UPA, Left differ on private role in placements

The ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA) and the Left parties differed, though mildly, on "privatisation of employment exchanges" in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday.

While the Congress maintained that what was happening was just an extension of employment information services, the CPI(M) wanted to know why the Planning Commission had suggested some of the work of employment exchanges be farmed out to private placement agencies.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lent its voice in support of the CPI(M), the second time this week in the Upper House. On the last occasion, both the Left and the BJP agreed that FDI in the retail sector would be bad for the country.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh intervened to say that providing information on employment was an integral part of providing employment and if the private sector was doing this, there was no harm in it.

Moolchand Meena (CPI) wanted to know if the Planning Commission had suggested that the Employment Exchanges Act be amended to allow private employment exchanges to provide jobs and placement services to both private sector and public sector establishments.

He also wanted to know if the reason for this was the poor coverage of employment exchanges, in which case, employment exchanges should be strengthened.

In a statement, Minister of State for Planning MV Rajashekharan said the mid-term appraisal of the 10th Plan had suggested that the Employment Exchanges Act be amended and private employment exchanges be set up to provide job placement services in both the public and private sector.

The minister said the data collected by employment exchanges was poor and thus failed to capture trends in employment.

The CPI(M)'s Sitaram Yechury said registration with employment exchanges was going down. In any case, employment exchanges existed to provide employment, not to help collect data.

Murli Manohar Joshi (BJP) said the government must consult Parliament before agreeing to such a proposal.

The Prime Minister fended off what was threatening to become a full-scale controversy by suggesting mildly that employment information services could be provided by both the private and public sector.

Though the House moved to the next question, it was clear that the last word had not been heard of the issue.