Tender system
is not new to Indian economic system and in the functioning of the state. In
the mainstream way, tendering is debated around the theme of Public-Private
Partnership. But, a very little is discussed about the tender system within the
private sector. Taken from the field experiences (in Udaipur, Rajasthan), this
post is an attempt to unravel the bitter realities of the tender system in the
mining sector and its negative impact on the labour rights.
Tender system
is generally debated around the construction sector and if any public
enterprise (like oil and railways) opens up to the private players. Whenever
such debates happen, the focal points of such debates are centred upon the
amount of money on which each tender was sold and which companies got the
maximum number of tenders. It is only the news of corruption that highlights
the faults of the tender system otherwise it is projected as “time and money
saver strategy”. Nobody cares and want to discuss what happens to the labourers
if one sees the construction of roads and buildings they can easily found many
workers living in the tin sheds. Whenever anything happens there is no news
surrounded on their rights even if they get killed, other than the numbers and
compensation granted by the state. In one sentence, there is a complete silence
on their rights and dignity not only from the state but also from the civil
society.
 |
| Photo by Satish Makadiya |
Mining in India
is a subject of Union list (Seventh Schedule) and the parliament of India has
the legitimacy to make regulations on the issues related to it. In order to
make a “good environment” for the private investors, the post-LPG reform period
in India has seen a continuous dilution in labour laws. (See also India’s
Labour Law Changes by ActionAid on https://www.actionaidindia.org/aadocument/India%E2%80%99s%20Labour%20Law_%20FINAL%20PRINT%20-%20WEBSITE.pdf
). Whether in terms of Providential funds, proper compensation or formation of
labour unions private owners were provided many loopholes to find the easiest
way to get out of the labour related issues in which the tender system has
played a fine role. Since there is no strict jurisdiction made upon the tender
owner to provide facilities to the employees, therefore the labourers which
work under this system are often get exploited. Now, I would like to
contextualise this argument with the case of a mineworker.
Mr John
(Changed name) is a mineworker and still working in the same mine where he
started his work 27 years ago. He is a tribe and hasn’t studied much, though he
is good at his skills. When he started his work, he was employed under a
private company and was getting some facilities under the labour laws. He was
getting three paid leaves in a month and bonus on different occasions. Along
with this, he was not forced to work more than 8 hours and for overtime, he was
paid accordingly. But four years before there was demand arose for the
establishment of trade union where the workers can express their concerns. That
demand took a political mileage with the involvement of local politicians and
the mine owner didn’t get impressed with this. He distributed all his mine
leases into multiple tenders. All the tender purchaser were confidants of the
mine owner. Two years earlier John met an accident in his chest and was at
bedrest for two months. He was given an amount of five thousand from the tender
owner and was advised to not take further this issue. After this, John has a
continuous pain in the chest and he has developed some problems in breathing
too. Now John has to work for 12 hours a day and paid the minimum wage of 332
per day despite having the experience and expertise in the field. He didn’t get
any paid holiday and not even paid for over time. With the introduction of
heavy machinery and the advancement of technologies, in the last three years,
the number of workers in his mine has decreased from 40 to10. The workers who
were asked to leave were neither provided with any amount like that of PF nor
any alternative livelihood. Most of them have worked more than 15 years with Mr
John in the same mines. So, Mr John is still doing the same job because he doesn’t
have any alternative mean of earning nor have much agricultural land.
Now the
question comes who is responsible for this, the company or the tender
owner?.... But before proving one a guilty it should be more focused by social
workers on the possible ways of saving millions of workers like John from the
exploitation of the tender system. Simply removing the tender system cannot
work because everything has its pros and cons and the responsibility of
conscious citizens is to create ways where human rights can be achieved in an
effective manner.
Labour Rights
are also Human Rights.
A heartfelt
thanks to Real Mr John for his courage to speak the truth.
Thanking you in
Anticipation
Mohammad Imran
Excellent work....very insightful
ReplyDelete