THE LABOUR ARGUMENT
The Uttar Pradesh government notified on Saturday that it is in process of developing a new employment policy to provide work to nearly 20 lakh migrant workers of the state expected to return due to the national lockdown. UP will make use of existing and new MSMES to employ the large pool of migrant workers as per their skills, ensuring minimum salary of Rs 15,000, work hours and security. The notification follows a midweek ordinance approved by the state government providing periodic relief (3 years) to industries from some clauses of
labour laws. The state labour law minister asserted that laws providing basic rights to labourers have not been touched; those regarding bonded labour, timely payment of salaries and deployment of women and children will not be relaxed. Besides UP, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh have also relaxed
labour laws to give flexibility to industries and attract foreign investment. The relaxed norms mainly constitute the free hand given to industries in hiring and firing labourers as per their requirement and increased shift hours and overtime hours for workers. On one side, arguments in favour of the move, mainly from India Inc, focus on the cursory effect of these laws in providing protection to the labourers and the strong need to revive the economy amid the pandemic downturn. On the other side, arguments against the move discuss the utter disregard that these state governments have expressed for the various categories of workers enjoying benefits of these laws. Moreover, the three states that have taken the lead in diluting labour laws and ushering in flexibility for industries are also the ones featuring in the top 5 states with most Covid-19 cases. The positive effect that the UP government is planning for its returning migrant workers with the dilution of labour laws has a prerequisite of a suitable working environment post-lockdown. Rising cases do not augur well for these states and their intention to revive the economy through novel steps notwithstanding timely planning. But that does not mean a government should not plan at all.
Ease of doing business has been a burning topic of discussion in India in recent times. The pandemic might have slowed progress but India in recent years has taken several key measures to improve its ranking in the World Bank’s doing business reports. From 130 in 2017, 100 in 2018, 77 in 2019 to 63 in 2020, India has improved in several key areas to become an attractive destination for business. And, together with the new vision to emerge as an alternative manufacturing hub to China, the mandate to further simplify and streamline processes for doing business is stronger than ever. But while there is an aim that India strives for, it cannot circumvent labour concerns of safety and security. It has to give due consideration to labour rights notwithstanding its coverage ratio. Labour reforms are necessary but not at the cost of labourers’ rights. In its bid to rise in the doing business index, India should not categorically fall in human development index or inequality index. While it is true that we require to take unconventional measures to cover the gap created by the pandemic, the same should not be done by turning a blind eye to humanitarian and moral grounds. The free hand to industries to hire and fire
leaves labourers in a tight uncertain spot. If in the name of flexibility, state governments feel the need to impose it then they ought to come up with a safety net that provides unemployment insurance and re-training so those fired can be redirected towards employment without being stranded in uncertainty. Eyeing economic growth is important but it should be done with economic development since the latter’s absence would not result in true development.