 | « Back to article | Print this article |
'Samsung declared they would not allow the presence of any trade union.'
'This is unacceptable as the rule of law in India permits employees to have a trade union.'
'So, the crux of the strike is this.'
The strike at the Samsung India factory in Chennai by the CITU affiliated employees entered the 33nd day today.
On the 9th of October, on the 31st day of the strike, the Tamil Nadu police entered the premises and arrested many of the striking employees and also leaders.
But this was condemned by not just the opposition but by the allies of DMK also.
The question that is being asked now is, like Nokia, will Samsung also leave India?
In this interview, A Soundararajan, CITU's general secretary, talks about the strike that has received global attention. CITU -- Centre of Indian Trade Unions -- is affiliated to the Communist Party of India-Marxist.
"The government is hand in glove with the management. The government is not asking the management to follow and abide by the law and respect the trade union rights of the employees," Soundararajan tells Rediff.com's Shobha Warrier.
The arrest of the striking employees by the Tamil Nadu police is described by the allies of the DMK and the Opposition as anti-democratic.
How do you look at this?
It is very clear that what the state government did was undemocratic and autocratic. It can take place only in a police raj.
We were sitting in a private place and the police had no right to enter the area and arrest us. That too, without a warrant. But they did.
The police also removed the tent under which we were sitting.
The previous day, the minister for industries T R B Raja said that employees should look at the chief minister as a comrade, and the very next day, striking employees were arrested.
Did this come as a shock to you?
We were not shocked or surprised because we know them (the government and the ministers).
There is a big gap between what they talk and what they do. They talk one thing and do another thing, and that is what we are seeing in the last 4-5 days.
You feel the government is hand in glove with the management?
For all practical purposes, what they do suggests that the government is hand in glove with the management.
The government is not asking the management to follow and abide by the law and respect the trade union rights of the employees.
Is not allowing a trade union to function the biggest complaint against the management?
The management is not even allowing the employees to form a trade union. Functioning of the union comes only later.
They declared that on the premises of their company, they would not allow the presence of any trade union.
This is unacceptable as the rule of law in India permits employees to have a trade union.
So, the crux of the strike is this.
According to the management, as CITU leaders are not employees of the company, you cannot orchestrate a strike on its premises...
If you go to Kerala or anywhere in India, you will see that those who are not workers of a company are leading many unions.
In fact, this question was raised 100 years back too, and discussed over the years.
The fact is, as per the Trade Union Act 1926, one third of the total office bearers of a union can be outsiders or those who are not employees of the particular company.
For example, if there are 12 elected office bearers, 4 of them can be outsiders.
What I want to say is, when it is allowed by the Act itself, how can the management raise that issue.
When the workers want us to lead the union, the management cannot question the decision as it is the right of the workers to form a union and choose who to lead the union.
When the ruling party DMK's union, LPF (Labour Progressive Federation) has many outsiders as office bearers, this accusation is childish.
A few days ago, Samsung India said that they signed an agreement with the workers, but the strike continues.
Some workers are working inside and some are striking outside.
Nowhere you will get 100% of the employees to unite for a cause. Can the Congress or the BJP get 100% of all the votes in India?
In a democracy, the question is who gets the majority.
According to their statement, 512 employees are working inside. It is another matter that the number is wrong. But I say that there are 1,500 people outside the factory.
Let them come out and count the number of people sitting outside. The media knows how many people are striking.
When we came to know of an impending arrest yesterday (October 9), we had advised them not to come, but many had already reached the venue. And the police arrested them, 625 employees.
The fact is a majority of the employees are outside and only a negligible minority works inside.
But what does the management do? They claim to have talked to this minority and sign an agreement with them.
We won't accept such an agreement as they have not had any discussion with us. They have to look into our demands. So, they cannot claim that they signed an agreement with the employees.
The management is propagating that every demand has been taken care of, and the strike has to end now. But what they claim is incorrect and untrue.
Samsung says it will give better food in the canteen, have air-conditioned buses for the workers to travel, etc.
You mean the only sore point is not giving permission to have a trade union in the company?
After 16 years, they have agreed to give good food and an air-conditioned bus to travel.
So, you can imagine how they treated the workers in these 16 years. There was no AC in the bus. There was no good food in the canteen. There was no proper toilet facility. There was no locker.
Now, they are saying they will take care of all these things. What were you doing in the last 16 years?
Only because of the intervention of the union, they agreed to provide all these facilities to the employees.
They say that they functioned without a union all these years. It is because of the way the workers were treated that the workers were forced to form a union under the Act.
They should now abide by the rule and accept the union as a demand of the workers.
A trade union is the business of the workers. They have every right to form a union and they will choose which union to be affiliated with. And they will choose the leader of the union.
The management has no role in a trade union.
The political party an employee belongs to is immaterial when he joins CITU. The 1,500 Samsung employees who are members of CITU belong to all political parties.
So, if the management gives permission to CITU to function inside, the strike will end?
Yes, the strike will be over immediately.
The minister accused the union of not thinking about the employees who have no food at home as they are not getting any salary for one month...
The decision to strike is not the CITU's. It is the workers themselves who decided to strike. And we are extending solidarity with them by supporting them by giving them money, food, etc.
When they took the decision to go on a strike, they knew very well that it was 'no work, no salary'. Fully aware of what awaits them, they started the strike.
Workers are not babies. Workers are not fools. So, these ministers and others need not shed tears for them.
I will go on to say that it is insulting to the workers when people talk like us.
Workers know that they will not get salary when they strike. They know they will be arrested. They know they will be put in jail. They chose to strike knowing full well the eventuality.
What does it show? How much they must have endured in the last 16 years!
The government is also talking about the impact this strike will have on the image of the state.
The chief minister has just come back from the US after signing many deals with some very big corporates.
They say this strike will tarnish the image of the state and the country...
What is the image of the state that has refused to follow the Trade Union Act?
What is the image of the state that is not pressurising the management to abide the rules in the Constitution?
What is the image of the state that does not protect the rights of its workers?
So, who is tarnishing the image? The state, or the striking workers?
They say that if Samsung leaves India like Nokia did after the workers strike, it will have a major impact on the other companies coming to India to set up plants..
These corporates will come only when they see that they can make some profit. They will choose any country in the world where they can make more profit. They don't think about anything else.
So, why should I be thinking about whether the corporates are coming to India or leaving India?
What about my rights as a citizen of India? Am I not entitled to have my rights in my own country? That is the question.
How can we accept when you are inviting somebody to make us their slaves?
If you do that, you are not my government, you are the government of the multinationals.
Do you think in the name of cheap labour, exploitation of workers is happening not just in India but all over the world?
Very much. Exploitation of workers is happening all over the world. But people will fight against exploitation after some time. It may not be today, it may be tomorrow. But it will happen.
I will say, exploitation is intensifying and moving to all the sectors too especially in the IT sector. They want to increase the working hours from 8 to 12 hours.
There are people like Narayana Murthy who want youngsters to work for 72 hours a week.
Exploitation is happening in so many ways now. That's why I am saying the struggle against exploitation also will intensify.
Who exploits the workers more? Indian companies or MNCs?
Both. An employer whether he is Indian or from some other country, there is no difference in the way workers are exploited.
Wherever capital employs people, exploitation also will come. Capital is the problem.
It was reported that Samsung treats its employees in South Korea better.
It is the worst in India. In South Korea, workers fought and got many rights.
Samsung calls this strike illegal...
Let the court say whether the strike is illegal or not. Neither the management or the government has the right to say whether a strike is legal or illegal. Only the court can say.
In many such earlier cases, the court had categorically said that a strike was not illegal. In fact, the court directed the management to settle the issues workers raised.
How long will the strike go on?
I don't know. Till better sense prevails on the management and the government, the strike will continue.
Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff.com