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:srini@epw.in

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.