Vol. 10 · pages 171–175

154 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES having regard to what I have stated on the point, Mr. Joshi will admit that, so far as the present machinery of the Government of India to deal with Labour problems is concerned, it cannot be said to be inadequate machinery. Tripartite Labour Conference Mr. Jamnadas Mehta made certain comments on the Tripartite Labour Conference. He said that the Tripartite Labour Conference should be raised to the level of the International Labour Office. Mr. Joshi said that it should have a separate secretariat and Mr. Mehta also suggested that the member in charge of the Labour Department, who generally presides over the proceedings of the Conference, should divest himself of that authority. Mr. Mehta also said that the reports of the Committee should be placed before the Legislature for rectification. Sir, I sympathise very greatly with all that has been said by my Honourable friends, Mr. Mehta and Mr. Joshi. I would like to say this. As both of them are aware, the procedure of the Committee is more or less a matter for the Conference itself to decide. This question whether the Conference should have a separate secretariat was discussed at the time when the Conference was inaugurated and I think I am right in saying that the Conference was unanimous in their decision for the time for having a separate secretariat, but in a subsequent Conference it was altered and that gave us a direction of a different character. I have no hesitation in saying that the matter will be considered again. Sir, there is only one more point about which I would like to say one thing, if I am right in presuming that both Mr. Mehta and Mr. Joshi regarded the Tripartite Labour Conference as a matter of small moment and not of much value. Sir, I beg to differ from this, because I think that the Labour Conference performs so important a function that I think it is really impossible to exaggerate its value. The point that I would like to make, and I ask the Members of the House to take particular note, is this. If anyone were to examine the agenda which has been placed before the Tripartite Labour Conference or the Standing Labour Committee, I think it would be admitted that the topics placed before them for consideration and discussion have been of the highest moment. I am speaking from recollection, but they

155 GOVERNMENT’S POLICY TOWARDS LABOUR have ranged from almost anything which could be regarded of great moment to the labour world. I would like to say this. Would it have been possible for the representatives of labour outside the Tripartite Conference to have approached any employer even to consider or to talk about those projects ? I am sure about it that no employer in the present disorganised condition of Indian labour would pay a tuppenny worth of attention to the problems which might be brought before them by representatives of employees. I do claim credit for the Tripartite Labour Conference, that, if we have done nothing more, we have at least done one thing, namely, to induce, if not to compel, the representatives of employees to meet the representatives of employers and discuss matters of the utmost and gravest importance. I think it is a great service that the Tripartite Conference is doing to the working classes of this country. Women In Coalmines My Honourable friend, Mrs. Subbarayan, in her speech referred largely to the question of the introduction of women in coalmines. I do not doubt the intensity of feeling which she said she has on a question of this character. But, Sir, I cannot go over the ground once again because the House will remember that this matter has already been discussed on an adjournment motion. I repeat again that I am indeed unhappy over the decision that we have to take and I assure the House that I am taking every possible step in order to increase the labour force to be employed in the mines and in order to increase coal output so that I may be in a position to put the ban on again at the earliest moment possible. Shrimati K. Radhabai Subbarayan : May I ask a question of the Honourable Member ? Did Government consult the Tripartite Conference before issuing a notification about employment of women for underground work in mines ? Dr. B.R. Ambedkar : I am afraid we had no time to do it. As I said it was an emergency and we had to meet it by a most emergent measure. One point which I would like to mention is the point raised by her, namely, that the Government of India, instead of trying to

156 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES remedy the grievances o f labour, was engaged in imprisoning labour leaders. Well, Sir, that is not a matter with which I, in my department, specifically deal. We had a great deal of discussion yesterday. I have not seen either yesterday or to-day any specific illustration or instance given to me of any Labour leader having been imprisoned by Government. Seth Yusuf Abdoola Haroon : I just referred to a case in the Karachi Port Trust. Mr. Hooseinboy A. Laljee : Is the Port Trust under you ? Dr. Ambedkar : No. Mr. Laljee : Railwaymen ? Dr. Ambedkar : No. Mr. Laljee : Seamen ? Dr. Ambedkar : No. Mr. Laljee : Then what else have you got ? Dr. Ambedkar : There are very many other categories of labour. I was dealing with the question of imprisonment of labour leaders. Smt. K. Radhabai Subbarayan : Was not Mr. Dange imprisoned ? Dr. Ambedkar : I am just coming to that. Knowing the labour leaders, as I do, the trouble I think is that labour leaders play more than one part. They are sometimes labour leaders, sometimes they are communists, sometimes they are national leaders, sometimes they are members of the Congress; and sometimes they are members of the Hindu Mahasabha or of some other organisation. An Honourable Member : All are to be tabooed ! Dr. Ambedkar : It is very difficult to say that labour leader who plays such a multiple part is imprisoned because he is a labour leader and not because he has acted in some other capacity—as a communist, as a member of the Congress, or as a member of the Hindu Mahasabha. In fact, if I may say so with all humility, in my judgment, if labour leaders were to exclusively devote themselves to the labour cause and not to be instruments of political parties of other complexion or other character, or of other programme, then they would be not only excluding themselves from the clutches of Rule 26, but they would also be doing a great deal of service to labour itself. Unfortunately we have not been able to get in this country labour leaders who are exclusively devoted to labour.

157 GOVERNMENT’S POLICY TOWARDS LABOUR An Honourable Member : Mr. Joshi is there. Dr. Ambedkar : I do not know if there is any other matter which has been raised in the course of this debate to which I have not given a reply, or which calls for a reply. I think I may say that whatever may be said with regard to the Government of India in the matter of Labour it can be legitimately claimed that there has been a new orientation with regard to the attitude of Government in respect of labour. Mr. Amarendra Nath Chattopadhyaya : What is the policy behind it? Dr. Ambedkar : For the last half an hour I have been saying nothing else. Maulvi Muhammad Abdul Ghani: May I seek one piece of information from the Honourable Member ? How is it that the technicians after being trained at a centre do not get certificates after the training ? Dr. Ambedkar : I will look into it. Mr. N.M. Joshi: Sir, in the hope that this discussion will lead to increased activity and better activity on the part of the Labour Department, I ask leave to withdraw my cut motion. The cut motion was, by leave of the Assembly, withdrawn. * * * *International Labour Conference in Philadelphia The Government of India have nominated the following delegation for the forthcoming International Labour Conference on April 20, 1944 at Philadelphia, U.S.A. said a Press communique issued on March 24 : Government Representatives : Sir Samuel Runganadhan, High Commissioner for India, Leader; Mr. H. C. Prior, Secretary, Labour Department, Delegate ; A member of the High Commissioner’s Office, Adviser to Government delegates and Secretary to the Indian Delegation. Employers’ Representatives : Mr. J.C. Mahindra, Delegate; Mr. D.G. Mulherkar, Adviser. *Indian Information, April 15, 1944, p. 416.

158 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Workers’ Representatives: Mr. Jamnadas Mehta, Delegate; Mr. Aftab Ali, Adviser; Mr. R. R. Bhole, Adviser. India, as a member of the International Organisation, has undertaken to nominate non-Government delegates and advisers chosen in agreement with the industrial organisations, if such organisations exist, which are most representatives of employers or work people, as the case may be, in their respective countries. The employers’ representatives have been chosen in this manner as agreed recommendations were received. As regards employers, there are two main organisations of employees and they have failed to submit agreed proposals. As Government have no machinery to examine which of the two organisations is the more representative body and as Government desire that labour should not lose its opportunity of having its say at this conference because of its failure to come to an agreement, Government have decided to adopt, for the present, the principle of nominating representatives alternately in agreement with each of the two organisations. In accordance with this decision they have nominated as representatives of workers the Delegates and one Adviser recommended by the Indian Federation of Labour, and have also included, as an Adviser, Mr. R. R. Bhole, recommended by the All-India Municipal Employees’ Federation, who has been accepted as a Co-Adviser by the workers’ Delegate. zz