2010-09-22 : Hamara Manch response to Institute communique on labour issues

Dear Friends,

As many of you know, a group of alumni have been actively engaged with the situation regarding contract workers on the IITK campus.  Their online petition now has over 1270 signatures, and in early Sept., a 1966 alumnus, Mr. Raj Sahai, also visited the campus as a representative of these concerned alumni to meet the administration as well as the Hamara Manch community.  Just before Raj’s visit (of which the administration had already been apprised), the Institute sent a communiqué to a few select alumni, including past and present presidents of AA, regarding its position with respect to contract labour on campus.  This August 24, 2010 communique (a five-page document available online at http://sites.google.com/site/iitkcitizensforum/), created exclusively for the alumni, makes extravagant claims about the Institute’s commitment to following the letter and the spirit of all labour laws, and assures the alumni that the Institute, as principal employer, is ensuring that all such laws are being complied with to the fullest in IITK.

The communiqué is a carefully crafted combination of half-truths and untruths.  A detailed Hamara Manch response to it is attached with this email.  The communiqué’s most blatant contradiction is with the recent June 15, 2010 circular issued by the Institute for internal consumption by contractors and Institute officials.  Two points are especially relevant here:

1)  The June 15 circular disassociates the Institute completely from the hiring and firing of workers by contractors, categorically stating that the Institute has no role to play in this entire process.  The communiqué, on the other hand, emphasizes the Institute’s role and responsibilities as the principal employer, repeatedly claiming that the Institute is even ‘going beyond the statutory realm’ to ensure that there is no exploitation of contract workers on campus.

2)  The June 15 circular makes the maintenance of all records related to contract workers the sole responsibility of the contractors, and strongly expresses the Institute’s displeasure at the labour commissioner’s office pointing fingers at the Institute for any shortcomings in this regard. The communiqué, on the other hand, claims that the Institute is ‘proactively cooperating with the labour enforcement authorities’ and has even appointed a ‘labour advisor’ to ensure that the Sept. 16, 2007 office order is implemented in toto.  And yet, the June 15 circular mentions the same labour advisor as a consultant chiefly for the contractors in case they have any questions about how to follow nothing but the letter of the law.

Clearly, the Institute is taking widely different and contradictory positions on the contract labour issue depending on whom it is addressing. While the document meant for internal consumption gives carte blanche to contractors regarding their treatment of workers, the document meant for the alumni takes the high ground, ensuring those sitting outside that the Institute is actively involved in fighting against worker exploitation on campus.  Here, it is interesting to note that while the June 15 circular has all the trappings of an official document including logo and Director’s signature, the communiqué sent to the alumni does not even have a date, let alone any logo or signature.  As such, the communiqué becomes worthless as an official document and stands clearly revealed as nothing more than an appeasement measure.  Its content and format is an insult to

the alumni and their very real concerns regarding the situation of contract labour on campus.

Hamara Manch

Majdoor Hain, Majboor Nahin (We are Workers, not helpless victims)

Shikshit Honge, Sangatith Honge, Sangharsh Karenge (We will Study, Build

Solidarity, Struggle for our Rights)

Attachment: DRPG communique response.pdf

( Was response to this document: communique_24Aug10.pdf send in an email dated 2010-Aug-25)