Longer Workdays, Wider Exemptions, and Rising Protests
The Maharashtra government has recently introduced significant amendments to state labour laws, sparking heated debates among trade unions, industry representatives, and labour rights activists. These changes—focused primarily on extending working hours and revising the applicability of the Shops and Establishments Act—are being positioned as measures to enhance productivity and attract investment. However, critics argue that they dilute hard-won worker protections and may worsen job conditions for lakhs of employees across the state.
Key Provisions of the Amendments
1. Extension of Working Hours
• Factories: The permissible working hours have been increased from 9 hours to 12 hours a day.
• Shops and Commercial Establishments: Employees can now be asked to work up to 10 hours a day, compared to the earlier cap of 9 hours.
• Weekly Limits: While the daily limit has gone up, the weekly maximum remains at 48 hours, aligning with international standards. This means employers may reorganize shifts to stretch some workdays longer while reducing others.
• Overtime Pay: Any work beyond 9 hours in a day or 48 hours in a week must be compensated at double the ordinary wage rate.
• Written Consent: Employees cannot be compelled to work extended shifts without their written approval, a safeguard introduced to balance flexibility with consent.
2. Changes to Shops and Establishments Act
• Threshold for Applicability Raised: The Act will now cover establishments with 20 or more employees, up from the earlier 10-employee threshold.
• Impact: This change means thousands of small shops and offices employing between 10–19 workers will fall outside the Act’s ambit, thereby escaping regulatory obligations on working conditions, leave policies, and welfare provisions.
Government’s Rationale
The state government has defended the amendments on multiple grounds:
• Ease of Doing Business: Relaxing the applicability of the Shops Act is expected to reduce compliance burdens for small businesses.
• Global Competitiveness: Longer daily work shifts, with flexibility for employers, are seen as aligning India with international work models, particularly in manufacturing hubs.
• Attracting Investments: By allowing operational flexibility, the government hopes to attract more private and foreign investments in Maharashtra’s industrial and commercial sectors.
Trade Union and Worker Concerns
Trade unions across Maharashtra have strongly opposed the changes, calling them a step backward in labour welfare. Their concerns include:
• Worker Exploitation Risks: Longer shifts could lead to fatigue, health issues, and lower productivity over time.
• Dilution of Worker Protections: Raising the Shops Act threshold excludes a significant portion of workers, leaving them vulnerable to arbitrary employer practices.
• Pressure on Consent Clause: Despite the requirement for written consent, workers may feel compelled to agree to extended hours due to job insecurity.
• Impact on Women Workers: Safety concerns around late working hours, especially for women in retail and services, remain inadequately addressed.
Trade unions have announced state-wide protests, and some have threatened legal challenges to the amendments.
Legal and Policy Implications
1. Alignment with Labour Codes: These changes anticipate the implementation of India’s four Labour Codes (particularly the Code on Wages and Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code), which also provide scope for longer workdays with weekly caps.
2. Potential Judicial Scrutiny: Given India’s constitutional protection of the right to life and dignity under Article 21, challenges may arise over whether such long shifts are reasonable and safe.
3. Precedent for Other States: Maharashtra’s move may encourage other states to adopt similar reforms, especially those competing to attract industries.
The Road Ahead
The amendments reflect the ongoing tug-of-war in Indian labour policy—between promoting business flexibility and safeguarding worker rights. While employers may welcome the reduced compliance and greater operational freedom, workers and unions fear erosion of labour standards. The real impact will depend on how strictly provisions on overtime pay, consent, and workplace safety are enforced.
For policymakers, the challenge lies in striking a balance between economic growth and human welfare. Without strong monitoring and enforcement, these reforms risk becoming a tool for exploitation rather than a means of empowerment.
No comments:
Post a Comment