Indian Trade Unions Need to Reform Themselves

By Nantoo Banerjee

Trade unionism seems to have lost focus in India. It has failed to reform itself to keep pace with economic reforms and globalisation, and changing job scenarios. It is also facing the biggest leadership crisis. The poor public and industry response to the nationwide strike call by 10 central trade unions on July 9 once again exposed the irrelevance of such an action in a country where the informal sector employs nearly 44 crore workers today, representing 85 percent of the total workforce. The informal sector encompasses a wide range of activities and workers, including those in agriculture, construction, small factories, domestic work, and various other self-employed and micro-enterprise roles. Workers in this sector don’t enjoy job or wage protection. As a result, the old-style trade unionism has become irrelevant in the present-day scenario.

The so-called central trade unions exist mostly in the public sector where they play some constructive role in the collective bargaining, especially for periodical wage settlement. The shrinking public sector is a matter of concern to them. However, they could do little when the government decided to hand over the control of the country’s largest petrochemical company, Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Limited (IPCL), a highly profit-making public sector enterprise, to the Ambani group’s Reliance Industries. The central TUs also made no attempt to prevent total privatisation of Bharat Aluminium (BALCO) in favour of Anil Agarwal-promoted Sterlite Industries (now Vedanta Limited). Even before the total privatisation of IPCL and BALCO, the government sold the prestigious Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) to the Tata group. The company has been renamed as Tata Communications. Where were the leaders of the central TUs, then?

Between 2014 and 2024, the government disinvested from as many as 179 central PSEs without any resistance from the trade unions. This explains why workers even from the central PSEs do not trust their trade unions. It could be the key reason behind the near rejection by a vast section of workers of the ‘Bharat Bandh’ call on July 9 by a forum of 10 central trade unions, including the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC), Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU), Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS), Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA), Labour Progressive Federation (LPF), and United Trade Union Congress (UTUC). Before the failed ‘Bandh’, the forum had claimed that over 250 million workers from diverse sectors—including banking, insurance, postal services, and coal mining—are expected to participate in the nationwide strike to protest against what the unions described as “anti-worker, anti-farmer, and anti-national pro-corporate policies” of the Centre.

Incidentally, this one was the fifth nationwide general strike (Bharat Bandh) since 2015, including a two-day strike on January 8-9, 2019 and another two-day strike on March 28-29, 2022. All the TU strikes had more or less the same old issues, protesting against the government policies such as PSE privatization, erosion of labour rights, the increasing use of contractual labour, anti-worker, anti-farmer, and anti-national pro-corporate agenda, the government’s unwillingness to engage in dialogue with unions, and the proposed amendments to the Trade Union Act, 1926. According to the government, the proposed amendments to the TU Act, 1926, are aimed to modernize and strengthen the framework for trade union registration, recognition, and collective bargaining. Key features include facilitating recognition of trade unions at the central and federal levels, enhancing transparency in the nomination of worker representatives, and potentially reducing industrial unrest. The amendments may also address the number of members required to form a union and the extent of outside leadership.

While the TU Act amendment proposals have understandably created tensions among the traditionally-oriented trade unions, the latter are more upset as the government never consulted with the central trade unions for the purpose. The TUs had submitted a 17-point charter of demands to the Union Labour Minister, Dr. Mansukh Mandaviya, last year. According to the unions, the government paid little attention to their demands and never bothered to convene the annual labour conference in the last 10 years, an omission the trade unions interpret as indifference towards the nation’s toiling labour force.

Unfortunately, today’s trade unions lack the leadership of those in the 1970s such as Sripad Dange, B T Ranadive, Satish Loomba, George Fernandes, Mahesh Desai, who forced the then Prime Minister form the country’s first Bonus Review Committee leading to the amendment of the Bonus Act to raise the minimum bonus from four percent to 8.33 percent and making the Dearness Allowance (DA) Rules for the government employees and pensioners to offset the impact of inflation. Interestingly, some of the state governments are now challenging the age-old DA Rules saying that the payment of DA should be made purely optional and has to be linked with a state government’s capacity to pay.

Few will disagree that currently, the trade union movement in India lacks proper leadership and focus, particularly in the face of economic reforms and globalization, and adopting fast to changing labour landscapes to remain relevant to the situation. The public sector concept has been vastly diluted to provide opportunities for the growth of the generally trade union-resistant private sector. The employment in the public sector has been steadily declining since the 1990s. The effective trade union membership in the organised sector has also declined. Trade unions have become overly politicised. Ruling political parties in states have their own affiliated trade unions. Gone are the days when the TUs such as AITUC, CITU, INTUC AND HMS represented the majority voice of workers at both the levels of states and the centre.

The central TUs have now become ineffective in most of the states of the country. The increasing pressure on unions to adapt to new forms of work, such as gig work and contractual employment, are posing unique challenges. Most of the unions are still controlled by external leaders lacking understanding of the needs of workers. They have not been innovative enough in developing new strategies to address the challenges of a rapidly changing labour market with employers, including the central and state governments and their agencies, going for contractual employment.

Finally, a lack of strong central legislation for union recognition leading to anti-union practices by employers and growing fragmentation among unions are weakening the bargaining power of trade unions. The successive failure of the nationwide strike attempts should serve a wakeup call for the modern-day TU leaders to revitalise their role shifting focus from job preservation to broader issues that concern all workers, including those in the informal sector, and resist fragmentation of unions to present a united front for collective bargaining with employers, including the government. (IPA Service)

The post Indian Trade Unions Need to Reform Themselves appeared first on Daily Excelsior.

News