Maharashtra to shelve labour reforms amid protests

MUMBAI: More than a year after Maharashtra decided to amend the Industrial Disputes Act, the state has decided to shelve the move following stringent opposition from groups including the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh amid signs that the government is backtracking on a number of proposed crucial reforms. Senior government officials said the state is unlikely to carry out the amendment on the lines

of the reform in Rajasthan that would have allowed companies to increase the limit of retrenchment of workers to 300 from 100 without seeking government permission. ET was the first to highlight that the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, a trade union affiliated with the ruling BJP's ideological mentor RSS, was staunchly opposed to the Maharashtra government's proposed move and had warned of a stir.

The Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969, is another labour reform that is stuck, officials said. This law forces industries to employ labourers from outside the company's workforce (Mathadis, called so because they help transport goods on their heads) for loading and unloading of goods. Under this law, even if the company has a labour force to transport the goods it has to use the Mathadi workers only. "Many companies have automated forklifts but they are forced to hire Mathadi workers. This is not just costly but also time-consuming," said Anant Sardeshmukh, director general of the Mahratta Chamber of Commerce Industries and Agriculture.

Citing an instance of how factory owners are held to ransom, Sardeshmukh said if a factory owner needs 20 workers to unload goods, he gets 30 workers instead. "The 10 workers are surplus and even if they sit idle we have to pay them their day's wages. And since the workers are regulated and controlled by the Mathadi board, the workers don't listen to the factory owners since we can't take any action against them," he said.

A government official said plans to amend the Act have been shelved since many of these unions have political affiliations. The pressure groups have also forced the state government to back off from amending the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) Act.

Under this law, farmers can directly sell their produce only to traders registered with the APMCs established in different parts of the state.