Indian Trade Union – Trading the Union

Trade Union can be defined as an organization run by and for workers who have banded together to achieve common goals in key areas and working conditions. The origins of unions' existence can be traced from the eighteenth century, where the rapid expansion of industrial society drew women, children, rural workers, and immigrants to the work force in larger numbers and in new roles. This pool of unskilled and semi-skilled labor spontaneously organized in fits and starts throughout its beginnings, and would later be an important arena for the development of trade unions.

In America, trade unionism came in role by the middle of 1860, and in Europe at the beginning of 1870s. The trade unionism in India developed quite slowly as compared to the western nations. The trade unionism in India begins in the last steps of 19th century. During this period, the working and living conditions of the labor were poor and their working hours were long. Capitalists were only interested in their productivity and profitability. In addition, the wages were also low and general economic conditions were poor in industries. In order to regulate the working hours and other service conditions of the Indian textile laborers, the Indian Factories Act was enacted in 1881. After this act, trade unionism slowly acquired pace. Mumbai, Bengal, Punjab and Kerala were the fertilized soil for trade unionism and political movement of working class.

At that time, even after 1950s, majority workers didn’t had a platform to get a fair wage, or a decent working environment. Due to the vast campaign and the influence of education, workers came to know that ‘together they can achieve’. There had sincere and people loving union leaders and oraganisers from political movements. The succeeded in building up worker union and making a political literate workforce. Many strikes took place; most of them were very sensitive, crucial and severe. Many workers sacrificed their lives; many of them suffered brutal torture from the management and sometimes from the government, by the police. A very good percentage of the leaders also suffered. A bloody game for the existence and survive. Mid of 1960s, it got full pace, most of the work places came under the control by the trade union. Even before that, Government servants and public sector workers had already secured themselves under trade union. Most of the private management was forced to accept trade unions and become ready to share a percentage of their profit for workers benefit. The workers got the benefit, better life, good working environment, more security and consideration achieved after so many sacrifices and bloodshed. What was the motive? Ensure better work environment, opportunity, fair wages for the work and a warm relation with the employment as well as the employer. Yes, we achieved that.

After 50 years, where do we stand? Trade union acquired a new face of mafia. Nowadays, trade union is playing a harsh, brutal role in the society, against public. Consider few of the recent issues. Petroleum officer’s strike hit the society for a week, Loco pilots’ flash strike which thrown out of gear for six hours, were challenging the public. But why public always becomes the victim? All the trade union and association are supported by any of the political parties. These unions are their major vote bank. So they need to involve and support irrespective of thinking public.
At present, trade union is not to protect the worker for his right to work, but to protect the worker even in his guilty. If a worker is suspended or dismissed, a call for strike is guaranteed. As I belong to Kerala, I am one among who suffer by the new phase of trade unionism. Each and every inch of Kerala is under the claws of trade unions. In Kerala, each political party is surviving, because of trade union. Unlimited blind support is being offered to union by their affiliated political parties. Cochin Port Trust is being suffered by the union at least once in a month and causes great loss not only to the port, but also the merchants who chose Cochin port as their channel. The workers are not bothers about the port, or the shipments. They are so selfish and declare strike for any reason. Few people will call for strike and others are forced to participate. Revenue loss due to strike is always with Cochin port and politicians are not interested to ensure a friendly environment.

In government offices, it is very difficult to find a person before 10:30 at his seat and after 4:00. While government decided to start punch card in the secretariat, the union opposed and called a strike. The reason they told was insufficient transport to reach in the office in time. Nice reason. The guys who works on private establishment reaches in the office by 9.00 and works until 6.00 using the same transport system.

The worst form of the trade unionism in Kerala is head load and general workers. The do not have any discipline or frame work. Their only aim is not to allow other from doing work and grabbing huge amount of money from the public. Most of the time they will behave like goondas and if you are dealing with them, and if you are arguing with them, any time you can be hit down. Let me quote an incident which happened with my friend. He brought one coat and a dining table from a furniture shop. The furniture was dismantled. My friend with his relative started unloading the pieces from the pick-up and the union guys reached there. There was only one piece, top of the table left in the pick-up. The union guys started arguing and they told that it is their right to do any kind of loading and unloading in the area. The argument slowly changed to abuse and threat. Suddenly my friend gave up and asked them how much will they charge? The answer was cool. They are 12 people and each need 200 rupees. Total 2400 rupees. As heard, my friend reached almost near to a paralysis. Total cost of the furniture was 8000 rupees. After negotiation they agreed to pay 1500 rupees to unload the remaining table top.
Industry in Kerala, suffered a lot by the negative implementation of trade union.

No industrialist is really dared to start a business in Kerala, because of the history. More than hundred of large scale industries locked out due to the strike. Most of the strike starts for hike in the wage or for the bonus. If the company is not in a good position to accept this, workers will call strike. Result : Management will accept the demand or lock-out. If management accepted the demand, company will sink in near future. However the workers and the management is going to suffer. If the company got close, the will lose their job. The union leaders will flew to the next location. There a lot of management who become bankrupt due to the labor problem in their business.

It is the time to realise and react. A change is required. Ensure and literate the workers about their right to work, and their responsibility as a worker. A wash out and vaccination is required to clear the parasite generally known as union leader. It is the time to restructure the labor law. This is the time of growth of opportunities. Working class should think them as a part of the society and should behave in sync with the public. Only workers can change their image of anti social. They should know why and how they acquired the power of the unity.

Irony of Indian Constitution - Protecting and supporting racism

Indian constitution is mounted on a strong foundation of socialist principle. The preamble says “WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens; Justice, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation” The words "socialist", "secular" and "integrity" were added to the definition in 1976 by constitutional amendment.

What does it mean? Let us consider one by one.
Sovereign: The word sovereign means supreme or independent. India is internally and externally sovereign - externally free from the control of any foreign power and internally
Socialist: It implies social equality, and does not connote any economic or political ideology.
Secular: It implies equality of all religions and religious tolerance.
Democratic: The people of India elect their governments at all levels. Every citizen enjoys this right without any discrimination on the basis of caste, creed, colour, sex, religion or education.
Republic: As opposed to a monarchy , in which the head of state is appointed on hereditary basis for a lifetime or until he/she abdicates from the throne, a democratic reoublic is an entity in which the head of state is elected, directly or indirectly, for a fixed tenure.
As a summary, the preamble assures the entire citizen will be treated equally irrespective of his religion, sex, education, color or language. But the term republic is being violated every public election. The right to vote is the right to choose. Always we have few constituencies which are announced as reserved for the candidates belong to some particular cast. Nice violation of the preamble. As the right to vote, we have the right for the candidature. But what if it is reserved? Is this what meant by equality or implementing a separation?

Secular is a region without any religion. But what about India as a secular country? Everywhere, every time people are marked by the cast or religion. Education – Seats are distributed based on the religion. Government job – separated by religion. Promotion – isolated by religion. Look into the base of the reservation. It is being divided as scheduled caste, scheduled tribe, other backward community, etc. is it according to preamble of the constitution? This reservation strategy itself hurts two words of the preamble, secular and socialist. At this point, let us discuss about the reservation. This has been implemented based on a concept for bringing socially backward people to the main stream. This has been brought to ensure the social equality of the backward people. But, then it becomes a right of the people who belong to a particular religion or cast.

While providing reservation, it is showing injustice to the people who are not covered by reservation. Let us consider one example. A government department invites job application for 10 vacancies. Among them 4 are reserved for different casts. Candidates who apply for those posts are having age relaxation, merit relaxation (like the percentage of marks in the qualification) etc. What about the people who are applying for the remaining six posts? As all the candidates got the same education, same competitive exam to get certified and going to appear the same questions for the qualifying test. But the candidates applying for the 4 seats are considered separately. Does it means equality?

There are arguments saying that the people in the reserved category are financially and socially backward. To bring them up, reservation and relaxations are required. If so, why reservation is considered for promotion? (In government departments, reservation and cast are considered for promotion). It is a bad situation where one among few people with the same qualification, same designation and same pay scale is being considered for promotion based on the cast. What happened to the word “SECULAR”? What happened to the word “EQUALITY”?

Another argument is that reservation is required to bring them financially and socially. Does it means the people not protected by reservation are financially and socially up? Does it means that the people who enjoy the benefit of reservation are socially and financially down?
Why this is happening? 60 years back, the society had a different face. But today, everyone is having the opportunity to get educated. All are having the capability to participate in the competition without any protection. Why the reservation is still going on and the division of minority and majority? The answer is simple. VOTE BANK. Technique is old “divide and rule”.
I believe that there are only two races among human, male and female. But the politicians will not allow this to be happened. They will categorise people base on their caste. Will create pockets for their selfish purpose. Will increase the distance between our hearts.

Why I can’t be treated as you and you can’t be treated as I? When my India will become a socialist secular country?

Negative Vote – The Positive Move

The general elections are almost round the corner. As a citizen, it is my right to cast my vote.

General question “To whom should I cast my vote?”. Answer is simple. “Any one in the ballot”.
But, what if, “I am not able to find a suitable candidate in the ballot”. Answer : “casting a vote can be completed by dropping the ballot in the ballot box. It is not necessary to mark against a candidate”. I can use my right to vote by dropping a ballot without any mark (The procedure is not that, the voter is given an opportunity to sign a separate form (Form 17-A), and submit it to the presiding officer). Majority of the voters are not aware of this. General trend is to mark against multiple candidates and make the ballot invalid. But, this can be treated as your favor for more than one candidate, even though your vote doesn’t count. If you want to show your disagree to the candidates, you should not cast your vote to any.

In the case of conventional ballot paper and ballot boxes, which was in use before(up to 1992), a voter could drop the ballot paper without marking his vote against any of the candidate.
According to the Rule 49-O of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 a voter can refuse his vote by signing a separate form (Form 17-A), and submitting it to the presiding officer.

Now, with Electronic Voting Machines, a voter has the option to refuse to vote after he has been identified and necessary entries made in the Register of Electors and the marked copy of the electoral roll. But this throws up the issue of compromising with the secrecy. Secret ballot is one of the characteristic of a democratic poll. Here the polling officials and the polling agents in the polling station have the knowledge of the choice of the voter.

So, for an effective negative voting, it is important that it should have secrecy. Election Commission of India (ECI), in its electoral reforms, has recommended as:
“The Commission recommends that the law should be amended to specifically provide for negative / neutral voting. For this purpose, Rules 22 and 49B of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 may be suitably amended adding a provision that in the ballot paper and the particulars on the ballot unit, in the column relating to names of candidates, after the entry relating to the last candidate, there shall be a column “None of the above” to enable a voter to reject all the candidates, if he chooses so. Such a proposal was earlier made by the Commission in 2001 (vide letter dated 10.12.2001).”

The 'negative vote' was debated for many years before it reached the doors of the Supreme Court as the substance of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in 2004. A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, disposing this petition on 23 February 2009, found sufficient merit in it to recommend its consideration by a larger Constitution Bench; the Government of India, opposing the petition, had argued for its outright dismissal. (Quiet natural).

The issue was brought before the court by the PUCL(People's Union of Civil Liberties), the Election Commission fully supported its petition and told the Bench that it had written letters to the Centre twice on December 10, 2001 and July 5, 2004 favoring an amendment to the Representation of People's Act (RPA) to this effect.

Nothing happened. Still the entire voters are not able to show their opinion with keeping the secrecy. Critic may argue if a voter is not willing to support any of the candidate in the list, he can show his disagree by not going to polling booth. There raises two problems. 1. I can’t use my right to vote as a citizen. 2. An impersonator can cast my vote. So the best solution is to add a new button at the bottom of the candidate list states “None of the above”. Then I can cast my vote even if I can’t support any of the candidate in the list.

It is heard that, in case the number of votes recorded under 49-O is more than those of the winning candidate, the contestants will be banned and they cannot contest the re-polling. It is a false statement but I wish if it is true.

Why governments are against public for using their rights? It is simple. They know very well that the public does not like them. If voters are aware of negative vote and started voting for “None of the above” – Oh god. Just imagine the negative votes are more than the topper. I wish if the election result is “majority of the voters are against the candidates. No one can be declared as winner. For the moral side a re-poll is required. As the result proved that majority of the voters are against the current list. They can’t appear in the re-poll.” This can happen. This fear is forcing politicians to say “NO” to “None of the above”.

A voter has the right to decide whether he need to agree or disagree with the candidates, keeping the secrecy (because secrecy of balloting is the base of the democracy).

Still debate is going on. Just think. Think. And Act