90-Hour Work Week!
[By Shivaji Sarkar]
Two statements, one by Larsen & Toubro (L&T) Chairman SN Subramanyan saying there should be 90-hour weekly work, including on Sundays, for each worker and the other by Narayan Murthy of Infosys saying it should be 70 hours, rock the Indian political-economic scenario, reflecting corporate unwillingness to create jobs as 44 labour laws are virtually scrapped. The four Labour Codes that replaced the laws are lame duck.
What Subramanyan says means everyone must work for 15 hours a day, virtually double of the accepted Chicago model of eight hours. In other words, they should work for two continuous shifts to get paid for one. Murthy envisages a 10-hour daily schedule. They say it was needed to make the nation great at the cost of the life and toil of the youth. Both the statements are atrocious as it robs the people of a decent life of – eight hours of sleep and eight hours unto themselves for personal and social enrichment.
This raises also the complicity of the government or its compulsions to yield to corporate whims that care for profits but not the welfare of the workers. Surprisingly, none from the government shoots back to shut the mouths of the pampered chiefs. How in a democracy could the two could ignore the workers, who for years are having the worst of hours, wages and working conditions forcing them to work almost for all through the day and night, even from their homes. The companies use their home space for office work, disturb their peace but never pay them for using the space, electricity or other facilities. Some companies are even known to put up cameras to monitor them in the privacy of their homes.
This speaks volumes. Not only of the grim working scenario but also of grimmer loss of vacancies in the country, which actually exist. India is losing jobs in all sectors and workers are forced to accept inhuman conditions for survival. Statements of Murthy and Subramanyan also bare the corporate apathy of creating jobs. They are trying to conceal that they instead of doubling the staff, are burdening them doubly to deny jobs to almost another equal number.
The Labour Ministry should have suo moto made a move to prosecute Murthy and Subramanyan for creating an unhealthy condition that not only robs jobs but renders required people unwanted. It’s a move against the nation and the government that painstakingly wants to have more jobs for improving social and economic conditions.
It is a virtual move for negating the process of Budget 2024 that unveiled a comprehensive strategy built on nine foundational pillars — agriculture, employment, inclusive development, manufacturing and services, urban development, energy, infrastructure, innovation/research and development, and next-gen reforms.
Former badminton star Jwala Gutta has criticised Subrahmanyan for his comments, which quickly went viral, about wanting his employees to work on Sundays. Gutta pointed out that it is sad people are not taking mental health and rest seriously. She is right. How could a company boss speak against the interest of the nation. Since Manmohan Singh became the finance minister initiating liberalisation and globalisation, the country has been losing jobs. The unemployment rate reached 6.9 per cent in 1991 itself.
A new study by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has just confirmed what we already suspected: India’s remarkable growth in the nineties, widely held as reform years, has been mostly a jobless one. In that period, the rate of India’s employment grew far more slowly than the rate of the economy.
Do Murthy and Subramanian want to have the country mired in a continuous jobless scenario? It appears that the two, may be representing many others of their ilk, want to disrupt Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s imminent full-fledged Budget aimed at elevating India’s economic growth to 7 per cent in the financial year (FY) 2026 from the expected 6.3 per cent in FY25, as an State Bank of India Mutual Fund report envisages. The budget is anticipated to introduce fiscal and monetary policy changes to boost demand and address the nation’s economic challenges. Are they trying to put the process off the rails!
The government has to move cautiously. It faces severe financial crunch. The borrowings are rising. It’s avoidable. The government could have put off many demolitions and reconstructions of railway stations, office buildings and the like to save billions a year. Instead, it could have gone on necessary repairs of the 150-year-old strong railway stations and the offices that were built mostly in 1960s. The benefit of these activities is not going to the people but only adds to the profits of a select groups of corporate. It is causing severe inflation, another indirect charge on the government’s own activities.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, corporate profits were a major factor in the initial rise in inflation. In the non-finance corporate sector, corporate profits accounted for more than half of the price growth between 2020 and 2021. Even in the second quarter of 2024, corporate profits could explain about a third of the growth in the price level since the end of 2019.
Corporate profits have grown more than 3.5 times faster than GDP growth in the past four years. However, employee salaries have not grown at the same rate as inflation. Ignoring the corporate profits has left the poor struggling to survive. Basic needs like housing, clean water, nutritious food, and healthcare are out of reach for many. Families are increasingly reliant on loans to meet essential needs. Devious methods through National Green Tribunal and Grade Response (Pollution) Action Plan are also robbing jobs and wealth like cars and tractors benefitting large companies.
The government has good reasons to intervene in these issues and correct the system. Each price rise is a drain on government finances as it remains the largest consumer. It’s also an occasion to tell the corporate to follow the basic labour rules and stop arbitrary retrenchment, mostly through forced resignations. A little arm-twisting could correct many scenarios and take the blames off the official system.
It could help if the government has an attractive political face and have more popularity. With a small stroke the government could not only correct the employment scenario but also cut on their phenomenal profits – both reasons are enough to raise the popular rating as well as rebuff a critical opposition. — INFA