SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY,

SCHOOL OF LAW, HYDERABAD

Labour Law- Tutorial I

India and its Role in ILO- Critical Analysis

Submitted by
Akshay Jain (15010323047)
Division ‘A’, BA. LL.B.

ON
13 September, 2019

Under the guidance of

Prof. Rukma

1
International Labor organization, to which India is one of the founding members and a
permanent member since 1922, was established in 1919. In 1928, ILO started its first
office in India. ILO has always strived to fulfil its objective of achieving for
socioeconomic development. The overarching goal of ILO is to promote opportunities for
all women and men in order to obtain decent and productive work in conditions of
freedom, equity, security and dignity.

While a number of peace treaties were being signed right after the World War I, a wave of
awakening and realizing the need for jobs was being felt among the working class, which
consequently, led Samuel Gompers lay down the founding stone for International Labour
Organization and its establishment as a result of part VIII of Treaty of Versailles, setting
up the foundation of socio-economic development.

The subject of Labor law is such that protects the weaker section of the society, namely
workers, from the arbitrary prerogative of the employers and as such Labour Law has
ascended to the status of that of “Protective Law”. It is one such branch of law, that not
only was drastically affected by the wave of ‘Laissez Faire’ but ended up creating a
whole new perception of the same. It led to a practice wherein the employer and the
workers were left free to enter into any form of employment contract and modify it with
reasonableness, according to their free will.

ILO Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work’98 declares 8

conventions as ‘fundamental conventions’. These conventions highlights the objectives of
ILO and also forms the basis for other conventions that passed by the organization.
Although, it is not necessary for all the member states to sign and ratify all of these 8
conventions, since these are based on the basic goals of ILO, in my opinion, it is a kind of
moral obligation and responsibility of, at least the founding members to promote these
conventions.
On the other hand, India being a founding, permanent and one of the strongest members
of ILO has signed and ratified only 6 out of the 8 conventions. India is not a party to

2
Convention No. 87 (Freedom of Association) and Convention No. 98 (Collective
Bargaining).

C. N. 87 which is Freedom of Association and protection of Right to Organize

Convention, passed in the year 1948, provides that the Workers and Employers have a
right to organize and form groups and into which the State cannot interfere. There is no
right with the authorities to dissolve any organization or an association of workers or
employers on any grounds, unless it is provided by the law. This convention helps the
workers and employers in demanding their basic rights at work such as freedom, dignity,
hygiene, security, equity etc, by forming associations/ unions and uniting for a mutual
benefit of social and economic development.

The other convention that India has not followed is C.N. 98, The Right to Organize and
Collective Bargaining, 1949. The workers have a right to take part in Union Acts and
conduct negotiations between employers and a group of employees aimed at agreements
to regulate working salaries, working conditions, benefits and other aspects of workers
compensation like medical allowances, pensions, etc. In simpler terms, it requires that the
law promotes the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation
between workers and employers to regulate employment.

The reason for which India has not ratified these two conventions is because of the
restrictions which are imposed on the government officials. Ratification of these
conventions and enacting laws on the basis of it involves granting of certain rights that
are prohibited under statutory rules, such as, to strike work, to publish official documents
on public domain, to accept financial contribution etc. In a country like India, the concept
of ratifying a convention by enacting a national law in line with the questions of
convention prevails. Therefore, ratifying these two conventions would result in bringing
new legislation where the government servants will be under its ambit. However, Govt.
has taken various pro-active steps to deal with the issues and is holding discussions with
all three stakeholders as to how these conventions can be ratified.

3
Even after 72 years of passing of the said conventions and India being one of the oldest
part of ILO and not being able to ratify them, then its because of the lack of intention to
bring laws under these two conventions. Bringing reasons like mentioned above, in my
opinion, is simply covering an act of negligence. In order to protect a small percent of
workers from falling under the ambit of these conventions, grave injustice has been
caused to a large number of workers from both, the small and large sector working class.

As per ILO estimates, more than 6 million people work under poor conditions and most
of them are children, representing the highest rate of child labor in South Asia. There is a
need to bring amendments to the present laws and bring new legislation which gives the
right to associate and bargain to the workers and employers and promote better working
conditions. The contention that govt. can bring civil servants under these laws and
therefore not ratifying the conventions can be negated by making an exception to such
officers wherever necessary, but, just because of this reason other working class shouldn’t
be made to suffer.