The scope and need for trade unions have grown manifold in today’s world, CITU President A K Padmanabhan tells Saubhadro Chatterji
You have replaced M K Pandhe as the president of the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU). Another CITU veteran Md Amin has been replaced by Tapan Sen as the general secretary. Is CITU trying to sport a young face to cater to a younger workforce?
It’s not the issue of looking young. Change in the leadership is a continuous process. Comrade Pandhe had taken charge of CITU long ago. He has not been replaced either. Both Pandhe and Amin continue to be part of the CITU leadership. We will be working with their guidance. This change has to be in every organisation.
Whether it’s the new leadership or the old one, the main question is the continuity of our perspective and policies. CITU has its own perspective, and that stays. We have completed 40 years. So, new leaders would automatically come to fore.
Do you mean the new leadership will not bring a new ideology in the organisation and it will function in the same way?
As far as CITU’s work, its perspective and its ideology are concerned, there will not be any change. It is very clear whatever we have said and whatever aims and objectives we have laid down in 40 years, we are upholding the same banners of unity of the working class, unity for struggle — we are continuing that.
But there has been a sea change in the industrial world in these 40 years. How do you see the relevance of trade unions in today's scenario?
I must say that the scope and the need for trade unions have increased manifold in today's world. Just look at what's going on in industry. Workers have understood that globalisation is only meant to expand exploitation. The necessity of having a strong organisation to launch struggles has been understood by a wider section of people. The way the employers want to use the situation, the way the multi-national companies (MNCs) want to do their business, it is clear they don't care for the law made in the British period. Remember the Trade Union Act came into being in 1926.
It's amusing to see the same MNC managements, which allow workers to form trade unions in their own countries, are opposed to the idea in India. Hyundai has a very powerful union in Seoul. When leaders of that union come to India, they are well-received and respected. But the Hyundai management in India was averse to employees forming unions. The mindset at Ford is no different. Even some Indian companies, which virtually enjoy monopolies, earlier allowed their workers to form unions, but now they, too, are following the footsteps of these MNCs and saying: "We don't want unions, we will shift our factory if unions are formed."
Yes, I agree there is a sea change. But what is the change? It's more and more exploitation. Earlier, almost 90 per cent employees in big companies were regular workers. Now, not even 10 per cent are on company pay rolls. In my state, Tamil Nadu, there is a special economic zone in Thirunelveli district for the transport sector. It has a tyre manufacturing unit that does not have even one regular worker. Each of the 425 workers is on contract. Within four months, the workers had stopped work on their own. Now, we have formed a union there.
More From This Section
In several other units in Tamil Nadu, there are hardly 40 per cent regular workers. We had forced the state government to amend its orders and fix a ceiling on apprenticeship. But it has still not been implemented.
Whether it is private, public, unorganised or cooperative sector, trade unions need to assert themselves more everywhere. In the emerging industries of the private sector, the role of unions is much more relevant.
But in the IT sector, trade unions have no role. In private enterprises, too, people don't want your organisations to interfere. In the unorganised sector, you couldn't establish yourself...
See, in the emerging private sector... in Karnataka, Haryana, Tamil Nadu... workers are forming trade unions on their own. They feel they should get united for collective bargaining. Yes, this is not happening to our full satisfaction, but the trends are very clear.
In IT, software engineers may be slightly better paid. But, the condition of workers in the IT-enabled services, business process outsourcing units, is pathetic. Recently, US President (Barack) Obama said offshore companies would have to pay taxes. Nasscom remarked, even after these tax concessions were withdrawn, we would still be able to go ahead. What does that mean? It shows they would earn their profits by cutting down employees' wages.
Your own leader, West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee has time and again kept the IT sector out of strike calls by CITU. He says he doesn't support strikes...
Workers don't support strikes either. But this is the only weapon in their hands to show their displeasure. We make strike calls only on policy issues. For example, BSNL officers and workers are going on strike on April 20. After that, May 5 onwards, more than 700,000 coal sector workers would go on strike. The workers have no other way but to call for a strike against the government's disinvestment policies. From 1991 till date, all our strikes have been called on policy issues, not for the economic benefit of individual workers. The workers have the right and will continue to intervene on policy issues.
Are you planning to go back to the old days of radical trade unionism and the culture of gherao?
I don't agree with this "radical" tag. We have our own agenda. We will do whatever is required to establish the rights of workers, starting from demonstrations to strikes. These are prerogatives of the workers and the working class.
Our priority now is to have more united struggle. Gherao in 1960s had its own reasons. Now, the need is that more and more workers - irrespective of their organisations and affiliations - should come together to pressure the government to change its policies. Last September, we formed a platform of all nine central trade unions, although the media didn't give any importance to it. We are jointly fighting on five issues - disinvestment, price rise, social security for the unorganised sector, implementation of labour laws and reduction in employment.
We want to maintain this unity. This is an issue-based unity and has nothing to do with party affiliations. We agree we have differences, but we have to overcome these differences.
Your critics say CITU is under the clutches of CPI(M) and, so, it can't function as an independent entity...
This is not correct. Yes, we have close ties with the party. Some of our leaders also hold organisational posts in CPI(M), but we act as a separate entity.
You oppose disinvestment of central government undertakings, but you are quiet when the Left Front government sells off Great Eastern Hotel...
We are opposed to the sale of strategic assets in strategic sectors. It's not correct to compare the telecom or coal sector with the hotel sector!