After Bharat Bandh, Unions are no closer to achieving their 12-point charter of demands

The one-day nationwide strike called by central trade unions to protest against the economic policies of the central government is nothing but a show of strength by a clutch of outfits devoid of the organisational capacity to uplift the country’s huge working class population. Though the strike had some impact, the unions will be the first to admit that they are no closer to achieving their 12-point charter of demands. While the losses from the stalled economic activity will temporarily singe the central and state governments, private establishments and daily wage-earners, in the larger scheme of things and over a long period of time, such one-day strikes limited to small geographical pockets and a few sectors register only as minor blips. The governments are willing to cope with the losses and move on, which explains the lack of penal action against the striking workers or union leaders, and the unions are content at having made their presence felt, symbolically. The unions are demanding enforcement of labour laws, withdrawal of amendments to labour laws, universal social security cover, minimum wages not less than Rs15,000, abandoning of disinvestment, rejection of contractisation of labour, and compulsory registration of trade unions.

Many of these demands are genuine but it is unlikely that the unions, in their present sterile condition, can extract any worthwhile concessions. Their presence is limited to a small fraction of the working class and they can hardly claim to represent all workers. They have hardly been able to make inroads in unorganised sectors like construction, mining and small-scale manufacturing which have seen a spurt in employment opportunities since the 1990s. The decline of industrial activity since the 1970s could be attributed to several reasons like technological changes, militant trade unionism and globalisation, but in the neo-liberal paradigm, governments have projected India’s labour laws as the sole reason for the stunted growth of factories and the mushrooming of the unorganised sector. Guided by this idea, Rajasthan has initiated amendments in its Industrial Disputes Act, Contract Labour Act, and Factories Act, to allow for easier worker retrenchment, hiring of contract workers, and restricting trade union activities. But there is no evidence that industrial output has increased in Rajasthan in 2014-15 as a result of the reforms.

Now the Centre is following suit with similar amendments which will make hire-and-fire the norm. The Factories Act Amendment Bill proposes to double the minimum number of workers in a factory to 20 for units with power and 40 for non-power backed units. So units with less than this statutory number of workers would not be considered as factories and in one legislative stroke their workers would be pushed into the unorganised sector. Such a policy would not have been so bad if there were plentiful job opportunities for the taking. Unfortunately, that is not the case; most industrial workers fall in the semi-skilled category and would be hard-pressed to find an opening in the depressed job market, and the increased competition. There are two conflicting ideologies at play here — one which believes that hire-and-fire will encourage industrialists to take risks, purse expansion plans and hire without fear of labour laws; and the unions which believe job security is of paramount importance in this uncertain environment. Strikes have helped workers get their due when they are clear about their aims and objectives. But in this one-day nationwide strike, there is a hotchpotch of various demands without a clear roadmap on how to achieve them. The political fight over the Land Acquisition Act amendment propelled farmers back to the centrestage of national discourse. The proposed labour law amendments offer the unions a chance to persuade political parties to pay heed to workers’ issues. They can do this not just by launching strikes but by adopting multiple innovative strategies.