Indian Trade Unions Need To Reform Themselves To Remain Relevant
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)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arabian Post
7 days ago
- Arabian Post
EU Can't Ban Non-Member India From Buying Russian Oil
By Nantoo Banerjee The European Union seems to have arrogated itself with extrajudicial power to prevent outside nations from purchasing Russian oil. It has no locus standi to impose its will on countries which are not members of EU. Thus, the latest expansion of the EU sanctions targeting Russian energy exports can legally cover only its 27 member countries and entities operating within the EU and not beyond. It is free to implement such decisions as fixing price caps and restrictions on shipping and insurance for Russian oil sold to EU countries, it cannot legally prohibit non-EU countries from buying Russian oil on the global market using non-EU flag carriers and insurers. The EU has no jurisdiction over countries such as India and China. Together, the two countries accounted for around 85 percent of Russia's crude oil exports in the month of June, last. It is also illegal if the EU tries to shut down the Gujarat-based Nayara Energy (formerly Essar Oil), in which Rosneft, the Russian oil giant, holds a 49.13 percent stake, or tries to prevent Indian oil refineries from importing crude oil from Russia. Reliance Industries (RIL) is India's largest importer of Russian crude oil for processing and exporting refined products. RIL shipped an average of 2.83 million barrels of diesel and 1.5 million barrels of jet fuel per month to Europe in the first seven months of this year, according to London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG) ship tracking data. Rosneft is present in Singapore through its subsidiary, Rosneft Singapore Pte. Ltd., to manage regional projects and develop international trade in oil and petroleum products as part of Rosneft's strategic focus on the Asia-Pacific region, which is expected to see significant growth in energy consumption. It also has a joint venture with PetroChina to build a refinery and petrochemical complex in Tianjin, China. The EU, in its 18th package of sanctions against Russia, approved on July 18, has banned imports of refined petroleum products made from Russian crude coming from third countries although it excluded a handful of Western nations, including Norway, the UK, Switzerland, Canada and the US. It banned vessels from accessing EU ports and docks, or undertaking ship-to-ship transfers of oil in a bid to shut down the so-called 'shadow fleet' of older oil tankers which are reportedly used to transport Russian oil and circumvent sanctions. It may be noted that the US has somewhat resisted the action, leaving the EU to move forward on its own, with limited power to enforce the measure because oil is largely traded in dollars, for which payment clearing is controlled by US banks. The EU's new package of sanctions is most unlikely to hit Russia's oil and gas exports. India and China are expected to continue buying discounted Russian crude although some Indian refineries, such as RIL, will find it difficult to re-export processed Russian crude to EU member countries. RIL may have to find new ways or new destinations to re-export processed Russian crude which may be further discounted after the fresh EU sanctions or face a big financial blow. As a whole, the Indian refinery industry will have to find ways to re-export refined Russian crude oil if they desire. This may not be an easy task. India was a supplier of refined petroleum products worth $15 billion annually to Europe. India imported crude oil worth US$50.3 billion from Russia in 2024-25. The share of Russian oil in India's crude oil basket is more than 44 percent. Several non-EU countries import processed crude oil, particularly refined petroleum products derived from Russian crude. India, China, and Turkey are significant buyers of Russian crude oil and refined products. Other notable processed crude oil importers include South Korea and Taiwan. The latest EU package of sanctions will make Russian crude oil even cheaper. It lowers the price on Russian crude to $47.60 a barrel from $60. The new cap, which takes effect on September 3, also includes a mechanism to ensure it is always 15 percent below average Russian crude prices. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), Russia earned around $192 billion last year from selling oil. Cutting a part of that may mean a loss to the country's export revenue, but it could also be at the cost of the rest of the world with spiking oil prices globally if the export of Russia's more than seven million barrels of oil per day abruptly disappears. Anyway, India and China, the two top importers of Russian oil, are most unlikely to go by so-called universal ban on import of Russian oil imposed by the EU or the US threat to order such a ban in due course to force a truce in the Russia-Ukraine war. Incidentally, both India and China continue to have good relations with Ukraine. Last year, India's imports from Ukraine were valued at $1.036 billion, while India's exports to Ukraine were $0.187 billion. The total trade turnover between the two countries for the same period was $1.224 billion. China's imports from Ukraine totalled US$2.68 billion, according to the UN COMTRADE database. So far, both India and China appear to be unfazed by the EU ban on Russia's oil and gas exports. India's Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri thinks the market would more or less continue to operate as usual. The EU lens on Rosneft is a concern. Rosneft was believed to be in talks with some potential Indian buyers, including RIL, to sell off its majority stake in Nayara Energy, even before the EU contemplated further tightening the ban on Russian oil exports. The Indian petroleum minister seems to be generally happy that oil markets have not hardened following the announcement of fresh EU sanctions on Russia. Although India's $15-billion refined petroproducts export to the EU will take a hit, the country is already exploring new markets for the export of refined petroleum. The export earning, last year, was worth as much as $85 billion. Given the current geopolitical situation, import-based India needs to work out a strong strategy to protect its energy security as well as export trade. (IPA Service)
Zawya
24-07-2025
- Zawya
India's financial crime agency probes Anil Ambani's Reliance Group, source says
India's financial crime-fighting agency searched 35 locations linked to Reliance Anil Ambani Group as part of an investigation into alleged money laundering and siphoning of public funds, a government source said on Thursday. The Enforcement Directorate alleges the group orchestrated a 'well-planned' scheme to siphon off bank loans from YES Bank worth 30 billion rupees ($350 million) between 2017 and 2019 to many shell companies, the source said on condition of anonymity, as he is not authorised to speak to the media. Anil Ambani's Reliance group entities are accused of paying bribes to YES Bank officials before loans were disbursed, the source said, adding that loan approvals violated the bank's processes. Reliance and YES Bank did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Several group firms of Anil Ambani, the younger brother of billionaire Mukesh Ambani, have gone into bankruptcy since 2017. YES Bank, from which Anil Ambani group firms had borrowed heavily, was declared insolvent in 2020 and rescued by a group of Indian lenders in a plan approved by the central bank. Japan's Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp is seeking a 20% stake in a deal that has yet to get regulatory approval. The probe also found gross violations in YES Bank's loan approval process, such as lending to companies with weak financials, backdating credit memos, "evergreening" loans - issuing fresh loans to avoid labelling assets as nonperforming - and misrepresenting financials. YES Bank's former promoter, Rana Kapoor, was charged with bank fraud by the financial crime agency in 2020 and later arrested. He pleaded not guilty and was granted bail in 2024 by a special court in India's financial capital of Mumbai, according to local media reports. Anil Ambani's group entities have been subject to several regulatory actions in recent years. In August 2024, the markets regulator SEBI barred Anil Ambani and 24 others from securities markets for five years, citing fund diversion from Reliance Home Finance. Shares of Reliance Infrastructure and Reliance Power fell as much as 5% on Thursday after the news of the latest probe circulated. ($1 = 86.3300 Indian rupees) (Reporting by Nikunj Ohri in New Delhi, writing by Shubham Batra; Editing by William Mallard)
Arabian Post
15-07-2025
- Arabian Post
Indian Trade Unions Need To Reform Themselves To Remain Relevant
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)
