Current State and Evolution of Industrial Relations in Maharashtra

[Excerpt] Maharashtra is one of the highly industrialized and commercially well-developed states in India. It has a population of over 95 million people in an area of over 300 sq. km., giving it a density of 314 people per sq. km. A little over 40 per cent of its population lives in urban areas and the state boasts of a high literacy rate of 77 per cent as of 2001. It accounts for 10 per cent of geographical area and population, 15 per cent of urban population, 11 per cent of working factories and factory employment as of 2002-03. The state’s share in India’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2000-01 was 14 per cent. Maharashtra had the second highest per capita net state domestic product (at current prices), next only to Haryana, in 2002-03. It has been the most preferred investment destination for many years. The state figures prominently in the history of labour movement and industrial relations in India. The study of labour markets and industrial relations in a state has assumed special importance following the economic reforms process that has been under way since 1991. States can now freely compete for capital and design policies for attracting investment. As the economic reform process gained momentum, significant economic policies came to be introduced since the mid-1990s. It is in this context that the study of industrial relations in Maharashtra between 1995 and 2006 will be of interest. This paper seeks to study the current state of industrial relations in Maharashtra. The exercise covers, as far as possible, the period 1995-2006. Depending on availability, the data for the end year of the period will vary in the case of some variables. The state labour departments are not prompt in compiling statistics, unlike other departments which produce data relating to state income, consumer prices etc. The Labour Bureau, which compiles the statistics on several variables on industrial relations, reports non-submission or late submission of annual returns under various labour laws. The validity and reliability of labour statistics are, therefore, not strong

Profitability or Industrial Relations: What Explains Manufacturing Performance across Indian States?

This article begins with a critique of the well-known claim by Besley and Burgess concerning the negative impact of labour regulation on organized sector manufacturing performance in India. In the second part of the article, the authors use a state-level panel data set for the period 1969–2005 to analyse the relative importance of profitability (rate of profit as a percentage of the total replacement cost of capital stock) and industrial disputes (man-days lost to all industrial disputes as a percentage of total workers employed) to explain cross-state variations of manufacturing performance in India\u27s organized sector. Using three different measures of manufacturing performance — net value added, investment and employment — they find that profitability is more significant than industrial disputes in explaining the variation of manufacturing sector performance across Indian states. The findings presented here therefore question the uncritical acceptance of Besley and Burgess\u27s results in the literature on labour regulation

Freedom of association in the Bangladeshi garment industry: A policy schizophrenia in labour regulation

The right to freedom of association is fundamental to the establishment of labour unionism as an institution. The Bangladesh government while requires enabling legal provisions for unionisation in its garments industry, as this paper explicates, its legal regulation for the right to freedom of association is in palsy to uphold the labour unionism. This paper argues for the necessity of legislation capable of drawing from the complementary skills and resources of the government, factory owners, labour unions, and global brands to secure a sustained commitment and contribution towards socio‐economic and political dimensions of labour relations in the Bangladesh RMG industry

Emerging Consensus on Labour Market Institutions and Implications for Developing Countries: From the Debates in India

This paper makes a critical intervention to on-going theoretical and policy debates in the economic analysis of labour market institutions (LMIs) in the context of recent debates in India. It focuses on the internal inconsistency of mainstream economic analyses of LMIs, in particular those based on the new institutional economics (NIE) approach, and what appears to be an emerging policy consensus on LMIs within the World Bank and the International Labour Organization (ILO). The paper draws out the possible ideological parallels in these two developments, despite different intellectual origins and intentions of those engaged in these debates. A corresponding modification in policy debates in India is observed in the shifting perspectives from the Second National Commission on Labour (SNCL) to the National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS). The apparent emerging consensus in both the theoretical literature and policy debates reveals the tendency for researchers to focus on labour market outcomes and phenomenal forms of LMIs rather than the structures, processes, agencies and relations that underpin them. While this can be seen as an advancement from the traditional distortionist-institutionalist dichotomy, the tendency of this consensus to explain the persistence of seemingly inefficient institutions within the micro-level choice theoretic framework and its appeal to policy agendas on good governance, social capital, trust and civil society, render it vulnerable to appropriation by the mainstream. The paper argues that the emerging consensus on LMIs is an inadequate framework to inform effective policy propositions, and highlights the scope and opportunity for a political economy alternative