Labour Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2011 - Debate Participation SHRI RABINDRA KUMAR JENA (BALASORE): Honble Deputy-Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on the Labour Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2011. I will speak from my own experience and not from any other consideration. I say so because I had the advantage of working in an industry for about twenty years. Having joined the industry at the bottom most rung of the ladder as a Trainee, I left the industry after twenty years as the Managing Director of the company. Hence, I had the advantage of getting myself associated with various labour issues in the course of my association with the industry in those twenty years. Having said that, let me go back to the Bill in detail. The Bill was first brought in the year 2005. But the Bill was returned with primarily two observations. One is, extensive discussion must be held with all the stakeholders, more precisely with the employers and the employees. The Bill was again reintroduced in the year 2011. After this, discussions were held with the employers, but no consensus was arrived at with the trade unions and with the employees. One of the basic things which I would like to point out is that the whole Bill is based on a certain study conducted by the CSO, Central Statistical Organisation. The CSO, in its Report, has very clearly opined that about 418 lakh of such establishments are there in the country. But it was silent on the number of people working in those industries. This is a very important point that I would like to make. So, the number of workers have not been ascertained or determined. But the amendment has been brought forward basically on the basis of the numbers, which several Members who spoke before me have also pointed out. The study was never conducted on the number itself. It is a very important point I would like to bring to your notice. I will come to some of the critical observations about the Bill. We had a lot of discussions on the Standing Committee’s Report. The Member who spoke before me has said that the Standing Committee has given its consent to the Bill. The Standing Committee has made several recommendations. But several of those recommendations have not become part and parcel of the Bill. I will point out a few of them. For example, the Standing Committee has said that there is no penal provision in the Bill. I would just like to read out the Standing Committee’s recommendation. It said: “In the given scenario when there is no provision of punishment in the Act itself, it is open for the establishment not to furnish the return which could reveal the status of micro, small and medium enterprises. The Committee is of the considered view that a law without penal provision is toothless and cannot be enforced.” Any law without a legal provision is basically a law which is defunct and has no existence. I would sincerely urge upon the Hon’ble Minister to take cognizance of this serious and important point. Otherwise, we would digress from the main objective of the Bill. Now, I will come to point no. 2. It is basically a number game. One of our senior Members said that it should be increased from 19 to 25. You need to understand that on the face of it the Bill may look very simple, that this Bill is nothing but the number is getting increased from 19 to 40. But it has got a very serious consequence on the number of people who will go out of the ambit of the labour laws or the legal framework. The moment you increase it from 19 to 40, more than 70 per cent of the workforce in the country from this sector will go out of the ambit of the legal framework. To whom we are addressing? It means that the fate of all the labour class is slowly and silently getting transferred into the hands of a chosen few who are, by and large, driven by profit motive. Are we doing justice? Are we supposed to pass this kind of a law with this type of a provision in it? It is very serious that while the return is submitted in the electronic format, there is not provision that the names and other details of the employees need to be filled up. This will put to non-transparency in the system. People will take advantage of this. So, I would very seriously and honestly urge upon the Hon’ble Minister to take cognisance of the three points which I made just now. We, per se, do not oppose this Bill but while supporting the Bill, we very strongly urge upon the Hon’ble Minister to consider the three critical points while passing the Bill. With these words, I conclude. Thank you very much
Posted on: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 07:41:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015