In this blog post, Deepak Sati, a student pursuing a Diploma in Entrepreneurship Administration and Business Laws from NUJS, Kolkata, describes the concept of constitutional values and labour welfare.
Origin of Concept of Labour Welfare in India
Labour welfare activities arose in colonial India in reply to the need of cheap labours when; following the abolition of slavery in 1833, British colonies started importing Indian labours. British government passed legislations which led to the development of the concept of labour welfare in colonial India. The Apprentices Act of 1850 was passed with the objective of helping poor and orphan children to learn various trades by apprenticing them to craftsmen. The Fatal Accidents Act of 1853 aimed at providing compensation to the families of workmen who lost their lives as a result of an ‘‘actionable wrong.”
It was the Factories Act of 1881 which paved the way for the foundation of series of labour laws with the objective of bringing improvements in the working conditions of labours. The International Labour Organization (ILO) in its founding year, in 1919, recognised the importance of labour in the economic and social reconstruction of the world and suggested some changes in labour welfare schemes operating in India. The then government of the day, subsequently, enacted the Factories Act of 1922, which provided for the cap of 60 hours a week and 11 hours a day for both men and woman. The minimum age for child worker was set at 12.
Definition of Labour Welfare
The concept of labour welfare is a broad concept. It connotes a condition of well-being, happiness, satisfaction, conservation and development of human resource.1
The Committee on Labour Welfare, 1969, noted that “labour welfare includes such services, as facilities and amenities as adequate canteen, rest and recreational facilities, sanitary and medical facilities, arrangement for travel to and from work and for the accommodation of the workers employed at a distance from their homes and such other services amenities and facilities as contribute to improve the condition under which workers are employed.”2
Labour Rights and Indian Constitution
Indian constitution provides numerous safeguards for the protection of labour rights. These safeguards are in the form of fundamental rights and the Directive principle of State policy.
Articles 14,19,21,23 and 24 comprise of fundamental rights promised under part III of the Constitution. Articles 38, 39, 39A, 41, 42, 43,43A and 47 form part of the Directive Principles of State Policy under Part IV of the Constitution, but they are not enforceable in a court of law.
Article 39, 39A, 41, 42, 43 and 43A collectively can be termed “Magna Carta of working class in India.”
Let us have a brief overview of these Articles‐
Article 14 commands State to treat any person equally before the law.
Article (19) (1) (c) grants citizens the right to form association or unions.
Article 21 promises protection of life and personal liberty.
Article 23 prohibits forced labour.
Article 24 prohibits employment of children below the age of fourteen years.
Article 39(a) provides that the State shall secure to its citizens equal right to an adequate means of livelihood.
Article 39A provides that the State shall secure the equal opportunities for access to justice to its citizens and ensure that such opportunities are not denied by reason of economic or other disabilities.
Article 41 provides that within the limits of its economic capacity the State shall secure for the Right to work and education.
Article 42 instructs State to make provisions for securing just and humane conditions of work and for maternity relief.
Article 43 orders the State to secure a living wage, decent condition of work and social and cultural opportunities to all workers through legislation or economic organisation. And
Article 43A provides for the participation of workers in Management of Industries through legislation.
Principle of equal pay for equal work and Indian Supreme Court
The principle of equal pay for equal work is enshrined in Article 39(d) of the Constitution. For the first time, this principle was considered in Kishori Mohanlal Bakshi v. Union of India3 in 1962.Supreme Court then ruled that it was not capable of being enforced in a court of law. The Apex court changed its mind in 1982 when in Randhir Singh v. Union of India4, through a 3 judge bench, it held that:
The principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’, which meant equal pay for everyone irrespective of sex, was deducible from preamble and Articles 14,16 and 39(d) of the Constitution. The principle of equal pay for equal work w as held to be applicable to cases of unequal scales of pay, based on classification or irrational classification, though both sets of employees(engaged on temporary and regular basis, respectively) performed identical duties and responsibilities.
In DS Nakara v. Union of India5 (1983) where the subject matter was related to pension, not a wage, speaking through the constitutional bench of five judges, it observed that:
Article 38(1) enjoins the State to strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effective as it may a social order in which justice‑ social, economic and political shall inform all institutions of the national life. In particular, the State shall strive to minimise the inequalities in income and endeavour to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities.Art.39 (d) enjoins a duty to see that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women and this directive should be understood and interpreted in the light of the judgement of this court in Randhir Singh v.Union of India (1982).
The jurisprudence developed through these two case laws was recently applied by the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab v.Jagjit Singh6 (2016) where it held that temporarily engaged employees(daily wage employees, ad‐hoc appointed on casual basis , contractual employees and the like),are entitled to minimum of the regular pay scale, along with dearness allowance(as revised from time to time )on account of their performing same duties, which are discharged by those engaged on regular basis, against sanctioned posts.
Endnotes:
- P. Tyagi, “Labour Economics and Social Welfare”, page no 601, 2004
- Report of the Study Team Appointed by the Government of India 1969, opacity p.32
- https://indiankanoon.org
- Ibid
- Ibid
- http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/FileServer/2016-10-26_1477486855.pdf
