2017-09-01 Public minutes of the meeting by special invitees.

Dear friends,

Many of you have expressed concern regarding the firing of 72 workers from

the VH when the contract there was changed. The Institute administration

took note of the community's concern and called a special IAC meeting to

discuss the matter. Please find below a record of that IAC meeting for

your information:

Record of IAC meeting on the VH issue on Sept. 1, 2017 at 10:30am:

Special Invitees from the faculty included Drs. Sumit Basu, Nandini Gupta,

Harish Karnick, Suchitra Mathur, Rahul Varman

The Director began by sharing the following:

1)      Group D recruitment has been stopped in IITK, which has necessitated

outsourcing of such service work. The institute attempts to rotate

contractors, selecting new ones who are national-level operators and hence

better equipped to provide better service.

2)      The fact that 72 workers were going to lose their jobs was brought to

his attention just 10 days ago by some faculty members. Continuous

meetings with the contractor since then have finally resulted in the

contractor’s agreeing to take 30 of these 72 workers. The contractor has

categorically said that taking any more would negatively affect the

quality of service that can be provided. The contractor has also made

clear that under the new contractor, fewer workers overall would be needed

since there will be significant mechanisation of work.

3)      Institute cannot force the contractor to take more since putting such

pressure would eventually make contractors’ afraid to bid for IITK

contracts. But the institute will try to ensure that most of the remaining

42 workers are also accommodated elsewhere.

The special invitees then presented their understanding of the issue:

1)      The VH, by all reports, has been providing exemplary service and

therefore the need for change is not evident.

2)      The new contractor, Sarovar Hotels Pvt. Ltd, is an international hotel

chain owned in its turn by a French company, which is now a subsidiary of

a Chinese public sector concern. Such a multi-national corporation would

be very hard to hold accountable by the institute for its service and

treatment of workers.

3)      The reason for this change-over is cited as the previous contractor’s

negligence as evidenced by absenteeism, and yet VH has continued to

provide exemplary service exclusively due to the effort of these 72

workers. Why then are they paying the price for the change-over?

4)      The present tender document requires almost no details regarding

workers who will be employed to provide the service. While this may not be

illegal in itself, it is highly likely to lead to illegalities with

respect to worker’s wages since this lack of information makes it nearly

impossible to hold the contractor accountable in this regard.

5)      Everything the community has so far learned about the manner of

functioning of the new contractor (from the recruitment of very raw young

workers to forgeries on appointment letters) is highly unprofessional.

6)      Given the above, cancellation of this contract would be the best course

of action.

The following points emerged in the ensuing discussion:

1)      Regarding Tender/Contract Document: It needs to be re-visited to

provide more transparency and accountability to ensure that there is no

exploitation of workers. Suggestions in this regard included:

(a)     Having a more detailed financial bid wherein the amounts are listed

under different categories of operating costs including workers’ wages.

(b)     Including a clause regarding retention of existing workers as far as

possible.

(c)     The contractor should be asked to provide an account of the total

number of workers who will be employed to the Institute before beginning

work. With respect to the new VH contractor, this information should be

requested immediately and shared with IAC members.

(d)     With respect to the VH contract, an addendum should be added requiring

compliance with all tender provisions and ensuring customer satisfaction.

2)      Regarding Contractor:

(a)     International companies are harder to hold accountable and the

Institute should take this into consideration when selecting contractors.

(b)     The new VH contractor will be monitored closely to ensure quality of

service and treatment of workers. The VH incharge will be assisted in this

by a small committee.

3)      Regarding Workers: Two general points were made in this regard:

(a)     As a public institute, IIT Kanpur has a social responsibility to the

local community. In this regard, a Workers’ Exchange, wherein details of

all existing workers on campus and local workers are available, needs to

be established. Contractors could then be mandated to hire all workers,

except those requiring special skills not available in this pool, from

this Workers’ Exchange.

(b)     Since contractual work is now a regular part of IIT Kanpur with over

3000 contract workers, it is necessary to evolve mechanisms to deal with

this situation proactively. In this regard, the David Thomas Report,

commissioned by the Institute on the issue of contract workers in 2012,

needs to be widely shared and its provisions implemented.

With regard to the specific issue of the 72 VH workers, the IAC decided

the following:

(1) The new contractor, Sarovar Hotels Private Ltd, would take over the

running of the VH from Sept. 1, 2017.

(2) The new contractor would take in 30 of the earlier 72 workers,

providing them with a job starting Sept. 1, 2017.

(3) The remaining 42 workers would be accommodated in various other jobs

across the Institute within one month.

        This proposal would be communicated to the VH workers by an IAC committee

consisting of Profs. Sandeep Verma, Y. N. Singh, Javed Malik, and

Gouthama.

Sincerely,

Special Invitees to IAC meeting. 

_______________________________