KERALA: TRADE UNIONISM |
Men (Not) At Work
|
Idling too earns them wages. It's a nasty relapse of an old Left habit.
|
|
|
John Mary |
|
**
The trade union movement in Kerala has largely thrived on blessings from the Communist parties. |
|
|
|
|
|
| "Which working class rights classifies nokku kooli? Need we support unjust demands by trade unions?" Pinarayi Vijayan, CPI(M) leader |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ironically, the ruling CPI(M)-led front in the state today is facing problems from the very institution it nurtured. Worker's unions have crossed all limits by making it a practice to demand money for work they are not doing. They call it 'nokku kooli', or wages for (just) looking on. While this practice has only picked up ever since the Left came to power, its latest victim is the Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) |
|
|
|
in Thiruvananthapuram.
It was a norm till the other day: vehicles that brought in machinery, including sophisticated equipment, to VSSC, the Indian Space Research Organisation's lead centre for launch vehicles, had to stop half a km away from its gate. They can enter only after the lorry drivers paid the union leaders nokku kooli. The government eventually saw the ludicrous aspect of it—state industry minister Elamaram Kareem, himself a trade unionist, intervened and stopped it.
There is no guarantee, though, that it won't be revived. "I just can't wish away all this," ISRO chief G. Madhavan Nair told Outlook. "My only prayer is that they spare the prestigious Indian Institute of Space Sciences and Technology (close to the Liquid Propulsion Systems Centre at nearby Valiyamala) for which work is to start next month. The problem is it has to be completed in 12 months and any wrangling by the labour could either delay the project or jack up the civil costs by 20 to 30 per cent."
Whether it be the airport, hospitals, IT, construction or the tourism sector, nokku kooli has become a ubiquitous menace. It is rampant in the loading/ unloading sector—be it at strategic facilities or power projects, be it in the Gulf money-fed northern town of Kozhikode or the booming port city of Kochi. Head-loaders, who deem all loading/ unloading anywhere in the state to be their prerogative, simply insist on a cut even if the load is too heavy or sensitive for them to handle. The 'we won't work but you still pay' principle rules.
The unethical practice has earned Kerala the dubious reputation of being hostile to investors. Already, labour is expensive in Kerala and nokku kooli raises the costs further. Recently, in one of his most candid admissions, Communist Party of India (Marxist) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan said "wages are for those who do their work and not for those who just hang around." Pinarayi, a known foe of the more old-school figure of CM V.S. Achuthanandan, questioned how a certain section thought nokku kooli was part of its right. "While unions are progressive in their slogans, they must examine why they don't practise what they preach."
Pinarayi's blunt words invited a flurry of reactions—for and against. Opposition leader and former CM Oommen Chandy termed it "belated wisdom". All the same, he welcomed it since it "augurs well for Kerala". The head-load workers are hardly amused, although no one has protested.
There's support for Pinarayi from within the Left. |
Says finance minister Thomas Issac: "Instead of questioning his motives, we must look at the wisdom in what Pinarayi says. " Adds cooperation minister G. Sudhakaran: "Trade unions, which had been set up to end the exploitation by the monopolists and to work for people's welfare, are now looting the masses."
Nokku kooli often enjoys a quasi-statutory status. The wages list finalised by the Head-load Workers Welfare Fund Board in an industrial zone in Kochi shows Rs 200 per load of ready-mix concrete. This, when the entire process is machine-driven. Here, nokku kooli gets into the statute book. Similarly, one tipper load (lorry which can mechanically tip the load) fetches Rs 15 for the union. At least 1,000 tipper lorries are at work in the Vallarpadom container trans-shipment terminal site in Kochi. Yet another example was in Idukki. Power minister A.K. Balan publicly censured head-load workers who took Rs 3,000 each as nokku kooli while cranes installed some 14 turbines, each weighing 80 tonnes, atop 120-ft towers, for a windmill farm.
Even as Pinarayi spoke of not tolerating the unethical practice, three containers with pvc pipes from Chandigarh were stranded outside Thiruvananthapuram. Reason: non-payment of (exorbitant) wages. It took a nearly 10-day wait and an intervention by the labour officer for the unloading to start—but only after the container drivers paid Rs 4,000. But the same work gets done for a fraction of it in, say, Chandigarh.
Now that a sharp political consensus has evolved on ending unethical labour practices, especially when the Left coalition is in power, there's a flash of hope. There's not been a whimper of protest against Pinarayi's outburst. The big question is the motive behind it: is it because his party is in power that he wants improved labour ethic or is it because of the impending Lok Sabha elections? If Pinarayi wanted to end nokku kooli, a mere fiat from the akg Centre, the CPI(M)'s state headquarters, would have done the trick, say his detractors. But Pinarayi brushes aside the sceptics. The CPI(M), he feels, can no longer be blind to what is going on.
Posts
4 comments:
Unemployment wage is not ‘nokku kooli’
There is a lot of misconception on the practice of workers demanding wage in lieu of lost employment consequent to introduction of practices that displace labour.
During initial stages of industrialisation, workers responded to the introduction of machine by breaking such machines.
When agitations to protect employment and wages became intense, in course of time, capitalist world struck a compromise.
Full employment is now recognised as desirable economic goal. At the same time, unemployment or temporary unemployment is indistinguishable from the capitalist system. It was in this context that the civilised societies agreed on compromise to pay unemployment wage to workers during the periods of temporary unemployment. This compromise was later codified by ILO through various Conventions and Recommendations that aim at full employment, constant consultation with all stake holders including workers, social security benefits to workers during temporary and even permanent periods of involuntary unemployment.
Unfortunately, India – which is a founding member of ILO – has not ratified several Conventions by codifying them into law. ILO is the only international organisation that was established long before even the U.N. and it is the only surviving forum of League of Nations. ILO is far more democratic – workers’ organisations, employers’ organisations and the Governments jointly discuss and agree on labour codes that are acceptable to all the parties through consensus.
In spite of global recognition for payment of unemployment wage, in India there is no law for paying such social security benefit to workers.
In Kerala, organised labour struck a compromise with employers. The employers whose policy or their machines, when they displace labour, such employers agreed to compensate the affected workers. It is a payment paid directly by the employers to workers.
In certain pockets, some benamies or intermediaries may be snatching this payment. It is highly deplorable. If others usurp on workers rights and cheat labour such anti-social elements need to be dealt with firmly.
It is bad to sarcastically term as ‘nokku kooli’. What labour is getting is unemployment wage. It is a right gained through constant struggle and fight by working class in capitalist societies. This fact need to be stressed now than never before. Because, in this era of capitalist globalisation, several labour rights are beginning to be termed derisively. This trend must be reversed.
@Iyer, Thanks for visiting my blog and leaving your valuable opinion.
Ok, as regards Unemployment wages, I agree that the worldwide practice of unemployment benefits need to be introduced in India (the new labour policy bill has a provision for this but not sure when those would be passed as an act). However the worldwide practice of unemployment wages does not work the way you have stated or would want to. Its purely an insurance benefit. Worker and employer contribute a premium on a monthly basis, the benefit of which can be availed when the worker goes unemployed (meaning no employment). Here unemployment mean you are no longer on the rolls of the employer or any. Its not equal to the 'unemployed' - meaning you are still on the rolls of the employer but do not have any work (a.k.a bench). So the concept is quite different from the one you have stated.
Coming to the 'nokku kooli', you have equated with the unemployment wage. It is simply not the case. Here the workers are still employed with the employer enjoying whatever benefits that are applicable. So this cannot be equated to as unemployment wages. If they are seriously interested in the unemployment wages, they should adopt the worldwide practice of unemployment wages.
I stand by the 'no work no pay' concept. If you do not do any work you shouldn't be entitled to any pay. Thats how majority in India and elsewhere are. Demanding pay for not doing anything blaming industrialization or machination is atrocious to say the least.
As technology improves, machination will also improve and increase in large numbers. Thats the way of life, so you have got to get used to it and find a better employment opportunities to move on by adapting to newer skills. But the Indian labour unions wouldnt agree to it simply because the easiest thing to do is to use the power of the union and manipulate the situation. These are unjustifiable in any way you look at it.
Well, mouly, you have, in a way, stated the problem in the Indian context and I agree to most of what you say – which I quote from your comments – parenthesis added:-
Here (i.e., in developed countries) unemployment mean you are no longer on the rolls of the employer or any. It’s not equal to the 'unemployed' - meaning (i.e., in the Indian context) you are still on the rolls of the employer but do not have any work (a.k.a bench). So the concept is quite different from the one you have stated.
In India formal employer-employee relation is confined to a minuscule few. For most workers it is hire and fire depending upon the availability of work – but at the same time, where there is strong trade union – the harshness of hire and fire is a bit mellowed through consultations and compromises.
For example, I am a trade unionist in seaport sector and I have direct experience and involvement in this sector.
When shipping companies in 1973 wanted to bring container ships, the Companies volunteered to assure the workers that there will be no job losses and the work would be streamlined in the manner that everyone is retained on the job. To be fair to the companies, I must admit that they honoured the promise. However, constantly pressure was being applied in a concerted way that the streamlined practices were wasteful and ineffective in terms of costs. Cargo handling labour costs in ports was borne by the shipping companies from freight. When competition became intense, the shipping companies separated this cost and started levying separately. That is how THC (Terminal handling Cost) in addition to shipping freight came into vogue. The companies claimed that THC became necessary due to excessive port costs and restrictive practices of workers.
Even in the port of New York in the U.S., such practices are officially recognised and compensatory payments are collected and distributed to registered dockworkers (longshoremen)
However, in 1992 the labour in Cochin Port made another compromise after Union Shipping Minister intervened. A conciliation settlement was reached before the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) that paved the way for removal of some of the restrictive practices on the part of labour in return for guarantee by shipping companies to the effect that shortfall in wages will be compensated by either alternative employment or compensatory payments. This settlement was watered own unilaterally by the employers with the result that only few categories were able to retain certain minimum level of wages while claims of certain others such as workers who deliver export cargo at port and receive import cargo from ports could not secure any protection either from unemployment or shortfall in wages, which occurred over a period of time – that too gradually, as more and more ports’ users began to adopt the new practices.
Another instance pertains to introduction of mechanical unloader for discharging imported bulk cargo from ships. In this case all affected workers were offered one-time lump sum compensation. This compensation was not retrenchment. The workers retained their job elsewhere where bulk mechanical unloaders wee not introduced.
Now coming to the instance of tipper lorries and ready mix cement. They affect construction workers. They get a certain level of employment. If at all work sites, these machines are introduced they would lose job substantially. Of course no employer is retrenching them. Yet none had hired them also for any fixed term that is longer than a day. All the same they lose work and earnings. There is no formal safety net. Where else should they go? So the trade unions made a compromise that the employers who displace labour pay some agreed compensatory wage.
The question arises when under this pretext, some other, non-workers and other intermediaries extract payments. Such malpractices have arisen. There is need to curb them. At the same time without putting a substitute safety net, it is illogical to abolish unemployment compensation by derisively terming it as ‘nokku kooli’
@Iyer, Thanks once again Mr Iyer for elaborating and detailing a bit of history too on the subject of compensatory wages for displayed workers. I very much appreciate your detailed explanation and putting things in the right perspective.
I agree that a safety net is badly needed in India to protect employees in difficult times. Its also unfair to term the entire act in derogatory terms without understanding the history behind it (not sure if the outlook author ever knew the history behind it or cared to check with people on the ground realities!!).
Safety net for unemployment and medical situation are absolutely essential (whichever way you look at it) in India. It is surprising that these are not still available to workers in India. Even if you take countries which swear by capitalism have some good safety features. In the US, even though capitalism rules, Trade unions have a large say in employment matters in certain industries. For example, in my last project (it was a telecom industry) bargaining unions negotiate and control most aspects of the employment terms, rules and pay. They have some good features agreed to in their agreement like - Job bank (worker losing a job is assigned to a global pool job banks during his bench times and gets paid at a agreed percentage of his normal pay for a limited time period. Any other organization or department or group companies will first look into the Job bank pool before deciding to hire new. And ofcourse compensatory package in the event of losing the job altogether is also good. But they also have a clause that Telecom being an essential services, the unions cannot disrupt the operation or service in any manner. So it looked to me an agreed balance between the company and the workers. As in other sectors they have a good unemployment protection, medical protection and ofcourse the social security net from the government. Wonder why these cannot be introduced in India. Trade unions being all powerful with good political bargaining setup should have negotiated to bring these into the law books.
Post a Comment