Workers look up to Samant as a saviour

The attraction that Samant held for workers can now be fairly clearly understood. He represented direct, swift and uncompromising confrontation. His charter of demands in most places was simple, in practice if not on paper. He would usually put forth a direct, simple, lumpsum demand, eg, a wage rise of Rs 200 per month per worker. He did not seem to be unduly bothered by the intricacies of the modalities by which this was to be effected, Palpable, attractive quantums were the backbone of his demands. The quantums of wage rise demanded were also unprecedently high.

Samant also effectively articulated the general distrust of capitalists which the workers were feeling. He echoed the disgust which the worker was feeling towards the legal system. The labour law machinery had been seen to be time-consuming, murderously slow and essentially biased against the workers. It was not seen in any way as an aid to problem solving.

An activist of Samant's union has been quoted as saying (Sunday, September 7, 1980); "We don't need more labour courts. They are traps for workers. Let them burn down the existing ones also." This has also by and large been the feeling of the average worker.

Samant supported it, verbalised it and acted upon it. He generally kept away from the legal machinery and legal procedures, Direct talks, direct actions and appeals to ministerial authority to intervene have marked his operations. He has not only avoided legal procedures, but has violated accepted legalistic norms. He brushed aside injunctions, ignored questions of the legality of his actions, trampled upon signed and concluded agreements. He seemed to have realised at a practical level that the real balance of power resides in an is achieved at the production points. Laws can be bypassed with impunity if strength can be mustered on the shop floor and at factory gates.

The distrust which he displayed in the financial statements of companies also echoed the workers' sentiments. He refused to accept these as the basis of any settlements, refused to even read them. He has repeatedly and openly called them fraudulent. The only basis for negotiations that he has accepted are his own demands. Intricate arguments about capacity to pay, etc, he has treated as useless lies. He displayed in the same manner a contempt for negotiations. Not much, he seems to have felt, can be achieved through negotiations. They are only ways of delaying the proceedings and of trapping the workers. Trial of strength through immediate direct confrontation was the foundation of his methodology.

Datta Samant seems to the managements outrageous. He has been variously alluded to as irresponsible, a maverick, a mafia-style operator, and so on. What has been characteristically missed is that the "outrageous and irresponsible" behaviour is the basis of his strength. In an atmosphere of total distrust of and disgust with capitalist norms and modes, variously imposed on the legal and trade union machinery, a flouting of bourgeois respectability and responsibility held great attraction for the workers.

Datta Samant in many respects is not a trade unionist. He is only the spearhead and figurehead of an upsurge. He does not organise workers. He mobilises them. He does not pay much attention to normal day to day trade union activities. He only leads the workers into strikes or lockouts. He has no systematised organisational structure. He has no norms. He pays no attention to the consolidation of experiences gained by the workers. He seems to be constantly heading a charge. His is not an organisational effort, it is not even a movement. He is leading what is essentially a struggle campaign, launched and desired by the workers themselves. In a particular period he was, therefore, the expression of an upsurge which changed the set norms. In another, with his many limitations, he may become a liability to workers' struggles.

One characteristic which stands out, particularly in the earlier part of this period, is Samant's capacity to inspire confidence in workers, to galvanise even the docile ones into militant actions. Workers in some units -- particularly the smaller or far-flung ones -- have not even met Samant in person.

Under his leadership they have struggled. He organised no relief for workers in long drawn out work stoppages, but they did not revolt. This 'charismatic' hold is nothing short of fascinating. Rarely have there been any democratic procedures about decision making. A small coterie usually takes all the decisions. Not even otherwise alert observers have termed this bureaucratisation.

Datta Samant's operations are marked by certain other features. His organisations seem to be very loose structurally. The conduct of day-to-day affairs at a factory is left to a local committee -- self-appointed rather than elected in many cases. These committees of 'worker militants' are a peculiar mixture. In some factories (eg, Premier Automobiles, Larsen and Toubro) they comprise authentic activists with militant pasts enjoying the trust and respect of the workers and having basic working class positions in their outlook. In many others, such genuine militants are either in a minority or even absent. Toughies (who were in some cases once strike-breakers) evoking fear rather than respect and with basically opportunist tendencies dominate the scene.

The Samant wave is also marked by a strong personality cult. The approach of Samant to the workers is that of a saviour. The workers is that of a saviour. The workers too by and large look upon him as that. Not the strength and struggles of the workers but the magical qualities of Samant are seen to be responsible for various occurrences. Slogan and speeches (of his lieutenants) extol this messianic leadership. Having become a cult figure he has shown tremendous sympathy but hardly any respect for the workers he leads. His functioning has primitivist plebiscitary elements but no participative democratic character. He therefore approximates a populist autocratism rather than a democratic representative leadership.

A major issue of the Samant wave has been violent inter-union rivalry. The wave has killed, injured and inflicted tremendous harm upon numerous activists of other unions. It may seem to some, with definite justification, that the main enemy and target of the Samant wave were other unions and not managements.

Kind courtesy: Economic and Political Weekly