Photo Credit: Socialism.in
Two years of the Modi regime have seen the Indian political economy in doldrums, inflation on the increase and scant job creation. In this scenario the government appears intent on legislating against the right of labour to organize and protest, further sharpening its authoritarian and anti-democratic thrust.
As the results of the 2016 Assembly elections were announced on May 19, there was exultation on the corporate-driven television channels: the discourse centred around how these results implied a great leap forwardfor the Modi government and consequently, the ‘economic reform’ process. The stock market however was scripting a different story. On May 19 and 20, the BSE index fell by 350 points.
With the completion of two years of the BJP led NDA government this May, the body language of the Indian political economy is in stark contrast to the optimistic claims of the Modi camp. The BSE index is today actually lower today than it was at this time two years ago. The rupee has fallen 20 % from Rs 57 to the dollar in May 2014, to Rs 67 in May 2016.
Despite a huge subsidy to the Indian economy over the entire two years of Modi rule due to low crude oil prices, price rise has continued unchecked, especially in food grains and pulses. Public and private services in health, transport, housing and education have deteriorated and have become more expensive.
Exports have declined continuously during this period. Manufacturing is in decline. Despite the much-hyped schemes like “Make in India”, “Start Up India”, “Skill India”, job creation in India in 2015 was the lowest in any year since the global crisis of 2008. The common people are experiencing, not ‘acche din’, but ‘kacche din’.
The comprehensive attack on basic working class rights by the Modi Government in the name of labour law amendments has to be seen in the background of the comprehensive failure of this government on the economic front.
The government is increasingly desperate for investment. With very little to offer foreign investors by way of infrastructure, what the Modi government is offering them instead is regulatory and environmental concessions, and the slavery of the Indian workers.
Both the organised as well as the unorganised sector workers are under attack. In the name of labour reforms, the entire edifice of labour laws which has been constructed over more than a century of the labour movement is sought to be dismantled.
Labour is in the concurrent list with legislative power for the states as well as the centre. The changes in labour laws were initiated by the BJP state government in Rajasthan, which made fundamental amendments in four laws. The Central Labour Minister issued instructions for other states to follow suit along the Rajasthan model.
The Industrial Disputes Act has been amended to make it possible for employers to layoff or retrench workers and close factories at will without government permission if they employed less than 300 workers.
The Contract Labour Act has been amended to absolve the principal employer of responsibility for compliance. Upto 49 contract workers can be employed without a licence.
Since the entitlement of contract workers to basic rights like minimum wages, bonus etc. arises out of conditions in the license, effectively this means that contract workers employed without a licence have no right to minimum wages, bonus, or provident fund.
Amendment to the Factories Act in Rajasthan has doubled the minimum number of workers needed for its becoming applicable. Changes in the Apprentice Act made it possible for employers to employ large numbers of employees with no rights of workers- not even the meager rights of contract workers, even after working five years in an establishment.
In Maharashtra, amendments have been made in the Factories Act and Contract Labour Act similar to Rajasthan.
The changes proposed in the central legislation go even beyond the changes in Rajasthan. It is beyond the scope of this article to detail the proposed changes. (CITU Notes containing detailed analyses of the proposed changes may be obtained by sending an e mail to the writer)
Defeating the attack on workers rights requires that the BJP to be defeated electorally, as took place in 2004.
It is sufficeth to say that the Central government proposes to replace 44 labour legislations by 5 code bills. The code bills are designed to restrict and take away basic rights such as the right to strike, the right of workers to defend themselves against arbitrary victimisation and removal from work, and the right to have a union leadership of their choice.
The attack on the unorganized sector is equally severe, including severe cutbacks in allocations for scheme workers such as anganwadi sevikas, mid day meal workers, and ASHA workers . There are more than one crore such scheme workers in the country, most of them women.
The proposed changes are part of the ‘labour reforms’ of an aggressive neo liberal economic policy. Some of the changes currently proposed were considered by the previous UPA II government.
Five years back all the major central trade unions including INTUC (Congress-affiliated) and BMS (affiliated to the RSS), came together to fight these changes. This unity has strengthened in the intervening period, resulting in several All India Strike actions including a 2 day strike in February2013 and a one day general strike in September 2 last year.
The RSS affiliated BMS union, though party to the strike decision withdrew at the last moment under political pressure. This has severely undermined their credibility among the workers, and also deprived them of their claim to be a non political organisation.
A welcome consequence of the BMS flip-flop is that today politics is no longer a prohibited subject in the trade union discourse, (in the interests of trade union unity.) Today the united trade union movement is openly critical of the politics of the Modi government not only in areas of labour rights, but also on issues of economic policy like giving control of national natural resources to corporate houses. The politics of communalism and religious hatred was openly criticized in the joint trade union rallies of May Day 2016.
[Neither in 2013 nor 2016 do these protests garner ‘mainstream media attention.]
Today the united trade union movement is openly critical of the politics of the Modi government not only in areas of labour rights, but also on issues of economic policy like giving control of national natural resources to corporate houses. The politics of communalism and religious hatred was openly criticized in the joint trade union rallies of May Day 2016.
Faced with growing resistance from an united trade union movement, in which the ‘Red Flag’ unions were playing the leading role, it appears that the BJP governments had decided to suppress the rising tide by resorting to misuse of both the state machinery as well as extra legal strong arm tactics.
The right wing strategists appear to have prepared a script in which the red flag would be painted as an ‘anti-national’ ideology, which was opposing development , and supporting ‘terrorists’ in the name of democratic rights. The first act of this multi-act play, was to suppress the left in the universities, which was seen as a soft target, and make them an example of what could happen to those opposing the government.
What the government did not anticipate nor could they contend with, was the spirited resistance from the universities, exemplified by the JNU counter-struggle. The very ideologies which they sought to suppress were now broadcast on prime time by all the major media (at least for a few weeks!). The resistance was sharply and eloquently articulated by Kanhaiya Kumar and his colleagues.
From the first day after Kanhaiya’s release from jail, the BJP and RSS found themselves at the receiving end of a public debate, which has continued since. Seeking to don the mantle of desh-bhakts , they found themselves having to defend themselves against the charges of pseudo-nationalism and hypocrisy.
During the Mayday rallies this year, speaker after speaker, not only from the left unions, openly commended the JNU students, and criticized the RSS. Azaadi from hunger is our demand , they said on May 1, 2016, and that is why we are demanding a minimum wage of Rs 15,000. We need to maintain our unity to fight this anti-worker and anti-farmer government, and that is why we need to have azadi from communalism and politics of religious hatred. How can a government which is bent on handing over the natural resources of this country like coal, oil and gas to multinationals preach to us about nationalism, they asked.
The space for criticism of neoliberal economics as being detrimental to the interests of this country, and the exposure of the nexus between communalism and right wing political economy has widened, due to the events of February and March this year.
As the trade unions mobilise for the August 9 day of action with the demand “Modi Sarkar Chalejao”, and the proposed All India strike on September 2, this space is set to widen.
Can the attack on labour rights be defeated ? Yes, if the trade unions follow a consistent strategy over the coming years. Recall that in 2001 the BJP led NDA government had made a serious attempt to curtail labour rights, through the instrument of the 2nd National Labour Commission. Disinvestment of the public sector was also high on its agenda.
In the bye elections (Rajasthan) which were held in the four constituencies in September 2014 , in three out of those four constituencies, which the BJP had won with wide margins just four months earlier , the BJP was defeated. In two of these three it was trounced with wide margins.
At that time the opposition to the 2nd NLC was far less united than it is today. Despite this handicap, the trade unions, led by the left organizations, conducted successful struggles to stall the so called labour reforms, and disinvestment, till the parliament elections in May 2014.
These struggles included numerous sectoral and All India strikes including a historic 3 day strike of the oil sector workers in January 2014, which, coupled with legal challenges, stalled the privatisation of HPCL.
In May 2004, the BJP led NDA government was itself removed from power at the centre, resulting in the scrapping of both the 2nd NLC recommendations as well as the Disinvestment ministry.
The contemporary Rajasthan experience is significant. In May 2014 the BJP had won all 25 seats to Parliament. Four winning candidates were sitting MLAs, necessitating bye elections within 6 months. The labour law amendments were passed in the Rajasthan assembly in July 2014.
During August there were widespread trade union joint protests which included the BMS union. In the bye elections whichwere held in the four constituencies in September 2014 , in three out of those four constituencies, which the BJP had won with wide margins just four months earlier , the BJP was defeated. In two of these three it was trounced with wide margins.
Determined and widespread trade union campaigning in the coming days, coupled with a cool and calculated electoral arithmetic strategy has the potential to restrict the BJP in the coming period. Defeating the attack on workers rights requires that the BJP to be defeated electorally, as took place in 2004.
A strategy for achieving this objective is eminently possible today. Trade union unity is stronger. There is a consensus about resisting the Modi government offensive. The unity of the working people goes beyond trade unions to include organisations of farmers, youth and students.
The strike action planned for September 2, 2016, will be wider and deeper than the September 2 strike last year. But the real test will be the assembly and Lok Sabha elections. Much depends on whether the defence of labour and farmer rights can become a dominant political issue in the forthcoming electoral battles.
The author is Secretary, CITU Maharashtra; Centre of Affiliated Trade Unions-CITU is a national trade union affiliated to the Communist Party of India-Marxist, CPI-M.
But where sweet talking did not work, Mansoor readily deployed Taliban columns against recalcitrant commanders. He had commander 
