The Right to Information (RTI) Act 2005 provides for setting out the practical regime of the right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote openness, transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. Its avowed purpose is to enable citizens to have access to information such that the resultant transparency mitigates corruption and holds governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed. It is understood that sometimes the revelation of information in actual practice is likely to conflict with other public interests, including the efficient operation of governments, the optimum use of limited fiscal resources and the preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information. In such cases, it becomes necessary to harmonise these conflicting interests while preserving the democratic ideal.

The RTI Act is limited to government and public authorities, and does not apply to the private sector. Thus, its coverage is restricted to nearly two-thirds of the 7 per cent organised sector employees, that is, a little less than 5 per cent of the total workforce or about 18 million of the over 1.1 billion population.

Whereas the RTI Act gives the right to information to citizens, employees and their unions enjoy such rights to an extent under various labour laws. The difference now is that the government and public authorities cannot hide information and file notings on the grounds of the oath of official secrecy. Also, even before RTI Act , some labour laws, such as the Equal Remuneration Act and other social legislations, provided for intervention by a third party, even though not directly affected, to raise a dispute on behalf of the affected party.

Role of Information in the Context of Employment

Employees expect equity and fairness from their employers. They desire and deserve openness and transparency in employment relationships. They wish to understand the basis for discrimination, if such discrimination becomes desirable for the efficient and effective functioning of the organisation. They need protection from arbitrary and vindictive treatment, if any, from the employers.

The types of information that employees and their unions frequently require relate to the terms and conditions of the employment contract and their compliance; the job descriptions, job specifications, criteria for selection and recruitment, transfer, rewards, promotions, etc.; the compliance of applicable laws, collective agreements, etc.; the procedures for grievance redressal and management of discipline; how the employer responded to employees grievances in the past; the decisions of the management that affect the security of the jobs; and occupational health and safety. Depending on the nature of the employment, one may wish to see the safety guidelines, inspection and monitoring mechanism/reports and medical records of employees affected in the past, information about hazardous substances involved, steps taken to prevent rather than just remedy the problems, etc.

Extending the RTI Act Coverage

It should be possible for unions to take the key elements of RTI Act, draw on the experience of the implementation of the Act thus far and put it on the agenda for collective bargaining on what kind of information should be provided, where, when, how and by whom. It will be in the interest of the employers to provide free access to any and all information that promotes equity, fairness, openness, transparency and accountability of people who have control on the work and lives of other people. Even without the RTI Act, employees and trade unions have rights under various labour laws and collective agreements to fight against unfair labour practices. Therefore, it is difficult for employers to deny information. They can, at best, defer or delay, at tremendous cost to all stakeholders. Whereas employers are obliged to accommodate the reasonable request of employees and their unions for information, sometimes it may be possible for employers to block and disguise certain kinds of information on some technical grounds or under the guise of confidentiality and competitive considerations. In the past, courts have ruled, in several countries, that a privacy rule does not apply to employers and employment records when they are acting in their role as employers. When a union requests employment-related information from the employer about the employees, they represent or the bargaining unit, the employer is required to provide the information consistent with the principles of natural justice and fair play. If employers use gimmicks without rhyme or reason, it vitiates the atmosphere of trust. Whereas the free flow of information can build bridges of understanding, the blocking of information can erect walls of misunderstanding, making it difficult for both parties to either cooperate or collaborate.

Trade unions in India may do well to look at the National Labour Relations Act (NLRA) in the USA, which gives trade unions the right to a broad range of information that unions require to  bargain collectively and effectively, to represent workers in grievances or for any other purpose that relates to a union`s right to represent workers (http://www.unbossed.com/index.php). Under the NLRA, unions may request for an employee`s personal information, job descriptions, pay-related data, employee benefits, personnel policies.

Information is not only power. It is also the tonic which is vital for mutual trust, understanding, cooperation and collaboration. In the mid-1950s, the Foundation for Workers` Association with Management in Tata Steel was provided a framework work agreement, which listed the topics on which management would share information with workers and their union on a continuous basis. This was to ensure 60 years of industrial harmony and progress. There are examples of trade unions in Mumbai using the Union Research Group to gather information about jobs in the parent companies of pharmaceutical companies and using that information at the collective bargaining table for influencing job classifications in India. There was a case in the late 1960s of a consumer durable goods industry, which tried to restrict access to cost volume profit relations of its products even to Indian managers by organising the accounts data and information in a fragmented way with the help of managers from parent company headquarters. The union leadership grew suspicious of the intentions of the management and asked its members working in different departments of the company to memorise (not steal carbon copy of the data, which would entail disciplinary action) all accounting data, write these on a piece of paper and put it in a box in the union office on regular basis. The union appointed a small working group to assemble the pieces of information to get a more complete picture. Within six months, the union had a fair idea about the companies cost structure, and a better idea than the Indian managers working in the finance department, and used this information to influence bargaining outcomes. In another multinational company, the union helped a researcher from a developed country, who was sympathetic to the union cause, to collect data and information from about 30 factories to which production was outsourced, obtaining detailed information about new human resource management practices and how these are impinging upon the union and its members. The data and information thus gained was put to profitable use in formulating appropriate strategies and build up pressure on the management, with a view to safeguard the interests of the workers more effectively.

Conclusion

The RTI Act has a wider use for citizen rights vis-à-vis public authorities. It can also be used in the context of employment in government and public enterprises, but not in the private sector. In the private sector, the unions can seek information on matters provided in various labour legislations in the country such as on occupational safety and health-related matters, using the provisions of the Factories Act. They can ask information on various aspects listed in the relevant schedule, under the notice of change and its effect on workers.

Where trade unions themselves are weak and unable to assert and obtain information from employers, in furtherance of legitimate trade union activities, they can tap additional sources such as the media, academics through collaborative research, members of legislature/parliament through correspondence, questions, etc., civil society institutions, international networks of trade unions and global unions as well as representation to the ILO Committee of Experts on Freedom of Association, etc.