Maruti India

People’s Union for Democratic Rights

Press Release   17th June 2013

Release of PUDR report ‘Driving Force: Labour Struggles and Violation of
Rights in Maruti Suzuki India Limited’ ('kks"k.k dk ifg;k twu 2013) at
Public Meeting at Gandhi Peace Foundation, Delhi

The report ‘Driving Force: Labour Struggles and Violation of Rights in
Maruti Suzuki India Limited’ is a result of investigations conducted by PUDR
into the violence that broke out at the Maruti unit located at Manesar on 18
July 2012. It’s going to be nearly a year since the incident in which an HR
manager died and some other managers as well as workers were injured. In the
months that followed, a large number of workers and their family members
were harassed by the police in the course of a deeply flawed police
investigation into the incident. As a result of this investigation, workers
were arrested, jailed, and have been denied bail till date. The company at
the same time terminated hundreds of workers accusing them of involvement in
the incident well before the police investigation was completed. The
registered union has not been allowed to function inside the unit, and its
activities outside are being repeatedly and severely curbed by the police
and  administration. It is against this backdrop that this report is being
released after a detailed fact finding investigation into the incident, its 

deep rooted context and implications. This report follows PUDR’s two
previous reports Hard Drive (2001) (iw¡th dk ifg;k, 2001) and Freewheeling
Capital (2007) (csdkcw ljek;knkj, 2007) which recorded previous crucial
moments of the labour struggle at Maruti.  In the course of the present fact
finding, we have met or spoken to the workers (contract, permanent and
terminated), the union leaders, their lawyer as well as officials from the
labour department, Gurgaon, and different police officials. All attempts to
meet the management turned out to be futile because it did not give us
appointment for a meeting despite our persistent efforts.

Main findings, recorded in the report are as follows:

1. The Farce of an Independent Enquiry

i. The events of 18 July 2012 at Maruti's Manesar unit are still heavily
shrouded in ambiguity and the real culprits can be identified only if a
thorough investigation is done by an independent agency which is not
influenced by the management. The Haryana police have been consistently
acting in a partisan manner favouring the management since the incident, and
therefore cannot be entrusted with this task. The lack of an independent
investigation into the incident has been amounting to a grave miscarriage of
justice.

ii. PUDR wishes to assert that an investigation and trial based on
preconceived notions and not on the basis of scientifically gathered
evidence could mean that those responsible for Awanish Dev’s death will go
scot free and innocents will be penalised. A close look at the charge sheet
filed by the police and denial of bail to the arrested workers shows that
the case is moving in this very direction. This would amount to a travesty
of law and denial of justice not only to the workers, but also to Awanish
Dev.

II.           Collusion of Management, Administration and Police in the
Harassment of Workers

i. In an absolute disregard for the rule of law, the entire blame for the
incident has been put on the workers not just by the management, but also
the police and administration, long before the investigation was in fact
over. The close correspondence between the FIR lodged by the police
containing between 500 and 600 ‘unnamed accused’ and the termination of 546
workers by the company allegedly for being responsible for the violence on
18 July, cannot be a coincidence. It shows exactly how closely the police
were protecting the company’s interests.
ii. Following the incident, the police arbitrarily arrested a large number
of workers not through an investigation, but on the basis of lists provided
by the management targeting the workers who were vocal, articulate and
active in the union, subjected the arrested workers to brutal torture,
violated the constitutional safeguards regarding detention and arrests and
harassed the family members of the workers. Not only this, the police has
been continuing to intimidate, target and attack the on going struggle of
the terminated and other workers in order to silence and criminalise their
legitimate protest (See Chapter Four). The scale of police action against
workers seems to be aimed to act as a deterrent for any agitation in
future – not only by these workers but also other workers in the Manesar and
Gurgaon industrial area. Most recently on 18 May 2013, the Haryana police
imposed Section 144 CrPC in Kaithal and arrested around 150 workers
peacefully protesting there since 24 March demanding release of arrested
workers and reinstatement of terminated workers.
iii. Another example of the police colluding with the management is that it
has in the course of investigating the incident completely ignored the
discrepancies in the management’s account, the fact that the workers were
also injured, the presence of bouncers in the premises, or the fact that
Awanish Dev, was always considered by the workers to be sympathetic to them.
In fact it is the workers’ who have been demanding an independent
investigation into the incident, a demand which has been ignored by the
state and the central government.

III.   History of Unfair Labour Practices and Workers struggles at Maruti

i. PUDR is of the view that July incident should be seen in the context of
the long chain of events that preceded it. It can be understood in the light
of the continuous tension and conflict in the unit between the management
and the workers as well as their persistent struggle of workers of the
Manesar unit to register a union and draw attention to their inhuman working
conditions.
ii. In September 2011, the Maruti management at the Manesar unit imposed a
condition that the workers could enter the plant for work only after signing
a 'good conduct' undertaking. The ‘good conduct’ undertaking effectively
takes away the right of the workers to go on a legal strike, a right
guaranteed by the Industrial Disputes Act (25T, 25U read with the Fifth
Schedule); this also amounts to unfair labour practice as per Section 8,
Fifth Schedule, IDA. (See Chapter Three).
iii.  Like other corporates, the main driving factor in Maruti is reducing
production costs, maximising profits and competing against other companies.
Yet Maruti stands out among them because the company's expenditure on
workers is among the lowest in automobile companies. Moreover the company
adopts various measures to extract maximum work from its workers. At Maruti
therefore, the production capability and targets are set considerably higher
than the installed capacity, i.e., production capability of the company is
1.55 million units per annum even though installed capacity is 1.26 million
units per annum (Annual Report, Maruti Suzuki India Limited, 2011- 12).
Workers are made to work non stop like robots for eight and a half hours,
with a break of only 30 minutes for lunch and two tea breaks of 7 minutes
each. For years, workers have been made to both report for duty 15 minutes
before shift-time and also work for 15 minutes extra every day without any
overtime payment. Further the policy on leave is very stringent and the
leave record is directly linked to the wages which are deducted on account
of any leave taken. This contributes to the regime of ceaseless production
and drastic increase in work pressure on the Maruti shopfloors.
iv. The wage deductions on account of leave are made from the
incentive-linked part of the wages of Maruti workers, under the
Production-Performance-Reward Scheme. A single leave taken by a permanent
worker, with permission from the supervisor, could also cost him a loss of
Rs. 1200 to Rs. 1500. Both before and after the 18 July 2012 incident, a
part of the wages is fixed, and a major component paid as incentive wages
linked to production, profit and leave records, which makes the wages
fluctuating. Norms of incentive linked wages have been arbitrarily fixed and
changed by the management at Maruti's Manesar plant. (See Chapter Two and
Three).
v. Maruti management especially at Manesar have been resorting to use of
temporary and contract labour as a norm, for regular work. In July 2012,
according to figures tabulated by the Labour Department, less than 25% of
the workers at Manesar were permanent. These workers are paid only for the
days they work (i.e., 26 days a month) and considerably less than the
permanent workers, for doing the same work. Not only is this a major cost
cutting measure but it secures for the company a more vulnerable,
disempowered and pliant work-force, less likely to be vocal and demand their
rights. The company's announced after the 18 July incident, that it will
regularise its workers. This is yet to materialise. (See Chapter Two).
vi. The Maruti management has also consistently violated the workers’ rights
by creating hurdles and actively preventing them from organising themselves.
The policy of the Maruti management not to let the workers unionise, is a
violation of the Indian Trade Union Act (1926). Since mid-2011, as the
workers’ struggle intensified, the management has responded by targeting
active workers through suspensions, terminations and registration of false
cases against them. Once the union got registered, its members and
coordinators have faced similar or worse harassment. All the union leaders
and many active members were implicated in the 18 July incident leading to
complete breakdown of the union and making the workers vulnerable as they
have lost all avenues of negotiation with the management. A large number of
active workers were subsequently terminated by the company, as mentioned,
because the company arbitrarily held them responsible for the 18 July
incident. After forcibly removing the union from the unit, the company is
now making a farcical gesture towards dealing with workers’ issues, by
setting up a joint worker-management ‘grievance committee’ and compelling
the workers to be a part of it. The legally registered union (MSWU) whose
members are continuing to take up workers' issues are not being allowed to
function inside the unit.
vii.  The Haryana Labour Department has connived with the management in
depriving the workers their right to unionise. In August 2011, it rejected
the pending application of the workers for registration, citing technical
grounds. Effectively, an application for registration filed on 3 June 2011,
resulted in actual registration of the union on 1 March 2012, after months
of fraught struggle. Moreover the Labour Department does not appear to have
ever intervened in support of workers' rights in the labour disputes at
Maruti. When the management deducted Maruti Manesar workers' wages on
account of the lockout of 2011, by describing it as a strike, or when the
management failed to act upon the Charter of Demands of workers in 2012, the
Labour Department did not intervene. It has failed to question the
management on its use of dubious and unfair labour practices, the 'good
conduct undertaking' or the use of contract labour for regular work. (See
Chapter Three).
One of the notable features of the recent labour struggles at Maruti’s
Manesar unit has been an unprecedented unity between permanent and contract
workers. One of the main demands from the beginning of the struggle has been
the regularisation of contract workers. The workers who have regrouped under
the MSWU to carry on their struggle include both permanent and contract
workers. Contract workers are also among those who have been held guilty of
the violence on 18 July and are now in jail.
What makes the Maruti story extraordinary is certainly not the company and
its cars but the extraordinary struggle of its workers that has continued in
spite of ruthless repression by the management and the police and failure of
the labour department and the judiciary at all levels to provide any justice
to them. Above all, the workers have tenaciously fought for their political
right to form their own union. The struggle has also concentrated on
creating democratic structures within the union, and through these, finding
ways of articulating their grievances regarding the highly exploitative
labour regime.

PUDR demands that:
1.An independent and unbiased judicial enquiry should be initiated into the
events that led to the death of Awanish Dev. The judge nominated should be
someone both parties are agreeable to.
2. The police investigation into the 18 July incident carried out by police
officers of Haryana should be nullified and a fresh investigation be
initiated, by an SIT comprising police drawn from other states.
3. The role of hired bouncers that led to the precipitation of the events at
the spot be investigated.
4. The Haryana police officials, responsible for violation of legal
guidelines regarding arrest and for custodial torture of arrestees, and
harassment of their family members be identified and criminally prosecuted.
5. Re-instatement of all workers should be ensured in the absence of
definite evidence of their involvement.
6. Role of the labour department should be investigated and action should be
taken against the officials for not fulfilling their obligations related to
labour laws.
7. All the workers arrested for the 18 July incident should be immediately
granted bail. The trial into the incident should be speedily done and those
not guilty should be acquitted.
8. Workers' right to have their independent union be restored at Maruti. The
MSWU which is the legally recognised union of the Maruti Manesar unit should
be allowed to function inside the plant with immediate effect.
9. All the contract workers both at Manesar and Gurgaon unit be immediately
regularised and practice of hiring contract workers for regular work should
be stopped.
10. The rights of workers guaranteed in law be enforced at Maruti with
immediate effect.

D. Manjit & Asish Gupta
Secretaries, PUDR