8/13/2019 For a Minimum Living Wage
1/3
COMMENTARY
DECember 28, 2013 vol xlvIiI no 52 EPW Economic & PoliticalWeekly12
For a Minimum Living WageWorkers March to Parliament
Srinivasan Ramani
On 12 December, nearly a lakh
of workers predominantly
from the unorganised sector
marched to Parliament to
demand a minimum living wage,
social security measures and
regularisation of work. The call
had been given by trade unions
across the political spectrum and
the participants came from all
parts of the country. However,
mainstream and popular media
remained indifferent and ignored
the rally, as always.
Nearly one lakh workers marched
from the Ramlila Maidan to
Parliament on 12 December in
New Delhi. The rally was the culmination
of a year-long campaign by a number of
trade unions and included a 48-hour
national strike in February 2013. The
workers were demanding higher mini-
mum wages, social security, and imple-
mentation of labour laws among a charter
of 10 demands.1The trade unions repre-
sented included the Bharatiya Mazdoor
Sangh (BMS-affiliated to the Sangh
parivar), the Indian National Trade Union
Congress (INTUC the labour arm of the
Congress Party), the All-India Trade
Union Congress (AITUC associated with
the Communist Party of India (CPI)), the
Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITUof
the Communist Party of India (Marxist)),
and the Hindustan Mazdoor Sangh (HMS)
along with a number of others associated
with other left and regional parties. Themobilisation was dominated by the
leftist unions which have periodically
called such rallies over the years to pro-
test against the exploitation of the work-
ing population resulting from the centres
economic reforms.
The first set of demands was put for-
ward by the trade unions jointly in Sep-
tember 2009. In the three years between
then and September 2011, two generalstrikes were called and a total set of 10
demands were again presented to the
government. All these actions however
met with complete indifference from the
centre. The unions then called a 48-hour
general strike from 20 to 21 February 2013.
This time around there was an immediate
reaction and the union representatives
were invited for talks a week before the
scheduled strike. A three-member minis-
terial committee to be headed by Defence
Minister A K Antony was also set up.
The Antony Committee met the central
trade union representatives in May but
only sought more time to come up with
recommendations apropos the demands.
At this juncture, the trade unions decided
that they had to go ahead with plans for
a nationwide mobilisation and rally in
New Delhi in December.
Rally with a Difference
The 12 December rally was qualitativelydifferent perhaps its mobilisation from
across various parts of the countryEmail:[email protected]
8/13/2019 For a Minimum Living Wage
2/3
COMMENTARY
Economic & PoliticalWeekly EPW DECember 28, 2013 vol xlvIiI no 52 13
(from Kashmir to Kanyakumari and
from Tripura to Gujarat as CITUgeneral
secretary A K Padmanabhan put it) was
most representative of Indias labour force
than other similar rallies in the capital. A
large number of workers men and wom-
en gathered at the venue came from the
huge informal sector that characterisesIndias labour economy. From hawkers
to contract workers and part-time health
and sanitation workers to those engaged
in small businesses and trading enter-
prises, the composition of the rally was
distinct. Generally such rallies are domi-
nated by workers from the organised
manufacturing and tertiary sectors.
Padmanabhan argued that,
the largest number of members mobilised in
all trade unions are from the unorganisedsector. There is a general tendency to state
that the central trade unions are only con-
nected to the organised sector. But 65% of
the members of our own organisation, the
CITUconsist of unorganised workers. I think
there is an image created by the media that
we are seeking to be representative. This is
not true as we are trying to mobilise han-
dloom workers, sanitation workers, and
domestic helpers among others for a very
long time.
One reason for the huge presence of
informal sector workers was that manyof the 10 demands in the charter related
to them. The immediate and most press-
ing demand was that of fixing the mini-
mum wage to not less than Rs 10,000
per month linked with the consumer
price index and an amendment to the
Minimum Wages Act to ensure universal
coverage irrespective of schedules. The
general opinion was that the amount
had to be the minimum living wage
across the country considering price rise
and living conditions. The demand for
assured pension for the entire popula-
tion (and a social security act) also
found resonance with employees in the
informal sector. Part-time workers in the
National Rural Health Mission (NRHM),
domestic helpers and accredited social
health activists (ASHAs) had enthusiasti-
cally taken part in the agitations in order
to secure pension provisions among
other demands. The NRHMworkers also
mentioned that they had been summarilydismissed from their jobs without notice
and sought reinstatement.
The rally, in sum, featured workers
from a number of different sectors.
AITUCleader and CPInational secretary,
Amarjeet Kaur pointed to participants
at the rally from the postal services, the
railways, defence, petroleum, telecom-
munications, air transport and services,
construction, the mid-day meal sch eme,ASHAs, anganwadi workers, domestic
workers, agricultural workers and fish
workers, among others.
The diversity in participation was
reflected in the specificity of demands
and concerns among each sector. If the
HMSunion members working in pharma-
ceutical plants in Gurgaon, Haryana
were incensed with rising living costs,
lack of adequate compensation, non-
regularisation of their employment and
long working hours, the CITU affiliated
engineering workers from Tamil Nadu
were equally angry about such issues.
Part-time women employees of the NRHM
sought regularisation of their work and
withdrawal of the practice of sudden
termination. Domestic helpers sought
social security; hawkers complained
about unending police harassment and
their need for licences, hoping that a bill
being discussed in Parliament on their
behalf would soon be passed.Trade union representatives were not
only exercised about these demands,
they also face challenges as organisers
in the present-day globalised economy.
A CITUrepresentative from Tamil Nadu,
who belonged to an engineering work-
ers union, acknowledged the new diffi-
culties. With multinational employers
having the ability to coerce governments
to stymie labour unrest with the threat
of shifting their factories elsewhere, it
was incumbent upon workers to show
transnational/trans-federal unity, he said.
Last year, a joint strike of workers based
in Tamil Nadu and South Korea fore-
grounding concerns with factory man-
agement was one endeavour that showed
how they could rise up to the challenge,
he said.
A BMS trade union representative
(based in Uttar Pradesh) said that the
union was putting pressure on its sister
organisation, the Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP) to address worker concerns and
to evolve pro-labour and poor-friendly
policies. Unity with leftist trade unions
was not simply out of compulsion,
he affirmed.
Empty Promises
The trade union leaders were peeved
at the governments response to their
agitations. Prime Minister ManmohanSingh had in May, after attending the
Indian Labour Conference and agreeing
with the justness of the demands by the
trade unions, promised to meet with the
leaders within a month after consulta-
tions with the Antony Committee. The
meeting was yet to take place, Padmana-
bhan said. The UPA government has
shown more alacrity in addressing the
concerns of big business heads, and has
generally shown little interest in being
briefed directly by labour leaders let
alone seeking inputs from them for policy.
Following the large rally, a delegation
of trade union representatives met the
defence minister and handed over a
memorandum with the demands and
also sought speedier implementation of
the committees recommendations. They
later met the prime minister and were
told that the finance minister would con-
sider their demands, in particular the
Rs 10,000 minimum wage issue.
Media Indifference
Following the usual and familiar pat-
tern, popular media ignored the massive
workers rally in total contrast to the dis-
proportionate coverage provided to even
the smallest protest rallies. Obviously,
the angst of the workers so visible at this
and previous rallies failed to attract the
attention of this media.
New Delhis Jantar Mantar is well
known as Indias protest zone rather
than as the location for architectural
astronomy as it was historically meant to
be. It is here that discontents of various
kinds get expressed through speeches,
fasts, agitations, and marches. Media
attention is always fixated on this or that
agitation which takes place at this venue;
sometimes disproportionate attention
and hyperbole is provided as the Anna
Hazare-led campaign for a Jan Lokpal
Bill showed.Even as lakhs of workers gathered in
central Delhi culminating in the rally
8/13/2019 For a Minimum Living Wage
3/3
COMMENTARY
DECember 28, 2013 vol xlvIiI no 52 EPW Economic & PoliticalWeekly14
at Jantar Mantar, the media seemed
oblivious. Barring honourable excep-
tions in the print media, an otherwise
hyperactive electronic media remained
completely silent about the worker un-
rest. In fact, the foreign press paid more
heed to a similar workers rally in Delhi
in February 2011 compared to theIndian media.2
Leftist trade union activists men-
tioned that the increased and diverse
participation in worker protests and
the popularity of their demands was
due to the impact of neo-liberal reforms,
which had hurt a large section of the
working population. That did not neces-
sarily mean that the participants in
the rally were ideologically conscious
about neo-liberal policy and bias in
policymaking. A reversal of neo-liberalism
because of popular opposition was pos-
sible only if that gap between realisa-
tion of outcomes and that of policy was
breached, they argued. But this task of
explaining policy to the people was a
difficult task for the trade unions alone
to shoulder and they needed media cov-erage and civil society support for their
cause. With an unsympathetic media
dominated by special interests who
allow coverage only for some liberal
causes, the central trade unions burden
is that much higher.
Notes
1 The demands included (1) Urgent measuresfor containing price-rise through universalisa-tion of public distribution system and banning
speculative trade in commodity market,(2) Containing unemployment through con-crete measures for employment generation,(3) Strict enforcement of all basic labourlaws without any exception or exemptionand stringent punitive measures for violationof labour laws, (4) Universal social securitycover for all workers, (5) Minimum wages ofnot less than Rs 10,000 per month with provi-sions of indexation, (6) Assured pension for
the entire working population, (7) Stoppage ofdisinvestment in Centra l/State PSUs, (8) Stop-page of contractorisation in permanent peren-nial work and payment of same wage andbenefits for contract workers as regular work-ers for same and similar work, (9) Removal ofall ceilings on payment and eligibility of bo-nus, provident fund; increase the quantum ofgratuity, (10) Compulsory registration of tradeunions within a period of 45 days and immedi-ate ratification of ILO Conventions nos 87 and98 quoted verbatim from a memorandumpresented by the central trade unions to thegovernment.
2 See Medias (Lack of) Coverage of WorkersRally in Delhi, http://www.pragoti.in/node/4300, accessed on 13 December 2013.
Top Related