Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1990, publiée 77ème session CIT (1990)

1. The Committee has taken note of the Government's report and of the renewed allegations formulated by the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh Workers' Organisation, as well as the Government's comments on the subject of these allegations. The Committee has dealt with the question in its observation to which it would ask the Government to refer.

2. The Committee refers to its previous comments concerning the communication received from the Steel Workers' Federation of India in August 1987, in which this Federation alleged that a large number of workers in the Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) were performing work of a permanent nature in the stockyards and dockyards of this public enterprise, but were not being paid the minimum wages that had been fixed. The Federation also indicated in this communication that these workers were not recruited directly by the SAIL but that they had been working for it for several years. The allegations of the Federation focused therefore on the non-payment of minimum wages and on the nature of the contract binding the workers concerned to the SAIL. Having analysed the allegations of the Federation and the comments of the Government in reply to these allegations, the Committee did not consider itself in a position to conclude, on the basis of the information available, that the work performed by the contract workers in question was of a permanent and full-time nature. It had also taken note of the Government's statement, according to which the workers in question were entitled to receive the minimum wage. Although it did not consider that there was sufficient evidence that the requirements of the Convention had not been respected in this instance, the Committee had requested the Government to indicate whether measures had been adopted, in accordance with the Law of 1970 concerning contract labour (regulation and abolition), or under the terms of any other law, to determine the exact nature of the work performed by these workers.

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government on this issue in its last report indicating that article 10 of the above-mentioned Law allowed the governments of the various constituent States to prohibit the employment of contract labour by following the procedure provided for by that article. In this context, the Committee notes that a Decree of the Supreme Court of India, dated 14 November 1988, directed the government of West Bengal to examine the question of the prohibition of the employment of contract labour in six naval stockyards where the SAIL carries out its operations, and to take the necessary measures in the near future. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate information on the measures adopted by the government of West Bengal following the decision of the Supreme Court of India. With regard to the wages paid to the workers employed by the SAIL, the Committee takes note of the Government's statement that this company pays not only the minimum wage rates, but wages considerably in excess of the minimum. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to communicate information on the measures adopted by the SAIL and the governments concerned, so that the workers in question will be paid at least at the official rate fixed for minimum wages, in accordance with the provisions of Article 3, paragraph 3, of the Convention. Please communicate copies of any future contracts drawn up by the above-mentioned company regarding the workers concerned.

3. Referring to its previous comments concerning the allegations that cinema workers in West Bengal were not receiving the minimum wages applicable to them because when the minimum wages were revised in 1970, the employers concerned obtained an injunction from the Calcutta High Court against implementation, the Committee notes that according to the report, the government of West Bengal, which is the authority responsible in accordance with the law on minimum wages of 1948, cannot apply the provisions of the notification of 1970 fixing the minimum wage for workers in the cinema industry so long as the court has not yet pronounced on the appeal of 1976 against this notification. However, the Government adds that minimum wages are fixed in approximately 750 cinema halls by means of negotiation between the parties concerned and in conformity with the directives adopted by the above-mentioned government in October 1982. The Government also indicates that the union concerned has not provided details on the defaulters. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply information on the efforts undertaken by the government of West Bengal so that cinema workers will be paid at a rate that corresponds to the legal minimum wage at least.

4. With regard to the fixing of a minimum wage rate at national level, the Committee had taken note in its earlier comments of the efforts made by the central Government to establish guide-lines under which minimum wages could be fixed at regional level. The Committee notes that, according to the latest report, these guide-lines have been established and provide for the setting up of six regional consultative committees on minimum wages. The Committee also notes the statements on the composition and the functions of these regional committees, and on the elements that they must take into account when fixing minimum wage rates. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would, in the first place, indicate whether the representatives of the workers and employers concerned or of their respective organisations were consulted when the guide-lines were being formulated and, in the second place, to specify the measures adopted or planned to ensure that the employers and the workers concerned will participate in equal numbers and on an equal footing in the application of these guide-lines, in accordance with the provisions of Article 3, paragraph 2. Finally, it would be grateful if the Government would communicate information on the practical implementation of these guide-lines and on the results obtained.

5. In its previous comments, the Committee had also referred to the observations transmitted by the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh Workers' Organisation and the Indian Trade Union Congress on the need to reinforce existing measures to ensure better application of the provisions on minimum wages, and it had noted that, according to the comments of the Government on the subject of these observations, efforts had been made to reinforce the labour inspection services, and that a government-financed project had been undertaken, on a trial basis, to grant financial aid to four States for this purpose. The Committee notes that, according to information supplied by the Government in its latest report, the above-mentioned project has functioned satisfactorily and has led to the appointment of 154 of the 200 rural inspectors envisaged. The Committee also notes that the question of the effective application of the Law on Minimum Wages, 1948, has been the subject of several discussions at the Conference of the Ministers of Labour of the Member States of the Union and that in 1987, at its 36th Session, the Conference formulated a set of recommendations aimed at reinforcing the effective implementation of the law on minimum wages. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures introduced with a view to implementing the above recommendations and to ensure better application of the law on minimum wages in the entire territory.