This issue should not be subjectively approached, based on the assumptions or opinions of individuals without considerable knowledge of the various stages of the development of the trade union movement in India, nor with a motive of discrediting the central trade unions (CTUs). The All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) firmly believes that trade unions are effective weapons of the working class to change the structure of society and the social order. Organising the unorganised is, therefore, a pre-requisite in the struggle for social change. The task is vast and the responsibility enormous.

Have CTU leaders properly understood and articulated the needs and concerns of the unorganised sector workers? A positive answer to this provocative question emerges in historical records. The history of the Indian working class and the trade union movement has been recorded by eminent authors of the trade union movement, including Prem Sagar Gupta, S.A. Dange and A.B. Bardhan and published by the AITUC since 1920, and other CTUs periodically, and in publications relating to the struggle of the Indian working class led by the workers either collectively or individually. A positive answer is also easily found in the reports, proceedings, resolutions, programmes and action plans adopted and released publicly after every National Conference of each CTU. Some of these are part of the National Archives of the Labour History Project in the V.V. Giri National Labour Institute and the Mariben Kara Institute. Other similar labour research organisations have also published texts on the events of the Indian working class movement.

The records of the CTUs, specifically the AITUC — the premier national trade union centre of the Indian working class led by several leaders of the freedom movement and doyens of the working class movement — contain overwhelming evidence of the correct understanding of the situation of the unorganised workers at different stages of the working class struggle. Whatever legislation now exists to protect the rights of workers is the result of several struggles to organise workers who were, at some time, unorganised.

AITUC has, in its own programmes, raised demands of specific relevance to unorganised workers from time to time. Com. Indrajit Gupta, General Secretary of AITUC, gave the clarion call to ‘organise the unorganised’ in the Bangalore session of AITUC, decades ago.

Under the liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation policies, the organised are increasingly sought to be made unorganised through atypical forms of employment, in particular, contract labour. This practice is spreading to all types of formerly permanent and perennial jobs, and it is the permanent workers’ unions, invariably affiliated to the CTUs, which fight for their cause. The AITUC has categorically decided that the permanency of contract workers is its ultimate goal, and that struggle has to be continuously engaged in to realise this. The immediate demand and supporting action should focus on securing payment of at least minimum wages for contract workers working in a particular factory, company or enterprise. All the public sector trade unions (under the Committee of Public Sector Trade Unions, CPSTU) have incorporated this demand in their respective current Charter of Demands. Some of the unions in the private sector, affiliated to CTUs, have incorporated these demands; others will follow. Pressure to do so is being applied in many major sectors such as coal, oil, steel, cement and engineering.

In the Minimum Wage Advisory Boards, at the central and state levels, the representatives of the CTUs serve as members, placing and arguing the case of unorganised sector workers in the tripartite forum. When employers go to the High Court to obtain a stay on the payment of minimum wages, senior leaders and lawyers, who are also representatives of the CTUs, fight against these efforts to obstruct the implementation of the Minimum Wages Act on behalf of those very categories of unorganised workers, who do not even get the notified minimum wage. The inspiration for this struggle dates as far back as the decision on providing workers a ‘living wage’ by the 15^th Indian Labour Conference in 1958, which was also a contribution of the CTUs.

The creation of several Welfare Boards in Kerala involved the active participation of the CTUs.  The creation of similar Welfare Boards has also been in the offing in some other states consequent to the efforts and struggles of CTUs.  

The Supreme Court of India, in an earlier judgment (Gujarat Electricity Board), ruled that the permanent workers’ union has the right to espouse the cause of contract labourers. This is a judicial vindication of the task followed by the organised workers’ union to protect the interest of unorganised workers. 

For the last few years, we have been demanding and agitating for a comprehensive law for agricultural workers and a separate law for the unorganised workers. On 23 November 2006, the AITUC organised a march of unorganised workers to Parliament, in which, according to the Press, over 1.5 lakh people participated. We have been organising similar several state-wide programmes on the unorganized workers demands and separate, comprehensive laws. This shall continue. While our functionaries, who are Members of Parliament and State Assemblies, fight within those forums, we fight outside the Parliament and Assemblies, facing the police and goons of the employers.

Because of the effective and meaningful presence of the representatives of CTUs in several tripartite committees, the governments — central and state — are not able to go ahead with whatever they want to pursue. Ironically, while the CTUs are firm on comprehensive laws for agricultural and unorganised workers with government funding (3 per cent of the GDP to start with), certain other organisations, claiming to represent sections of the unorganised workers, support the governments’ inadequate and deficient bills and criticise the CTUs for opposing them and making these demands.

Do CTUs have adequate unorganised worker members to claim to represent them?

he question of whether or not CTUs have adequate numbers of unorganised sector workers in various sectors is sometimes raised. A question that must also be asked is whether organisations other than the CTUs, which claim to represent all unorganised sector workers, have anywhere near the number of members from these sectors as the CTUs do. The current membership of the CTUs, claimed and verified, vindicate the position of the CTUs that only they can represent unorganised and informal workers. For example, of the AITUC’s total verified membership of more than 33 lakhs, the members from the unorganised sector constitute more than one-third of the total members. The facts being so, which other non-CTU organisation can claim to represent the unorganised workers?

Do CTUs claim a monopoly in representing the unorganised sector?

Another specific concern that the CTUs favour the nomination of their representatives has been raised. All CTUs are democratic organisations, with nationwide networks of elected forums, from the unit/area level to the district, state and national levels and also from several federations at the national level, including construction workers, beedi workers, agricultural workers, toddy tappers, forest workers, estate workers, anganwadi, balwadi, midday-meal workers, rickshaw pullers, handloom workers, municipal workers and panchayat workers. Whereas CTUs certainly do not claim to represent all the unorganised workers listed by the 2^nd National Commission on Labour (122 types), no one else can claim to do so either. As for democratic processes, the system of governance in our country is universally accepted as a democratic system. The President of India is not elected by the people of India, but by an electoral college. In several states, and even sometimes at the centre, the ruling party or parties do not get even half the votes. This also applies to several members of the legislative assemblies and Parliament. A similar method of election as representative is also prescribed for the recognition of National Trade Unions, where certain responsibilities are assigned through such recognition. This method of designating representatives of the working class cannot be misconstrued as a monopoly of representation. If other membership-based unions in the country possess membership over and above the CTUs in several states, let them also be represented in the relevant committees.

What is the role of the CTUs in the struggle of the unorganised sector workers?

The CTUs are, at times, misconstrued as uncooperative, especially in working with NGOs and certain other membership-based individual organisations.

There are certain organisations and forums that are mainly accountable to their donors. There is nothing wrong in their being ‘donor-driven’ or ‘project fulfilling’ organisations. But they cannot be and must not be equated with the national CTUs, who are accountable to their members and elected bodies at various levels. CTUs do coordinate with and encourage certain labour-supporting organisations and certain former bureaucrats, now working for the unorganised workers. CTUs also have great respect for certain progressive judges. The co-operation of CTUs will continue with all of them, whenever required.

However, the action programme of CTUs cannot be decided by NGOs and other forums. Neither can CTUs be bound by the ‘umbrella’ of such forums. Trade unions have their own united bodies such as the Sponsoring Committee of Trade Unions and the National Platform of Mass Organizations. Decisions are made collectively in these forums. There have been several occasions of issue-based unity and united actions in the last 15 years, in particular on unorganised and agricultural workers’ demands. It is the political duty of the organised workers to extend their support and solidarity to the brothers and sisters of their own class, the unorganised sector workers and their allies, agricultural workers and small peasants.

The CTUs were, are and will continue to represent the unorganised workers in the organised sector as well as those in the unorganised sector. The situation demands the engaging of more and more cadres from among the organised workers besides those who work in the field for this purpose. This means the use of increased resources, including manpower, in this process. These problems will have to be further addressed and overcome. The struggle for organising the unorganised shall be continued with more vigour and conviction by the CTUs.