Vol. 10 · pages 216–220

199 PLENARY SESSION OF TRIPARTITE LABOUR CONFERENCE statistics of wages and earnings and hours of work for selected industries on an all-India basis is under active consideration. Involuntary Unemployment The fifth Labour Conference at its session in September, 1943, unanimously agreed that some kind of relief was necessary for cases of involuntary unemployment of workers due to shortage of coal, raw materials, etc. The Central Government have issued a circular letter to Provincial Governments advocating the adoption of principles set out therein, for grant of relief, and this letter has also been brought to the notice of the States concerned. At this session Labour had put in a strong plea for adequate representation in legislatures, local bodies and statutory committees, etc. The matter is under consideration and the Memorandum points out that labour is represented on “Central” official committees such as the Reconstruction Policy Committees, Central Health Survey and Development Committee and Central Food Advisory Committee. Wages And Earnings This session adopted a resolution for the setting up of a machinery to investigate the question of wages and earnings, employment and housing and social conditions generally with a view to providing adequate materials on which to plan a policy of social security for labour. In pursuance of this resolution a Labour Investigation Committee has been constituted and its report is expected to be received by the middle of 1945. The Memorandum points out that Provincial Governments and States, and employers and workers associations were consulted about introduction of standing orders in industrial concerns employing 250 or more persons, and that there was general opposition to take statutory powers under the Defence of India Rules. It is proposed to enact permanent legislation on the subject at an early date. In the meantime the two all-India bodies of employers have been requested to frame standing orders forthwith without waiting for legislation to be completed. A memorandum designed to be of assistance to the employer in framing the Standing Orders has also been circulated.

200 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The discussions of Statutory Wage Control at the fourth Standing Labour Committee meeting resulted in a fair measure of agreement regarding the form of machinery for the regulation of wages. The question as to what industries may be covered by legislation was on the Agenda of the present session of labour conference. Industrial Canteens Committees have been set up in four Provinces, i.e., Bombay, the United Provinces, Bengal and Bihar, to investigate the question of standardisation of definitions of trades and the recommendations of these committees are awaited. As suggested at this meeting representatives of labour are associated with the Central Exchange through the Employment Committees constituted for advising National Service Labour Tribunals in regard to the administration of Employment Exchanges. The Memorandum further refers to the steps taken by the central Government to encourage workers’ canteens in industrial concerns. They have sanctioned rent-free accommodation and free furniture and cooking utensils in canteens run by Government or by the workers or by both jointly and, under certain conditions, even in the canteens run by contractors. Supply of rationed foodstuffs to canteens outside the rations has also been sanctioned. * * * zz

37 * The Factories (Second Amendment) Bill @ Holidays with Pay for Factory Workers The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar (Labour Member): Sir, I move: “That the bill further to amend the Factories Act, 1934, (Second Amendment) be referred to a select Committee consisting of Nawab siddique Ali Khan, Khan Bahadur Shaikh Fazl-i-Haq Piracha, Mr. R. R. Gupta, Mr. A. C. Inskip, Sir Vithal N. Chandavarkar, Rao Bahadur, N. Siva Raj, Mr. N. M. Joshi, Mr. D. S. Joshi and the Mover and that the number of members whose presence shall be necessary to constitute a meeting of the Committee shall be five.” The provisions of the Bill fall into two parts and I think it will be desirable from the point of view of simplicity in the matter of presentation if I explained to the House the provisions of the Bill in two separate forms. Part I of the Bill deals with compensatory holidays for the loss of compulsory holidays. Members will realise that in section 35 of the Factories Act it is obligatory upon the owner or manager of the factory to give one compulsory holiday to every adult worker in the factory. This provision which is contained in section 35 is subject to the provisions contained in sections 43 and 44. Section 43 and 44 provide that the Inspector of factories may permit exemptions being granted to the manager of the factory or factory owner from the obligations imposed by section 35. The view that is taken is this that when such exemptions should be granted, they ought to be compensated by other holidays, equivalent in number. Health and efficiency of the worker requires that he should have the requisite number of holidays which are prescribed by law. The Act, as it stands, makes no such provisions for compensatory holidays. Consequently, clause 2 of the Bill has been introduced for the purpose of removing this lacuna. It will now be open for the Provincial Governments to make rules subject to certain *Legislative Assembly Debates (Central), Vol. IV, 1st Nov. 1944, pp. 89-91. @ Titles for paragraphs are taken from the Indian Information, 15th November 1944, pp. 600-01.

202 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES adjustments that wherever exemptions have been granted under section 35, compensatory holidays of the equivalent amount shall be granted to the workmen. This is the first part of the provisions of the Bill. Labour Convention Coming to the second part of the Bill, the provisions contained therein deal with the question of holidays with pay. It might be desirable at the outset to state to the House the origin of this part of the Bill. Many members of the House will recall that in 1936 the International Labour Conference passed a convention relating to the holidays with pay. The Government of India, which was represented at that International Labour Conference, was not prepared to accept the convention and to ratify it. A Government Resolution was moved in the Assembly on the 26th July, 1937, proposing the non-acceptance of the convention. The Resolution was carried. But while the Government did not find itself in a position to ratify the convention, the Member in charge of the Resolution said that the government would explore and examine the possibilities of giving effect to the convention, if not wholly, at any rate, in part and undertook to have consultation with the Provincial Governments and all the Associations representing the employers and employees to find out to what extent there was a general agreement in the matter of this convention. Part II of the provisions which relate to holidays with pay are the result of this examination and exchange of views which have been going on over a considerable number of years. Perennial Factories Turning to the Bill itself, it will be seen that the Bill applies to factories and it applies not to all the factories, but to perennial factories only. The Bill undoubtedly is limited in its scope as compared to the provisions contained in the convention which was adopted in 1936. With regard to the other provisions, I think it will be better if I divide my observations in four parts so as to cover separately the four points which legislation concerning holidays with pay must necessarily deal with. 1. Length of holiday. 2. Qualifying conditions for a right to a holiday. 3. Limiting conditions. 4. Pay during holiday. With regard to the first point, namely length of a holiday, this is a matter which is dealt with

203 THE FACTORIES (SECOND AMENDMENT) BILL in the new section 49-B which the Bill proposes to add to the Factories Act. According to this section, the total holiday is to be on seven consecutive days for a worker who has put in a continuous service for one year. It might be asked as to why we have taken seven days and not more. The reply to that is that in fixing this period of seven days, we have followed the provisions contained in the Geneva convention of 1936 which laid down six days as the limit of the holiday. To that we have added a seventh day which is a compulsory weekly rest granted to a worker under section 35 of the Factories Act. With regard to the question of qualifying conditions laying down as to when a worker will be entitled to claim a seven days holiday, the provisions contained in the Bill are as follows. As a matter of fact, there is really only one condition and that is that the worker must have put in a period of twelve months continuous service. There is no other condition. With regard to the question as to what is continuous service of twelve months, the bill provides for what are called interruptions and declares mat certain interruptions shall not invalidate the claim for holidays with pay. The interruptions which are mentioned in the Bill are interruptions arising out of sickness, accident, authorised leave, lock-out period and a strike period provided the strike is legal. Involuntary Unemployment There is also another provision in the bill which relates to the same subject and that is the question of involuntary unemployment caused by the desire of the factory owner to close the factory. We have limited that to a period of 30 days. If the involuntary unemployment caused by the factory manager does not extend beyond 30 days, then that would not invalidate the claim of the worker for his right to holidays with pay. It might be necessary perhaps to mention why we have prescribed only 30 days. The explanation is this. Holidays with pay must necessarily take into account the ability of the manager or the factory owner to pay and the view that is taken in the Bill is that if the manager or the factory owner is obliged to close his factory for more than 30 days, then I think it is legitimate to presume that he has really not been prospering as well as he ought to and that he is, therefore, not in a position to pay the cost for holidays with pay. But if the involuntary period does not exceed 30 days, then the presumption is that he is still