The Wage boards formed for Working Journalists,
Non-Journalists and other newspaper employees under G.R. Majithia as Chairman
of the Wage Boards set up by The Labour and Employment Ministry has recommended -
1. Hike in basic pay from 2.5 to 3 times
2. Fixing the retirement age at 65.
3. Revised basic pay has to be calculated after merging
the existing basic pay, DA and the 30 percent interim relief already granted
besides 35 per cent variable pay.
4. The recommendations have to be implemented from 8th
January 2008 if accepted by the Govt. of India.
5. Introduced variable pay concept for all employees
working in newspaper establishments and news agencies. The Boards proposed a
variable pay of 35 per cent.
6. Variable Pay has to be implemented from 1st July 2010.
7. The basic pay at the entry level could be somewhere
around Rs. 9,000 and Basic Pay at senior level could be around Rs. 25,000 in a
category 1 media organisation.
8. Need of a permanent tribunal to redress grievances
between employers and employees
9. DA should be paid bi-annually with effect from July 1
and January 1 every year.
10. Need of revision of allowances such as HRA, transport
allowance, night shift allowance etc.
11. HRA shall be paid at the 30 percent, 20 percent and
10 percent of the basic pay based on the areas specified.
12. Medical allowance of Rs. 1000 and Rs. 500 per month
per employee working in newspaper establishment of classes I and II and classes
III and IV respectively. No medical allowance for employees covered by ESIC.
Apprehensions of News Agencies :
1. Adversely affect the
newspaper industry, particularly the weaker
2. In private
sector , Govt. should not decide the
wage specially after independence when every one has suitable right which
protects them from exploitation.
3. The industry contended that wage fixation should now be
left, as in other industries, to market forces of Demand & Supply.
4. Government had not accepted
recommendations pertaining to retirement age, pension, paternity leave and some
other aspects of wage benefits terming them as beyond the objective for which
the wage board was set up.
5.
newspaper industry, non-journalist employees are already paid much higher
than their counterparts in other industries, and this unnatural gap would
broaden if the wage board recommendations are implemented.
Important Issue is-
The
Supreme Court judgment will deal large sections of the print media a grievous
body blow and will financially weaken even the few strong companies that are
left in an industry that worldwide is under crushing pressure, with its very
existence in question.
But
there is a larger issue here: In this day and age, a government-appointed wage
board that fixes compensation for the private sector is completely
anachronistic. Fifty-eight years ago, when the first wage board was set up, the
industry situation may have warranted government intervention to ensure
employers didn’t exploit employees.
But India has moved on: In the organized industry, there is a largely free and fair labour market that determines wages and salaries on the basis of supply and demand; for blue-collar staff in a company, the management and unions arrive at an agreement through bipartite negotiations. What the wage board, on the other hand, does is impose from above wages that are not financially sustainable.
Even more shocking, is that this is the only industry in India where wages are fixed for an organized industry by a centrally-constituted outside body, and where the terms and conditions of employment make it difficult for managements to weed out even the most inefficient and unproductive workers. Every survey in the world has shown that labour inflexibility actually hurts creation of jobs — employers are wary of hiring even in boom time if they are not allowed to trim the workforce in a downturn. A flexible labour market, on the other hand, gives employers the confidence to add staff when a company, industry or market is expanding.
There is another inherent anomaly in the concept of a wage board in today’s media industry. Tectonic changes are sweeping through the industry, driven largely by technology and shifts in consumer behaviour. Print is no longer the sole purveyor of information; there is television, there is internet, and increasingly, there is mobile, all of which are threatening to eat into print’s market share. But none of these established or emerging mediums are covered by the wage board — which creates an uneven playing field and puts print at a huge financial disadvantage.
In fact, as consumption of media becomes seamless, the very definition of a ‘print journalist’ is being blurred. He/she is becoming platform agnostic, moving from filing for online to writing for print to appearing on television, all in the course of a single workday.
Further, the wage increases of about 80-100% have been applied, retrospectively, across the board — from journalists to press workers, drivers and peons. Even if one were to concede that journalists are special, what about the others? A driver’s salary will jump from Rs 36,000 to almost Rs 62,000 per month, a clerk’s from Rs 39,000 to over Rs 62,000, a peon’s from about Rs 33,000 to about Rs 58,000, a stenographer’s from Rs 40,000 to almost Rs 71,000, and a rotary machineman’s from Rs 40,000 to over Rs 76,000. This is way above what factory/office workers make in most industries and most companies.
But these are details. The big, big question that needs to be addressed is a fundamental one:
Should government be allowed to
interfere in what is essentially an employee-employer relationship, that too in
an organized, urban-centric industry?
Doesn’t it violate the principle of
market forces?
This paper is disappointed by the Supreme Court judgment. It is
out of sync with the reality of contemporary media. It seeks to set the clock
back to a time when the world looked very different.
