People’s Union for Democratic Rights
23 May 2013
Press Release
Release of PUDR
report ‘Driving
Force: Labour Struggles and Violation of Rights in Maruti Suzuki India
Limited’(May 2013) at Press Conference in Chandigarh
On
18 July 2012 a violent incident occurred at the Manesar unit of Maruti Suzuki
India Limited (MSIL), in which an HR manager died and some other managers as
well as workers were injured. Following reports of severe harassment of
Maruti workers and their families in late July 2012, Peoples Union for
Democratic Rights (PUDR) began a fact-finding investigation into the incident,
its context and implications. We are releasing our findings today in the
form of a report ‘Driving Force: Labour
Struggles and Violation of Rights in Maruti Suzuki India Limited’ (PUDR,
May, 2013). This report follows PUDR’s two previous reports Hard Drive (2001)
and Freewheelin’ Capital (2007) which recorded crucial moments of the
labour struggle at Maruti. In the course of our fact finding, we have met
or spoken to the workers (contract, permanent and terminated), the union
leaders, their lawyer as well as officials from the labour department, Gurgaon,
and different police officials. All attempts to meet the management turned out
to be futile because it did not give us appointment for a meeting despite our
persistent efforts.
PUDR’s findings, recorded in the
report are as follows:
(1)
The events of 18 July 2012 at Maruti's
Manesar unit are still heavily shrouded in ambiguity and the real culprits can
be identified only if a thorough investigation is done by an independent agency
which is not influenced by the management. The Haryana police have been
consistently acting in a partisan manner favouring the management since the
incident, and therefore cannot be entrusted with this task. The lack of an
independent investigation into the incident has been amounting to a grave
miscarriage of justice.
(2)
In an absolute disregard for the rule of law,
the entire blame for the incident was put on the workers not just by
the management, but also the police and administration, long before the
investigation was over. The nexus between the police and the management
got exposed most starkly after the 18 July incident. The close
correspondence between the FIR lodged by the police containing between
500 and 600 ‘unnamed accused’ and the termination of 546 workers by the
company allegedly for being responsible for the violence on 18 July,
cannot be a coincidence. It shows exactly how closely the police are
protecting the company’s interests.
(3)
This presumption of guilt governed
the manner in which the police acted after the incident. The police
arbitrarily arrested a large number of workers not through an investigation,
but on the basis of lists provided by the management targeting the workers
who were vocal, articulate and active in the union, subjected the arrested
workers to brutal torture, violated the constitutional safeguards
regarding detention and arrests and harassed the family members of the workers.
Not only this it has been continuing to intimidate, target and attack the on
going struggle of the terminated and other workers in order to silence and
criminalise their legitimate protest (See Chapter Four). The scale of police
action against workers seems to be aimed to act as a deterrent for any
agitation in future – not only by these workers but also other workers in
the Manesar and Gurgaon industrial area. Most recently on 18 May
2013, the Haryana police imposed Section 144 CrPC in Kaithal and arrested
around 150 workers peacefully protesting there since 24 March demanding release
of arrested workers and reinstatement of terminated workers.
(4)
Another example of the police colluding
with the management is that it has in the course of investigating the incident
completely ignored the discrepancies in the management’s account, the
fact that the workers were also injured, the presence of bouncers in the premises,
or the fact that Awanish Dev, was always considered by the workers to be sympathetic
to them. In fact it is the workers’ who have been demanding an
independent investigation into the incident, a demand which has
been ignored by the state and the central government.
(5)
We wish to
assert that an investigation and trial based on preconceived notions and not on
the basis of scientifically gathered evidence could mean that those responsible
for Awanish Dev’s death will go scot free and innocents will be penalised. A
close look at the charge sheet filed by the police and denial of bail to the
arrested workers shows that the case is moving in this very direction. This would
amount to a travesty of law and denial of justice not only to the workers, but
also to Awanish Dev.
(6)
The incident should be seen in the
context of the long chain of events that preceded it. It can be understood in
the light of the continuous tension and conflict in the unit between the
management and the workers as well as their persistent struggle of workers of
the Manesar unit to register a union and draw attention to their inhuman
working conditions.
(7)
In September
2011, the Maruti management at the Manesar unit imposed a condition that the
workers could enter the plant for work only after signing a 'good conduct'
undertaking. The
‘good conduct’ undertaking effectively takes away the right of the
workers to go on a legal strike, a right guaranteed by the Industrial
Disputes Act (25T, 25U read with the Fifth Schedule); this also
amounts to unfair labour practice as per Section 8, Fifth Schedule, IDA.
(See Chapter Three)
(8)
Like
all other corporates, the main driving factor in Maruti is reducing production
costs, maximising profits and competing against other companies. Maruti's
expenditure on workers is among the lowest in automobile companies. Moreover
the company adopts various measures to extract maximum work from itsworkers.
At Maruti therefore, the production capability and targets are
set considerably higher than the installed capacity, i.e., production
capability of the company is 1.55 million units per annum even though
installed capacity is 1.26 units per annum (Annual Report, Maruti
Suzuki India Limited, 2011- 12). Workers are made to work non stop like
robots for eight and a half hours, with a break of only 30 minutes for lunch
and two tea breaks of 7 minutes each. For years, workers have been made to both
report for duty 15 minutes before shift-time and also work for 15 minutes extra
every day without any overtime payment. Further the policy on leave is very
stringent and the leave record is directly linked to the wages which are
deducted on account of any leave taken. This contributes to the regime of
ceaseless production and drastic increase in work pressure on the Maruti
shopfloors.
(9)
The wage deductions on account of leave
are made from the incentive-linked part of the wages of Maruti workers, under
the Production-Performance-Reward Scheme. A single leave taken by a permanent
worker, with permission from the supervisor, could also cost him a loss of Rs.
1200 to Rs. 1500. Both before and after the 18 July 2012 incident, a part of
the wages is fixed, and a major component paid as incentive wages linked to
production, profit and leave records, which makes the wages fluctuating. Norms
of incentive linked wages have been arbitrarily fixed and changed by the
management at Maruti's Manesar plant. (See Chapter Two and Three)
(10)
Maruti management especially at Manesar
have been resorting to use of temporary and contract labour as a norm, for
regular work. In July 2012, according to figures tabulated by the Labour
Department, less than 25% of the workers at Manesar were permanent. These
workers are paid only for the days they work (i.e., 26 days a month) and
considerably less than the permanent workers, for doing the same work. Not only
is this a major cost cutting measure but it secures for the company a more
vulnerable, disempowered and pliant work-force, less likely to be vocal and
demand their rights. The company's announced after the 18 July incident, that
it will regularise its workers. This is yet to materialise. (See Chapter Two)
(11)
The Maruti management has also
consistently violated the workers’ rights by creating hurdles and
actively preventing them from organising themselves. The policy of
the Maruti management not to let the workers unionise, is a violation of
the Indian Trade Union Act (1926). Since mid-2011, as the workers’ struggle intensified,
the management has responded by targeting active workers through
suspensions, terminations and registration of false cases against
them. Once the union got registered, its members and coordinators have
faced similar or worse harassment. All the union leaders and many active
members were implicated in the 18 July incident leading to complete
breakdown of the union and making the workers vulnerable as they have lost
all avenues of negotiation with the management. A large number of
active workers were subsequently terminated by the company, as mentioned,
because the company arbitrarily held them responsible for the 18 July incident.
After forcibly removing the union from the unit, the company is now making
a farcical gesture towards dealing with workers’ issues, by
setting up a joint worker-management ‘grievance committee’ and
compelling the workers to be a part of it. The legally registered
union (MSWU) whose members are continuing to take up workers' issues are not
being allowed to function inside the unit.
(12)
The
Haryana Labour Department has connived with the management in depriving
the workers their right to unionise. In August 2011, it rejected the
pending application of the workers for registration, citing technical
grounds. Effectively, an application for registration filed on 3 June
2011, resulted in actual registration of the union on 1 March 2012, after
months of fraught struggle. Moreover the Labour Department does not appear
to have ever intervened in support of workers' rights in the labour disputes at
Maruti. When the management deducted Maruti Manesar workers' wages on account
of the lockout of 2011, by describing it as a strike, or when the management
failed to act upon the Charter of Demands of workers in 2012, the Labour Department
did not intervene. It has failed to question the management on its use of
dubious and unfair labour practices, the 'good conduct undertaking' or the use
of contract labour for regular work. (See Chapter Three)
(13)
One of the notable features of the recent labour
struggles at Maruti’s Manesar unit has been an unprecedented unity
between permanent and contract workers. The labour union has
consistently taken up issues pertaining to the contract workers. One of
the main demands from the beginning of the struggle has been the
regularisation of contract workers. The terminated workers who
have regrouped under the MSWU include both permanent and contract
workers. Contract workers are also among those who have been held
guilty of the violence on 18 July and are now in jail.
What makes the Maruti story extraordinary is
certainly not the company and its cars but the extraordinary struggle of
its workers that has continued inspite of ruthless repression by the
management and the police and failure of the labour department and the
judiciary at all levels to provide any justice to them. Above all,
the workers have tenaciously fought for their political right to form
their own union. The struggle has also concentrated on creating
democratic structures within the union, and through these, finding ways
of articulating their grievances regarding the highly exploitative
labour regime.
PUDR
demands that:
1.
An independent and unbiased judicial enquiry should be initiated into the
events that led to the death of Awanish Dev. The judge
nominated should be someone both parties are agreeable to.
2.
The police investigation into the 18 July incident carried out by police
officers of Haryana should be nullified and a fresh investigation be initiated,
by an SIT comprising police drawn from other states.
3.
The role of hired bouncers that led to the precipitation of the events at
the spot be investigated.
4.
The Haryana police officials, responsible for violation of legal guidelines
regarding arrest and for custodial torture of arrestees, and harassment
of their family members be identified and criminally prosecuted.
5.
Re-instatement of all workers should be ensured in the absence of definite
evidence of their involvement.
6.
Role of the labour department should be investigated and action should be
taken against the officials for not fulfilling their obligations
related to labour laws.
7.
All the workers arrested for the 18 July incident should be immediately
granted bail. The trial into the incident should be speedily done and
those not guilty should be acquitted.
8.
Workers' right to have their independent union be restored at Maruti. The MSWU
which is the legally recognised union of the Maruti Manesar unit should be
allowed to function inside the plant with immediate effect.
9.
All the contract workers both at Manesar and Gurgaon unit be immediately
regularised and practice of hiring contract workers for regular work should be
stopped.
10.
The rights of workers guaranteed in law be enforced at Maruti with immediate
effect.
D.
Manjit
Asish
Gupta
Secretaries,
PUDR
