"Betrayal of Workers Continues Unabated"

(Based on an article by Com. Paltu Sen in December 2004 issue of the Organ of Party’s West Bengal Provincial Committee, Biplabi Ganaline.)

November 2004 witnessed the ‘successful screening’ of the third and final piece of an Agreement trilogy in West Bengal's Jute Industry. The last piece, with the good old theme of “a glorious victory of jute workers” and directed by the experienced and self-proclaimed messiah of working class in West Bengal (if not in India too), the ‘Left’ Front, was enacted by all the old hands at the game – fourteen of the trade unions active in jute industry and including CITU, INTUC and AITUC as the main players. Massive media propaganda preceded the ‘screening’ this time. It seemed as if this piece would completely revolutionize the drama. The Labour Minister of the state played a ‘laudable’ role in the drama. As if extremely pained at the miseries of jute workers in West Bengal, he offered to extend his helping hand to the 'advantage' of the working class. In fact, the ‘helping hand’ of the government expectedly played a critical role in the entire bargain, as we will see. Even the overt villains of the show – owners of jute mills in particular and the industrial houses in the state in general – were not to be left behind in this big budget extravaganza. It appeared as if an unprecedented surge of industrialisation in the ‘Left’ ruled state under the able leadership (or better, dictatorship!) of Captain Buddha (a proletariat as he is!) was imminent.

"The Story Line in Brief"

Since August 2004, fourteen trade unions (TUs) have been voicing their disapproval to non-payment of enhanced DA to the workers, though the mill owners had committed to make such payments in an earlier agreement. The angry voice of the TUs underwent a dramatic transition on 2nd November 2004 – the TU group decides to go for an indefinite strike from 29th November till their demands are met. The performance gains momentum then. Frequent meetings to resolve the issue, tension between the mill owners and the TU leaders, their claims and counterclaims follow. Government-mediated encounters between 20th November and 27th November 2004 add dimensions to the drama.

The climax, however, was reached before the D-day! 27th November 2004 – the tension melts down. The owners cool down, so do the TUs.  A “historic victory” is claimed. A historic victory no doubt, but for whom? INTUC declares, “We are not satisfied, but forced to tolerate.” Hats off to their tolerance! And now the curtain falls. The agreement drama concludes at the cost of workers’ blood, sweat and tears. The media declares – “A major crisis averted. Industrial ‘revolution’ under Captain Buddha manages to hold on to its track.”

"Background to the Agreement"

For those who have not seen the first two pieces of the trilogy. The first agreement drama (a tripartite agreement) was struck on 5th January 2002. The mill owners violated the agreement and stopped paying DA, necessitating a second piece. This part climaxed around 8th January 2004, as a ‘logical continuation’ of the first. And now the third piece climaxed around 27th November, again a ‘logical continuation’ of the second. That completes the trilogy. Preparation for the trilogy dates back to 1998, when a tripartite agreement was formulated. That agreement lapsed in 2001.

November 1999 onwards, the jute mill owners stopped paying workers their DA, annual increments and bonus. They stopped permanent and special transfers and ate away a huge stock of PF and ESI. Employment of zero workers, ghost workers, voucherwallas, learner-apprentices, temporary workers and such other unrecorded workers at low wages at the whims and wishes of the employers became a regular feature in ‘Left’ Front ruled West Bengal. Irregularities in gratuity accounts and pensions schemes were rampant. This uninterrupted violation of labour laws once more clarified whom the constitutional ‘Lefts’ are siding with.

Under such circumstances, nineteen trade unions (including IFTU) in West Bengal had jointly decided to go on a continuous, uncompromising struggle with a 20-point charter of demands from 7th January 2002 onwards. But just before the start of the struggle, the ‘gang of fourteen’ went ahead with an agreement with the mill owners, at the directions of the ‘Left’ Front Government and its constituent parties, on 5th January 2002. The path-breaking (read back-stabbing) agreement ostensibly acceded to the demands of payment of enhanced DA, abolition of voucher system and voucherwallas, clearance of PF, ESI and gratuity, and resumption of permanent and special transfers at 250 at a time – but all at an unqualified future date. The mill-owners actually implemented none. They, on the other hand, had demanded introduction of – (i) a “katauti system”, an output-based wage system (on individual basis) through which one-third is to be deducted from a worker’s wage if a pre-assigned target is not achieved; and (ii) new employment at a minimum daily wage of Rs. 100, contrary to Rs. 220-225 as directed by the wage board. They also wished to maintain the pay scale of all those already getting low wages.

The demands of the workers thus got wiped off, and the owners, aided by their ardent defenders – the state machinery, empowered themselves to intensify their repression (economic as well as physical) on workers. Workers of several jute mills, such as the Ganges Jute, the Baranagar Jute, the Hanuman Jute, the Dalhousie Jute and the India Jute, witnessed severe state repression through curfew, lathi-charge, arrests and firing, which killed and injured many.

The principal player of the agreement, CITU, of course had to face defeats wherever TU elections were subsequently held. IFTU and five other trade unions initiated a campaign against the anti-worker agreement.

As the campaign started gaining momentum, the CITU led ‘gang of fourteen’ again comes to the fore. An ‘indefinite’ strike from 27th December 2003 follows. As the reader must have guessed by now, the strike culminates in another ‘path breaking’ (read back-stabbing) agreement of 8th January 2004. The new agreement assented to pay, within February 2004, a part of the long pending DA and to increase the wages of the workers, currently working for Rs. 100 a day by Rs. 10. The rest is the repetition of the old story. Two more points in this connection are worth considering. According to the 5th January agreement, (a) the next DA will be due in September 2004 (i.e., 7 months later); and (b) within May 2004, production targets of various mills will be decided and then the katauti system will be implemented. As a norm, DA is due at intervals of 3 months. Why then an interval of 7 months this time? The point (b) answers it. Point (a) will come into effect if and only if the katauti system is implemented.

The mill owners, in connivance with the “gang of fourteen”, used all means to get katauti implemented, even to the extent of closing mills down and reopening them months later only when the workers were compelled to agree to katauti. Despite all these, the workers gradually again started organising against the agreement through the initiative of IFTU and five other trade unions.

This then called for the third act. This time the TU gang initiated their game with a 13-point charter of demands, notable among them being (i) implementation of 8th January agreement and (ii) equal pay for equal work. Note the contradictions in the two demands. On the one hand they demanded equal pay for equal work, and on the other hand they agreed to a daily wage of Rs. 110 to some workers, which implies unequal pay for equal work. A treachery from the outset!

"Agreement of 27th November\: Its Salient (or Silent!) Features"

To describe in a nutshell, the new agreement signifies continuation and further betrayal of workers’ interests. It started within the bounds of the earlier agreements and ended in some more compromise, facilitating further intensification of exploitation of workers. As pointed out in the beginning, the ‘Left’ Front played a ‘laudable’ role in striking the said agreement. The agreement agreed to pay DA in principle – “Details of payment to be worked out within 15 days after negotiations with the Labour Commissioner.” Who knows when this period of 15 days will be over, if at all! Experiences of earlier agreements have made us sceptical. Secondly, the ‘Left’ Front has taken the obligation upon itself to see to it that katauti system is implemented within 4 months after fixing the production targets of mills.

As if that is not enough, the Labour Ministry promised to mediate in removing hurdles to the appointment of learner-apprentices at a pittance of Rs. 30-35 a day. Recall that the Labour Minister had promised to extend his helping hand, and he (along with his ‘comrades’) has done it. Imagine, the Labour Minister coming out of the negotiation hall, singing – “… But I have promises to keep, and miles to go before I sleep, …” The demand of permanent and special transfers got dumped. So also the proposal of employment of permanent and transferable employees in the ratio 90:10. Complete silence was maintained on the issue of owners’ repeated violation of earlier agreements. If the katauti system does not start functioning within 4 months, what will happen to the current agreement? It is any body’s guess. Already there is no mention of any time period of validity of the agreement.

A little more information in passing. Hukumchand Jute Mill, whose union is led and run by the main leader of CITU, Gobinda Guha, has been employing 2500 apprentices at a daily wage of Rs. 35 for over 4 years. In Weverly Jute Mill, where again the union is under the ‘able’ leadership of Gobinda Guha, katauti system has already been implemented through a bilateral agreement.

Inspired by the agreement of 27th November, the owners of cotton-textile mills in the state have followed suit. Engineering Industry owners have made similar demands. Attacks on workers of coal and steel industries have gained momentum. And all these are the deafeningly silent features of (to be) industrialised (the Buddhababu way) West Bengal, the thriving laboratory of New Economic Policy and New Industrial Policy; with ‘a human face’ of course.

In defence of their actions against workers, the owners harp on their age-old arguments – “huge crisis in jute industry”, “wages in this state are much higher than those in other states”, “productivity in this state is low as compared to that in other states”, etc. etc. – which when analysed can be easily seen to be unfounded, if not blatant lies. They are actually cooked up in order to suppress the workers.

First of all, the story of crisis in jute industry is more than 25 years old. During this period jute mills have not been permanently closed down, apart from several new mills coming up. Two new mills – one in Asansol and another in Coochbihar – have been established during this period in West Bengal.

Secondly, while the number of mills have gone down from 72 to 59, production has gone up from 9 lakh tonnes a year at one time to 16-17 lakh tonnes a year currently.

Thirdly, jute industry in West Bengal employed 2.85 lakh workers in the 1970s, which has now gone down by 1 lakh. The second and third points together imply immense increase in per head productivity.

Old machine tools and techniques are mainly responsible for low productivity. Lack of industrial research in this sector is also responsible.

The argument of low wage is given when the situation is compared to Andhra Pradesh. The fact is that only 10-11 mills in Andhra Pradesh are composite mills. The rest are small spinning, weaving or finishing mills, newly set-up far off from townships, where unorganised tribal workers are employed at daily wages of Rs. 60-80. They too are now gradually uniting and struggling for increase in their wages. The fact is that there are no major differences in wages and productivity in the mills of West Bengal and of the organised composite mills of Andhra Pradesh.

When talking of differences in labour cost, the factor is not calculated on the basis of labour costs of different units added up and then averaged to find average labour cost per tonne. Moreover, wages of zero workers, voucherwallas, learner-apprentices, which are even less than Rs. 60-80, are not taken into account in this context.

World market of Indian jute has expanded due to China and Thailand’s withdrawal from the market and cut in Bangladesh’s export.

“Crisis in Jute Industry” is not due to the workers. Crisis has cropped up as and when the Indian government and West Bengal government submitted to the pressures of the synthetic lobby. In that case, reduction of workers’ wages will not help. Even a zero wage for jute workers will not be able to bridge the gap in the cost of synthetic and jute bags.

Of course these analyses do not mean anything to those ‘gems of India’s development’, who are guided by the preconceived inkling of “whatever it may be, blame it on the workers.”

How to determine whether a charter of demands and an agreement are in favour of the workers or against the workers (and imply submission to owners’ pressure)? We should see if the burning issues of workers are properly and completely incorporated in the charter of demands. In the last charter of demands of the “gang of fourteen” before the agreement what do we observe? The demand for a solution to katauti system (production-based wage) was not a workers’ demand, but rather an issue long sought to be implemented by the mill owners. A minimum daily wage of Rs. 110 was not a workers’ demand. Nor was the agreement to employment of learner-apprentices at even lower wages. Workers at a daily wage of Rs. 35 are already to be seen in Hukumchand Jute and Hoogly Jute Mills. Evidently then, the long-standing demands of mill owners have made their way into the said charter of demands of the workers and the agreement.

Secondly, the choice of the time of a struggle is strategically very important. This time the strike announced before the agreement was temporally proper. That is the period of a year when mill owners look forward to heavy sale and high production.

A third important factor is the relative strengths of owners’ attack and of workers’ resistance and counter-attacks. This time there was no objective reason for the fourteen TUs to retreat.

What do the 'gang of fourteen' say about the last agreement, apart from it being historic? But then will this ‘historic’ agreement strengthen workers’ struggle or weaken and misguide it? We feel it will ultimately establish the basic demand of ‘New’ Economic Policies – non-unionization of industries.

The ‘democratic’ rule of 'Left’ Front Government stood exposed once more, when it ignored the demands of IFTU and five other trade unions (apart from a formal meeting) and went ahead with an agreement without even consulting these fighting forces.

What will the workers do under such circumstances? Com. Mao had long pointed out the two streams of struggles in world history – the struggles of the people and the struggles of the reactionaries, which is once more exemplified in the context of jute industries in West Bengal. He had pointed out  “Make trouble, fail, make trouble again, fail again … till their doom; that is the logic of the imperialists and all reactionaries the world over in dealing with the people’s cause, and they will never go against this logic.” (“Cast away Illusions, Prepare Struggle”, Selected Works of Mao, Vol. IV, p. 428)

And the agreement trilogy from 5th January 2002 to 8th January 2004 to 27th November 2004 is just this. And rest assured, the pet dogs of imperialism – the revisionists and the reactionaries – will continue the cycle.

Regarding people’s struggle, Com. Mao had instructed – “Fight, fail, fight again, fail again, fight again … till their victory, that is the logic of the people, and they too will never go against this logic.” (“Cast away Illusions, Prepare for struggle”, Selected Works of Mao, Vol. IV, p. 428). This is our path. The jute workers have adopted this path. The six trade unions, including IFTU, have decided to intensify their struggle through complete exposure of the black agreement and taking up opposition struggles in various factories. We firmly believe that the conspiracy of the ‘Left’ Front Govt., the jute mill owners and the revisionist and reactionary trade unions will ultimately fail. The jute workers will again be the torchbearers of working class struggle not only in West Bengal, but also in India.