The Conditions Of The Contract Workers In 2010
At Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur
A Fact Finding Report by Raj Sahai
13 December, 2010
Countercurrents.org
Nov 1, 2010
Summary Report
Introduction
As a representative of over 1200 alumni who signed the petition titled “STOP violation of Workers' Rights at IITK,” [ 4 ] I spent three days on IITK campus from September 8 to September 10, 2010. During these three days, I met with the IITK Director, administrators, contract workers, faculty and students knowledgeable about the contract workers' issue on campus. This report is based on what I learned from these meetings as well as several past and current records including a recent communiqué, past office orders, a recent June 15, 2010 circular, e-mail correspondences and petitions that I gathered over time and studied before my campus visit. IITK did not present me any new written evidence or documents to defend their position. My meeting schedule was as follows:
• September 8
• Meeting #1 Attendees: Dr. S. G. Dhande (Director) and Prof. Sanjeev Aggarwal (DRPG).
• Meeting #2 with over 200 workers who gathered at 6 PM at Valmiki Mandir at IITK. Some workers, who have now been fired, came from as far away as Lucknow. This meeting is also referred to as ‘Hamara Manch' (‘HM') in the text.
• September 9
• Meeting #3 Attendees: Mr. Rajeev Garg (Superintendent Engineer – SE, IWD), Mr. Tarun Gautam (IWD engineer and the MWMC secretary), several Engineers of IWD, Prof Sanjeev Aggarwal (DRPG), Mr. Sanjeev Kashalkar (Registrar).
• Meeting #4 Attendees: Professors A.P. Shukla (Retired), Suchitra Mathur, Gouthama (Current Member MWMC), Rahul Varman, Harish Karnick (Former MWMC Chair), Manali Chakrabarti, two contract workers and a few students
• September 10
• Meeting #5 Attendees: Prof. Munmun Jha (Current MWMC Chair), Mr. C. P. Singh (Assistant Registrar Legal), and Prof. Sanjeev Aggarwal (DRPG)
NOTE TAKER : Prof. Shobha Madan (an alumna, presently a faculty at IIT Kanpur and the first chair of the Minimum Wages Monitoring Committee) who was a voluntary observer, prepared transcripts of all meetings except the second meeting on Sep. 9 where a student prepared the meeting record.
Background
The practice of employing contract workers by IIT Kanpur started increasing at the expense of direct regular employees during the past two decades and presently the figure of the contingent workforce is estimated to be around 2,500. For its normal functioning, the Institute relies upon these contract workers not only for temporary construction works but also for perennial works such as messing (food preparation, serving and cleaning of kitchen and dishes), civil maintenance, electrical maintenance, horticulture, sanitation and sewer cleaning. The Ministry of Labor and Employment, Government of India, views that inferior labor status, casual nature of employment, lack of job security and poor economic conditions are the major characteristics of contract labor. These most vulnerable workers have been provided unequivocal legal protection by different laws, mainly, Contract Labor (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 [CL(R & A) Act, 1970], Minimum Wages Act, 1948 [MW Act, 1948], The Payment of Wages Act, 1936 [PW Act, 1936], Workmen Compensation Act & Apprentices Act 1961, and Inter-state Migrant Workmen Act, 1979 [ISMW Act, 1979].
These laws maintain that although contract workers are indirect employees, who are hired, supervised and remunerated by a contractor, it is the primary responsibility of the ‘principal employer', i.e. IIT Kanpur, which retains and pays for the work performed by the same workers, to legally ensure the timely payment of minimum (living) wages, contribute to ESI/EPF and Workers' Cess schemes, provide safe working conditions and safeguard the provision of amenities such as canteens, crèches, rest-rooms, latrines, urinals, washing facilities and first-aid facilities to the contract laborers.
The community of IIT Kanpur – students, faculty, staff and their family members – has observed numerous cases where the Institute has failed in its responsibility to protect the labor rights of the contract workers. The incidents of not paying the legally mandated minimum wages, arbitrary hiring and firing by the contractors, malpractices in the constitutionally guaranteed social security schemes such as ESI/EPF, bullying, threats and harassments of these workers have been rampant; in fact an established practice. The negligence in realizing the health and safety conditions have given rise to numerous injuries resulting in deaths in some cases. The IITK community, together with the workers, has been raising these issues and seeking redress from the administration and contractors for a long time. In recent times alumni and other citizens have also become a part of this struggle. A signature campaign launched by a group of alumni has been supported by more than 1200 alumni.
Summary of Findings
A summary of what I learned during my visit is given below. Details with appropriate references can be found in the detailed report available at IITK Citizens' Forum .
All IITK senior administrators have insisted that:
• IITK is following all labor laws;
• Situation in IITK for contract workers is better than that outside the campus; and
• Things have significantly improved since 2007.
However, none of the Institute officials acknowledge the contradictions or find anything wrong with the inconsistencies in the documents they themselves prepared or actions they themselves undertook that violate the spirit if not the letter of the labor laws. The general lack of actions on their part to punish the contractors for engaging in corrupt labor practices is also evident. The various reports generated by the Minimum Wage Monitoring Committee (MWMC) before 2008 and reports from labor commissioners' investigating team in 2009 have not resulted in any improvement in the lives of the contract workers despite the claims of these officials in my meetings with them.
The officials of IITK wish to convince the alumni that all necessary steps have been taken to correct the abuse of the contract workers. However, they have shown little interest in enforcing the Contract Labor Laws designed to protect the contract workers, the most vulnerable and least paid workers on the campus. An example of this mindset is a recent unsigned, undated document, and not written on the official letterhead of the Institute, titled Communiqué, prepared by an undeclared group of faculty/administrators. It was sent by the DRPG to the present and past presidents of the alumni association and a couple of the alumni, including myself, who are part of the efforts to correct these malpractices. It declares all the contract workers are now being paid their minimum guaranteed legal wages in the MWMC office; that the emergency campus medical facilities are now available to the workers, and all other grievances of the past are now being effectively dealt with. However, I learned in my visit to the campus that when one of the present MWMC members saw it and questioned the claims made in this Communiqué, he was told, “This may not be the existing reality, but this is what our committee should aspire to do.” From this I concluded that the alumni are being shielded from the truth.
The Director and the Institute officials insisted that significant improvements have been made in the conditions of the contract workers since 2007. Thus, it would seem that the Institute took initiative for these claimed improvements. However, such an impression will be misplaced. I learned that it was IITK community, including alumni intervention and condemnation of IITK's apathy towards the unnecessary deaths of three workers in 2007 that forced the IITK administration to issue the Sept. 16, 2007 Office Order which promised various reforms. Yet, its primary intent was essentially to placate the community and alumni rather than solve the problems as can be judged by the fact that even after three years, the Office Order is yet to be implemented. Similarly, when in 2010, the alumni petition regarding workers' rights once again strongly expressed alumni concern, the Institute issued the Communiqué that also asserted that all was well. But in between these two documents, the September 16, 2007 Office Order and the Communiqué, I learned that the Institute has also taken a number of steps and issued documents internally which contradicts these documents. These include appointment of members to MWMC who are generally unsympathetic to workers, disconnecting it completely from the large volunteer base that had made it functional prior to 2008, and turning over the wage office to the Institute Works Department (IWD) so that it lost all significance as an independent instrument for wage disbursement and handling grievances. In addition, there were notices issued for the Safai Karamcharis and the June 15, 2010 Circular empowering contractors to fire any worker without recourse for redressal. Since 2007, two more workers have met with accidental deaths and three have been seriously injured. Yet, none of these deaths or injuries has been appropriately compensated nor any significant efforts were made to improve safety at workplaces. From all these measures, I can only conclude that the Institute officials' are apathetic if not hostile towards the contract workers.
My three meetings with the Institute officials, confirmed the conclusion based on the documents issued noted in the paragraph above, that the IITK officials have no sympathy and little regard for the welfare of the contract workers . They do not value these workers' contributions to the functioning and growth of the Institute and have no appreciation of the wealth created by their labor. They don't see that the faculty and students enjoy the same facilities these workers create and maintain by their hard and illegally underpaid labor. In fact, the officials see them as essentially worthless and a nuisance that they are obliged to put up with, and wish they could be replaced by machines. The result of anti-worker attitudes among the officials of IITK has led to an environment of persistent intimidation of workers which is evident from:
• Workers continue to be denied minimum wages, health and retirement benefits (ESI and EPF), and other basic amenities, such as Rest-rooms, Canteens, Latrines and Urinals, Washing facilities, First-Aid facilities, and Crèches constitutionally due to them.
• The abovementioned Director's Circular of June 15, 2010 which has empowered the contractors to fire workers without any due process. This contradicts the previous order of 2007 and clearly violates the spirit if not the letter of the contract labor laws.
• General lack of or badly delayed and inadequate punishment of the contractors against whom complaints have been filed while workers have been fired for merely lodging complaints.
• Lack of concern for providing safe working conditions and the safe conditions for the workers' children, who remain at the construction site while their parents work.
The current MWMC Chair whose job it is to be the watchdog for the workers' interests instead defends the contractors. In his opinion, contractors are necessary for the Institute, but the workers are not.
A former chairman of MWMC wrote in his 2007 terminal report the following: “…[O]ur communication to the administration has been largely one way. We have sent countless suggestions, complaints, reminders to the administration, but they have usually chosen to ignore them, forcing us into an unprecedented situation where we had to file an RTI even to get information from the administration. And even then we were not provided with complete information.” While the Director in his meeting acknowledged there were problems in the past, he claimed there has been “significant improvement” since that time.
In my investigation, based on my conversations with the workers and activist students and faculty, I found that the conditions have largely remained the same as in 2007, and in certain aspects have worsened.
Recommendations
WHAT CAN ALUMNI DO ?
Given the long history of abuse of the contract workers at the IITK campus and as responsible citizens of the larger IITK community, the alumni community needs to be very actively involved in monitoring the situation and providing support to the efforts by the workers and members of the campus community to correct this situation. My visit and this fact-finding report need to form part of an ongoing process of alumni engagement with the contract workers issue at IITK. Some of our suggestions for such continuous involvement include:
• Signing the online petition to STOP Violating Contract Workers Rights at IIT Kanpur.
< http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/contract_worker_rights_iitk/ >.
• Writing letters to the Director at < [email protected] > to implement recommendations of this report.
• Writing letters to alumni friends and encouraging them to sign the online petition and write letters to the Director.
• Developing mechanisms to follow up on this report through initiation of feedback processes from the Institute, further fact-finding missions and / or visits by growing numbers of alumni to IITK campus where through speaking with workers and engaged community members, they can ascertain the situation for themselves.
• We also welcome other suggestions from alumni regarding ways in which we can further our involvement and make our voice stronger in effective protest against the ongoing violation of contract workers' rights at IIT Kanpur.
WHAT CAN INSTITUTE DO?
To the IITK administration, we recommend a series of measures that will concretely show their active commitment to, and not just paper evidence of, improving the contract workers' situation on campus. Immediate tasks that the Institute needs to undertake in this respect include:
• Immediate retraction of June 15, 2010 Circular that has given powers to contractors to fire any worker they wish without recourse to grievance process. Its provisions are illegal, inhumane and further contribute to systematic oppression of workers who are vital to the Institute's functioning.
• Creation of comprehensive worker lists (with photos) and lists of ESI/EPF documentation for workers, both of which could be put up in the public domain through the Institute website and notice boards.
• Implementation of safety measures, including training of workers in use of safety gadgets as well as first-aid materials, in consultation with workers and with feedback mechanisms in place to ensure that the safety measures meet the needs of the workers.
• Provision of Basic Amenities to Workers as required by the law. Since contractors have failed to provide basic amenities, the law empowers Principal Employer (IITK) to provide those amenities and deduct the cost from contractors' bills. IITK should use this power immediately.
• Since ESI hospitals are far away from campus, IITK should provide Health Care facility where workers are housed. Funds from Workers Cess could be used to run the healthcare facility and school for their children (also a desire expressed by the Director).
At a systemic level, the Institute needs to create a workplace atmosphere that is free of fear and intimidation for the workers. Towards this end, I recommend the following measures:
• Formation of a new Contract Workers Rights Committee (CWRC), replacing the current MWMC, with a mandate in writing to create mechanisms for giving a voice to workers, allowing for active consideration of their feedback in all measures related to them and providing a system for grievance handling that includes due process. This committee needs to be an independent one made up of community watchdogs and with representation from all concerned constituencies including workers and users. The representatives from the Institute (be it faculty or other officials) should only include those who have shown no prejudice against the workers, who have general knowledge of the workers grievances, and who have no conflict of interest as regards the workers or the contractors. The CWRC should regularly file their updates, reports, observations and suggestions where they can be accessed by all members of the community including workers, alumni, students, faculty, staff and others.
• Creation of mechanisms whereby IITK contributes to the economic development of its surrounding communities by offering employment to local youth. The formation of a Workers' Exchange wherein all local workers are registered, and the insistence that all contractors hire workers primarily through this organization, would accomplish this goal.
The Institute, in fact, would go a long way in fulfilling its responsibilities with regard to contract workers and ensuring fair labor practices by implementing the provisions outlined in the Policy Document prepared by the MWMC in 2006 and making the idea of a Workers' Exchange operational.
Note: The recommendations noted above were developed after much discussion and represent a consensus reached upon by the following alumni, all based in US/Canada: Raj Sahai (1966 Batch), Ashok Gupta (1972 Batch), Sushil Handa (1966 Batch) and Amit Singh (2005 Batch).
Acknowledgment
I appreciate and thank Dr. Sanjeev Aggarwal, DRPG, for arranging all the meetings and thank Dr. S. G. Dhande, Director, for meeting with me and arranging for my meetings with other officials of the Institute. I would also like to thank other officials, faculty, and students for meeting with me and providing me with their insights on workers' issues. However, my greatest thanks are owed to the workers, of whom more than 200 gathered at Valmiki Mandir for the Hamara Manch meeting. Some of them came from as far away as Lucknow, and some traveled 20 kms by bicycle, to share with me their stories at a great personal risk of being retaliated against by the contractors for just attending the meeting. I also owe a debt to Dr. Shobha Madan for attending all the meetings, taking detailed notes, and the preparation of transcripts. Finally, I owe thanks to all the activists who both in the US and on the campus helped me and trusted me on this fact finding effort. I could not have prepared this report without their painstaking efforts.
Raj Sahai is a 1966 graduate from IIT Kanpur currently at San Francisco, USA. He visited IITK campus from September 8-10, 2010 for a fact finding mission on contract workers issue as a representative of over 1200 alumni who signed the petition, “STOP Violating Workers' Rights at IITK [4]” . He can be reached at [email protected]
I also encourage you to go through the detailed report available at IITK Citizens' Forum .
Important note : I had requested the meeting only be held with the inspectors of the IWD to understand work site realities for contract workers, but the Institute added many officials and bosses of the inspectors, so that in effect, open and free dialogue with the inspectors was not possible.
