Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 1992, publiée 79ème session CIT (1992)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received and regrets that the report the federal Government had requested from the state Government of Maharashtra on the comments of the Hind Mazdoor Sabha (HMS) (Maharashtra State) concerning the non-application of this Convention by the provincial authorities has not been supplied.

The Committee notes that this workers' organisation pointed out firstly that, on 2 September 1987, the state Government issued a notification stating that the Trade Unions Act and Industrial Disputes Act are not applicable to workers covered by the "Employment Guarantee Scheme". This scheme had been in operation for over 12 years and had seen a union formed there in 1982 for the 5,000 or so workers known as "muster assistants". The Bombay High Court struck down the notification but, according to the HMS, the Government refuses to negotiate with the rural workers' organisation on its demand for security of service and adequate pay scales. In addition, contrary to an earlier agreement on discharges and recruitment, on 19 May 1989 the state Government scrapped arbitrarily the established seniority lists. Secondly, the HMS complained of the conditions of employment of over 300,000 female workers employed on the "Integrated Child Development Scheme" who teach or nurse in the same manner and according to the same rules as government employees, but are classified as "honorary workers" so as to deprive them of adequate pay scales and service conditions. Thirdly, the HMS refers to the poor working conditions of workers in the forest and brick-making industries, equivalent to that of bonded labour. The workers' unions' repeated efforts and representations to the state government departments involved have not been acted on. The HMS sees this inaction as particularly serious as regards the non-implementation of the minimum wage and the non-respect of court decisions in favour of the workers dismissed for anti-union reasons, including reinstatement orders of the Bombay High Court.

Noting with regret that the Government did not reply to these comments, the Committee can only recall in the strongest terms the provisions of the Convention, in particular Articles 4 and 5 which call on ratifying States to facilitate the establishment and growth of rural workers' organisations and to eliminate obstacles to this development. It also recalls that, in accordance with Article 3(2), rural workers' organisations shall be able to exercise the principles of freedom of association, such as the right to bargain on behalf of their members. It trusts that the federal Government will ensure that the provincial authorities are mindful of the obligations arising under the Convention in their future dealings with the HMS and its rural affiliates. The Committee also asks clarification from the Government on the status of the Employment Guarantee Scheme employees who should be covered by the relevant legislation, as well as on the trade union rights of the so-called "honorary workers" employed on the Integrated Child Development Scheme in Maharashtra State.