May 6, 2011
He who has injured thee was either stronger or weaker. If weaker spare him; if stronger, spare thyself. – Lucius Seneca, Roman philosopher and moralist, Spain (BC 4-AD 65).
As Air India stir enters the eighth day, with 90 % of the domestic flights grounded, both sides to the dispute should consider their strengths and weaknesses, and vulnerability to public wrath, in quest of ending the impasse in the national airline. The core of the dispute is about increased salary and even more about parity with one class of pilots what they get compared to the members of those given to the 800-strong Indian Commercial Pilots Association holding to ransom the jobs of the over-bloated employees totaling 41,000 – there are 243 employees for every IA plane against the industry average of 150.
It is not the employer who pays the wages – he only handles the money. It is the product that pays the wages. – Bob Foster.
If the product has to pay the wages, it should be wanted by the consumer and should have the right quality and competitive price. Otherwise, it would be a failure in the market-place and there would be no job and question of paying wages. This applies to services like Air India offers. It is now a victim of the question of equal pay for equal work which is a modern slogan. But the need for work under flexible rules to respond to market demands needs to be considered. This has been stressed in a recent judgment of the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the government can fix extra working hours for workers even if their colleagues discharging similar functions work for lesser hours and it does not violate the Constitutional provision of “equality” under Article 14. A Bench of Justices Markandeya Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra said that such differential timings can be adopted by the government to face competition from private sector and courts should not interfere in such executive function.
The apex court further said if the aggrieved employees had agreed to the timings at the time of their appointments, they cannot retract from the assurance. “In our opinion, fixing of hours of work, provided they do not violate any statutory provision or statutory rule, are really management functions and this court must exercise restraint and not ordinarily interfere with such management functions. It is not prudent or pragmatic for the court to insist on absolute equality when there are diverse situations and contingencies, as in the present case. In view of the inherent complexities involved in modern society, some free play must be given to the executive authorities in this connection,” Justices Katju and Mishra said.
The court passed the judgment while dismissing the appeal of Transport & Dock Workers Union & others challenging the differential timings fixed by the Mumbai Port Trust for typist-cum-computer clerks. According to the union, those appointed prior to November1, 1996, have to work for six and half hours, whereas others appointed subsequently have to work for seven and half hours (excluding lunch break). This, it was alleged, violates Article 14 of the Constitution. The Trust, however, defended the timings saying it was done to deal with growing competition from the private sector and also with consent of those appointed after November 1, 1996.
“If the law or practice deals equally with members of a well defined class, it is not obnoxious and it is not open to the charge of denial of equal protection to other persons. In the present case, as we have noted, the purpose of the classification was to make the activities of the port competitive and efficient,” the court observed. The court said that the policy cannot be said to have caused any prejudice to the employees as they were clearly told about the working hours prior to appointment. “In our opinion, the introduction of the new policy was a bona fide decision of the port and the acceptance of the conditions with open eyes by the applicants and recruits after1.11.1996 means that they cannot have grievance. It is well settled that courts should not ordinarily interfere with policy decisions. Excessive interference by the judiciary in the functions of the executive is not proper. Those who entered the service after1.11.1996 knew that they had to work for seven and half hours, excluding lunch break, and with open eyes accepted the employment. Hence, there is no question of violation of Article 14 of the Constitution,” the Bench said.
This judgment is likely to be cited when the judiciary, which has already issued contempt notices to the pilots, comes in to the picture. One emerging aspect increasingly followed is in the form of individual contracts, Even journalist, whose wages are periodically upgraded through wage boards, are now hired and fired on contract basis. This is the equivalent of telling a pilot: “I am giving you what you have agreed to accept and you are nobody to question if I give more to any other pilots”.
That would perhaps be okay if Air India is proprietary concern. But the funds for it come from the public and the CMD and his team of management themselves are being accused of action which pilots want to be investigated by CBI.
It is against this background that the pilots can be brought down from their lofty arrogance and greed through a system of job tendering. Pre-qualify pilots for given type of aircraft (eliminating fake pilots), as is done in the case contracts (technical and financial pre-qualification), and have the pilots submit sealed tenders for the total monthly package, say for a three-year period. The lowest bidders will get the job while the others would have over-priced themselves out of the market and lose the jobs. There could be a 10% annual rise in the package to take care of the ubiquitous inflation. Now, there is a complaint about employing foreign pilots at inflated costs (that could include kick-backs). Under this system, which is now also used for new share issues under the book-building route, the humble (including the foreign pilots) will get the jobs and the greedy will be humbled and benched.
John B Monteiro, author and journalist, is editor of his website www.welcometoreason.com (Interactive Cerebral challenger).
John Monteiro - Recent Archives: