labour laws

As one labour law replaces four existing laws, will something be lost in the fine print?

The proposed Labour Code on Wages Bill 2015 demonstrates how workers' safeguards could be eroded by proposed legislations.

A major restructuring of India’s labour laws is underway. Over the next few months, the National Democratic Alliance government aims to merge over 30 labour laws into four statutes. The first of the proposed new laws, the Labour Code on Wages Bill 2015, is currently being finalised after the Ministry of Labour and Employment invited public suggestions on it last month.

Ministry officials claim that the changes are needed to reflect changes in technology and because they will help create more jobs. In addition to the laws on wages, other legislations on the cards relate to industrial relations, social security for workers and work conditions, these sofficials aid.

But several trade unions, including the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh's Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh, have opposed the thrust of the new laws, saying that they will undermine workers' rights.

That contention would seem to be borne out by the draft of the Labour Code on Wages, which replace four existing laws – the Minimum Wages Act 1948, the Payment of Wages Act 1936, the Payment of Bonus Act 1965, and the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976. While a single broad law that replaces multiple laws on the same subject may help rationalise contradictions in existing laws, several of which were framed before India's independence, what is being lost in the fine print?

States will fix minimum wage rates
Under the Minimum Wages Act 1948, both central and state government can fix minimum wage rates in various sectors, with 45 sectors in the central sphere and 1,679 areas under states' jurisdiction.

But the draft Labour Code on Wages Bill restricts the power to fix minimum wages to just the state governments.

In a submission on the draft Bill, the Working Peoples Charter Secretariat – a group of trade unionists, labour activists and lawyers – have questioned whether this will create a situation where central government employees in different states would end up with different minimum wages, which would violate the constitutional provisions on equality. The provision would drive down wages to workers' disadvantage, leading to a race to the bottom among states.

The law also skips over the most significant wage discussion of the last five years: establishing a statutory National Floor Level Minimum Wage. State governments would be free to set the minimum wage rate higher than this basic wage, but not lower than it. Those supporting a statutory national floor wage say this could help ensure universal minimum wage coverage.

“A statutory National Floor Level Minimum Wage has long been the practice even in industrialised countries such as the US,” said Dr Ravi Srivastava, an economist who was part of the National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector, set up by the Congress-led government which recommended the implementation of a statutory national floor wage. A single floor rate all across the country would be understood by all and enforced better, he said. But since the wage boards of several states are in disarray. “It is not clear what will improve by placing the onus to set wage rates on states”, he said.

Virjesh Upadhyay, General Secretary of Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh, RSS's trade union wing, said that if states are going to decide all wage rates, it makes little sense to have a national law at all. “If there are bad practices and non-compliance, the government cannot make them disappear by simply removing them from the ambit of the law,” said Upadhyay.

Tapan Sen, General Secretary of the Centre of Indian Trade Unions, affiliated with the Communist Party of India  Marxist), saidthe draft bill should consider the recommendations of the Indian Labour Conference and Supreme Court orders to fix the minimum wage taking into consideration need-based criteria, including food, housing and clothing.

Weakening of Equal Remuneration Act
The Bill proposes to replace the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 with a single provision prohibiting discrimination on ground of sex “in the matter of wages; under the same employer, in respect of work of same or similar nature”.

While this sounds good, there are concerns that the existing laws actually offer wider protection. The original Act prohibits discrimination not just in matter of wages, but in recruitment of workers on the basis of their gender. It also provides for an advisory committee, one half of which consists of women members, to advise governments on increasing work opportunities for women and allows governments to appoint labour officers for hearing complaints.

As a single line provision replaces the nine-page Act, all the above features are missing from the draft Bill.

No more Inspectors, only facilitators
In a first, the Labour Code on Wages Bill proposes to replace Labour Inspectors, often portrayed as a burdensome remnant of the Inspector Raj, with “Facilitators”. The Bill proposes their role will be to “supply information and advice to employers and workers concerning the most effective means of complying with the provisions of this code”.

Dheeraj Kumar, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Labour and Employment, said that the Facilitators will work “to assist the work of industrial establishments and factories and to provide guidance to establishments”.  Under the Payment of Wages Act, non-compliance with inspection norms, and failure to provide adequate facility for inspection is punishable through a fine. But the Labour Code on Wages Bill proposes that before initiating prosecution proceedings, the Facilitators will give an opportunity to establishments to comply with the law by issuing a written direction. If the employer complies with the direction within stipulated time, the Facilitator will not initiate prosecution.

This would seem to remove the ability of the law to deter offenders, legal expert Usha Ramanathan noted in a recent article. “The meek and gentle treatment of offenders is at least half a universe away from fostering respect for the law that is being mooted."

Further, the Working Peoples Charter Secretariat has pointed out that the Bill may weaken enforcement mechanisms. This is because the powers given to labour commissioners to exercise statutory powers have been replaced by “one or more authorities” without specifying the exact nature of these authorities.

Restricting rights of trade unions
The proposed law does away with Section 23(2) of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 which permits trade unions to legally access audited accounts and balance-sheets of employers. This leaves workers with no possibility of scrutinising the financial claims of the employer, according to the Working People's Charter.

Reduced scope of Payment of Bonus Act
The draft Bill expands the exemptions under section 16 of Payment of Bonus Act for newly set-up establishments. Establishments could forgo paying bonuses to employees merely by changing their location, management, name or ownership.

“This draft degrades existing labour standards, condones widespread violation of labour laws and wage theft. This will only exacerbate the poverty of the working people,” said Ashim Roy, vice-president National Trade Union Initiative and member, Working Peoples Charter Secretariat. “The draft undermines trade union powers’ right to information, and collective bargaining for profit-sharing that is essential for a democratic and just nation.”

Not surprisingly, industry has welcomed the Bill. The All India Organisation of Employers said that it has asked the Ministry not to link the amendments to the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with the other three Acts related to wages, stating that bonus is an annual payment linked to profits and is not linked directly to daily or monthly wages.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.