unions into submission. What happened was the opposite. The unions foiled the bid to force globalisation down their throat.

Trade unions have to seriously ponder whether attending such conferences serves the purpose of developing a genuine tripartite machinery in India. The union labour ministry has made most of the tripartite committees defunct, while those which meet do not transact any meaningful business suited to the interests of the working class.

As the prime minister openly adopted a confrontationist attitude in his speech in the ILC, the trade union movement in India must give it a fitting reply by challenging the NDA government’s anti-national and anti-people polices. A countrywide united action by all trade unions can alone send a correct message to those who seek to surrender the economic sovereignty of the country to the World Bank-IMF-WTO trio. The working class of India will certainly respond magnificently if the trade union leadership in India issues such a clarion call to them.