Beedi workers stage statewide protest demanding revised minimum wages

May 18, 2012

beedi_karmica_protest_5

Mangalore/Udupi, May 18: Members of Karnataka State Beedi Workers' Federation on Thursday staged a state-wide protest including in Mangalore and Udupi demanding final notification of revised minimum wages to beedi workers.

Addressing protesters in front of the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner of Mangalore Region at Kankanady, Federation president B. Madhava said that beedi workers would stop working if the State Government did not publish the gazette notification on the revised minimum wages for workers in the sector within the next seven days.

Mr. Madhava said that a committee appointed by the Government in its meeting on March 8, had resolved to revise the minimum wages for workers for rolling 1,000 beedis to Rs. 106.

It had also resolved to increase the dearness allowance of workers to three paisa per point if the consumer price index went up above 4,284 points.

Accordingly, beedi workers should get Rs. 116.20 including dearness allowance for rolling 1,000 beedis from April 1, 2012.

But owners of beedi companies had not implemented the revised scale stating that the Government had not issued a gazette notification on the revision.

He said the Government had constituted the committee under Section 5 (1) (A) of Minimum Wages Act. It had representatives from the government, workers' unions, and beedi companies.

Mr. Madhava said that the workers would intensify the agitation if the government ignored their demand.

Udupi

In Udupi the protest was held in front of the taluk office. Federation general secretary Ramesh Mendon told presspersons that the Government had agreed to revise the minimum wages for beedi workers to Rs. 116.20 for every 1,000 beedis after trilateral talks between the representatives of beedi firm owners, beedi workers, and the Government.

Nearly 10 lakh beedi workers in the State were expecting the final notification on the revised minimum wages, which were to come to effect on April 1, 2012.

But the Labour Department did not issue the final notification. With the result, the revised minimum wages had not come into force. This was grave injustice to beedi workers.

The Labour Department had shown lack of concern to beedi workers. These beedi workers tied beedis, despite the impact they had on their health, just to eke out a livelihood. The Labour Department had been inhuman in dealing with this issue.

The department wanted to protect the interests of a few owners of beedi firms by its inaction.

The Labour Department should immediately notify the revised minimum wages and make it effective from April 1, Mr. Mendon said.

Federation leaders P. Vishwanath Rai, Dogu Suvarna, Vittal Poojary, K. Lakshman, Indira Kukkikatte, Pushpa M., Revathi Majoor, Indira Kaup, and Prema were present.

The protestors later submitted a memorandum addressed to the Chief Minister at the taluk office.

beedi_karmica_protest_4

beedi_karmica_protest_3

beedi_karmica_protest_2

beedi_karmica_protest_1

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
March 14,2020

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 11,2020

Bengaluru, Jan 11: India’s second-biggest IT company, Infosys Ltd, said it found no evidence of financial misconduct by its executives following a investigation into whistleblower complaints.

Bengaluru-headquartered Infosys, which earlier on Friday raised its revenue forecasts due to upbeat demand from Western clients, said an audit committee report exonerated Chief Executive Officer Salil Parekh and Chief Financial Officer Nilanjan Roy of all allegations, including accusations that the duo prevented employees from presenting data on large deals.

“I’m very happy that CEO Salil Parekh and CFO Nilanjan Roy have emerged from this stronger,” Infosys Chairman Nandan Nilekani told reporters. “The last two years since Salil has been here the company has changed dramatically for the better.”

Parekh took over as Infosys CEO in January 2018, after his predecessor Vishal Sikka quit following a public row with the company’s founder executives amid whistleblower allegations of wrongdoing.

The company earlier said it expected revenue to grow between 10 per cent and 10.5 per cent on a constant currency basis in the year ending March 2020, compared with its previous forecast of between 9 per cent and 10 per cent.

“We continue to see momentum in the market and we have an extremely robust pipeline driven by segment leaders,” CEO Parekh told a news conference.

“With the strength of large deal wins and digital momentum, we were able to clearly see that we have support to raise our guidance.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 16,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 16: A 66-year old man from the city, became the thirteenth COVID-19 related fatality in Karnataka, Health Department officials said on Thursday.

The elderly patient from Bengaluru, who was coronavirus positive died on April 15 at Victoria Hospital in the city, officials said.

"He was referred from a private hospital and was admitted in Victoria Hospital and was on ventilator support since April 10," they added.

A 80-year old woman in Belagavi and a 65-year old man from Chikkaballapura had also died on Wednesday.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.