Jagdish Rattanani and RK Pattnaik
In recent days, Union Labour and Employment Minister Santosh Kumar Gangwar held two meetings–- one with central trade unions and the other with employers’ representatives. The demands they put forward were proof again that they worked at cross-purposes even in the thick of this ongoing lockdown.
The first on the list of trade unions was a demand to provide more trains to transport the migrant workers back to their bases and, two, strict implementation of labour laws. The employers sought a plan from the government for return of these migrant labour to work by providing them counseling to alleviate their fears on Covid-19, as also financial help for their transportation, and supply of free groceries to them for six months. They also sought a relaxation in labour laws. In sum, the government must foot a part of the wages that the workers have lost.
Management and labour disagreements are usual. But they now live in two entirely different spaces. Little surprise, then, that all major unions have come together for a protest strike on May 22. This is likely to be symbolic, given that much of the economy is still under lockdown, and that unions in post-liberalisation era don’t carry the same power and influence they once did; a situation made worse by the trend towards contractualisation of the workforce.
The Annual Survey of Industries (ASI) quoted in a 2019 working paper from the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations notes that total employment in the organised manufacturing sector increased from 7.7 million in 2000-1 to 13.7 million in 2015-16, with over half of this increase accounted for by the growing use of contract workers. The average growth rate of contract employment at 8.39 per cent has outstripped the growth of regular employment at 3.22 per cent over the last decade. It pointed out: “These workers can be fired easily, have little or no job security and enjoy far fewer benefits in terms of health, safety, welfare and social security compared to directly employed workers. Given the deplorable conditions under which they work, a rapid increase of such jobs is unlikely to meet the challenge of productive job creation.”
This is the core of the migrant workers’ problems. They have wages at subsistence levels – that too, under terms that are often exploitative, unfair and dictated by a transactional arrangement that is now written into pricing models and the larger business dynamic. If they are regularised, business will complain that this is not viable. If they are kept on contract, they will continue to be exploited. As such, wages in industrial India and in many parts of the booming services sector are the MGNREGA of urban India. This is the abysmally weak foundation on which a large part of India’s industrial, small business and services activities run, and it has now shown up in the kind of collective misery heaped on these workers as they flee for the safety of their homes.
The plight of migrant workers is unending. Images continue to flow in of the poor and hapless pleading to be allowed to go home. The death of 24 migrant workers in an accident near Auraiya, UP, is the latest in an unending narrative of horror linked to the lockdown. It appears all kinds of working hands have left the cities, often paying thousands for a seat on a truck. Mumbai is already short of electricians, plumbers, helpers and attendants. The kick-starting of the economy will depend on how many will return and how soon. The panic condition can be judged from the demands of the CII that government map workers staying locally or in shelter homes and that they be “deployed” to the nearest factories, a kind of a conscription of the workforce.
One report said the CII has asked for action against workers who do not report back — a reiteration of the parallel universes in which workers and industry sit today. The outlandish demands are blind to the sensitivity that is required to respond to the unusual situation and lead to a scenario of more workers wanting to delay their return. Why would industry representatives put up such outlandish demands? A part of the answer lies in the mix of signals that the industry is receiving from the powers-that-be.
On its part, the government has announced a pan-all relief package, but an announcement is not enough. Effective and efficient implementation is important. Apart from inter-ministerial coordination, there is need for inter-state coordination, particularly when workers are moving from one state to another. There is no reason for workers to face hardships first in moving out and then being stopped at the borders of their home states. None of this helps fight the threat of COVID-19. This is Indian bureaucracy at its worst.
The number of people impacted is significant. Migration data is available in our Census and National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) reports. According to the 2011 Census (data released in 2016), the number of migrants were counted as 45.36 crore, accounting for 37 per cent of the population. We extrapolate data assuming that to be 40 per cent, given increased urbanization; and this giving us a rough estimate of around 500 million migrant labourers covering intra-state and inter-state movements.
The 2011 Census reported that 62 per cent, 26 per cent, and 12 per cent respectively are intra-district, inter-district and inter-state movement of migrants. Furthermore, it said 4 per cent of the total population was of inter-state migrant labourers. On a conservative estimate thus, the inter-state movement alone (not counting intra-state) could be in the range of 50-60 million people. Many more in addition to this are moving in between districts. Make no mistake – this is a historic reverse migration across the plains of India, amid the heat and dust, with a virus lurking, and amid unprecedented misery of the kind that mimics the horrors of Partition.
In the light of this, the withdrawal of protection afforded by the labour laws, as is done by states like UP and MP, is a signal that the problem of migrant workers will not be solved while the economy is moving towards more formalization. Indication is also that a skewed power balance does not bode well for an India supposedly walking a path of growth and development that is inclusive, sustainable and takes along its weakest. The workers can be pushed today but it won’t be long before they push others back.
Rattanani is a senior journalist and Pattnaik, a former central banker. Both are faculty members at SPJIMR. The Billion Press.