Labour laws: Unions want no change

Central trade unions will oppose the Bill that seeks to simplify labour laws regarding exemption from furnishing of returns and maintenance of registers.

The unions have strong reservations about several provisions in the labour laws (Exemption from Furnishing Returns and Maintaining Registers by Certain Establishments) Amendment & Miscellaneous Provisions Bill, 2005 that was introduced in Parliament last August. It had been referred to the standing committee on labour.

Asked for their suggestions on the proposed Bill by the committee last month, the unions were learnt to have decided to ask the government to keep the Bill from being taken up in Parliament and initiate comprehensive discussions with them on different issues pertaining to it. They are likely to send their reply to the committee tomorrow.

The trade unions want deletion of Clause 3 of the Bill that seeks to make the Act applicable to establishments in which not more than 500 persons are employed. It also seeks to extend the provisions of the Act to establishments employing more than 500 persons by a mere gazette notification.

"The proposed amendments will lead to a situation where an infinite number of even large establishments can be granted exemption. This is farthest from the idea of simplification of the forms of returns and registers," said W R Varadarajan, secretary, Citu.

The trade unions also contend that the proposed Bill seeks to do away with the concept of very small establishments. They will rather have a "small establishment" redefined as one in which not more than 10 persons are employed.

They argue that the law should provide for penalty to be imposed by the authority prescribed in the relevant Act and not just conviction, which takes a long time in the present legal system.

Besides the Central government, the proposed Bill seeks to empower state governments to grant exemption to any establishment from the requirement of maintenance of any register not only under the Scheduled Acts, but also under it. The trade unions are also against this provision.