The Role of Civil Society in Democratization
Trade Union Perspective

Pushkar Bajracharya, TU

The Nepalese Context

Trade Unions

Despite limited organised sector and the belated industrialization process, the problem of industrial relations has been well pronounced in Nepal. Insustrialisation, started in Nepal only since mid 1930’s. A second stage of industrial development took place in the sixties with the public sector initiative in many areas. The industrial policies of 1974, 1983, 1987 and 1992 provided increasing impetus on the private sector for industrialisation in the country. With growth in industrial development, the problems of industrial relation too emerged in the country. To protect the interest of employees, trade unions were established. Before 1951, three trade unions were established viz. Biratnagar Workers’ Union, Independent Workers’ Union, and Cotton Mills Workers’ Union all of which were located at Biratnagar. All Nepal Trade Union Congress was established in 1951 to encompass various trade unions and give national coverage. To consolidate the labourers’ strength, all Biratnagar based unions were amalgamated as Biratnagar Mill Workers’ Association under the chairmanship of Mr. G. P. Koirala. In 1959, a new All Nepal Union was organised under the name All Nepal United Labour Union, which however, was merged with All Nepal Union.

With emergence of the Panchayat polity, Nepal Labour Organisation was established as the sole trade union in Nepal. All other unions were derecognised. During the period 1962-1979, much of the labour unrest was suppressed by the government. However, industrial disputes of 1970-80 led to the recognition of trade unions by the government. After the restoration of democracy, major trade unions have emerged or consolidated in Nepal. This shows that there is a close relationship between democratisation and trade union growth in Nepal.

General Federation of Nepalese Trade Unions (GEFONT) viewed as affiliated with NCP, UML claiming membership of 210000.

Nepal trade Union Congress (NTUC), viewed as affiliated with NC and claiming membership of 160000.

All Nepal Trade Union Congress (ANTUC), viewed as affiliated with NCP Unity Centre and a membership of 15000.

Nepali Trade Union Federation (NTUF) viewed as affiliated with NCP, D and a membership of 20,000.

All Nepal Trade Union Congress viewed as affiliated with NCP, MB group and a member of 15000.

Nepal Trade Union Centre (NTUC) viewed as affiliated with NCP, M and a membership of 25000.

All Nepal Democratic free Trade Union (ANDFTU) viewed as affiliated with NDP and a membership of 15000.

Nepal Revolutionary Workers’ Union viewed as affiliated with NWPP and a membership of 20000,and

Nepal Progressive Labour Union (NPLU) with a membership of 10000.

Thus, a large member of trade unions, and their federations have emerged in Nepal. Their strengths however are estimated to be confined to specific sectors. It may be noted that trade unions generally operate in the realm of industrial and service sectors only. The vast labour force of agriculture and informal sectors is still outside the trade unions. In other words, the democratic rights of a vast section of labour still do not seem to have been recognised. This will not help to promote civil society. So, initiatives must be made to bring all forms of labour within the forum of unions and develop them in a conductive manner to promote and sustain development in the country. Democratisation should benefit all labour and not a part only. But the development of many unions may not be healthy.

The major reasons for the emergence of multiple unionism are:

eagerness of outside union leaders to have more members,

failure of management to establish proper relations with labour,

political Intervention and direct party affiliations,

dividing of unions by management,

the existing legal structure and provisions,

unions not paying attention to its members and misusing the position leading to members to form alternate unions,

lack of unity among members, and

desire of each trade or craft to be represented by its own union.

The major reason for multiple unionism is political in nature. Own positive development is the formation of federations effectively reducing the number of trade unions. The major consequences of multiple unionism are:

division of respect and loyalty on the side of labour,

each union wanting to show its superiority by presenting many demands to the company,

too many demands to the management from various unions,

workers receive distorted information confusion them,

substantive issues get submerged by peripheral issues,

conflict on the shop floor increases thus affecting production,

delay in reaching agreements and difficulty in implementation agreements,

reduced bargaining power of individual unions,

obstacles in implementation of polices,

external problems concerning other parties affect the shop floor and the enterprise as well as the organisation climate, and

one-upmanship in demands by unions.

Thus, the development of multiple unionism may not be healthy and could affect the very interest of labour. This may also not be able to preserve the democratic rights of labour and others may get an opportunity to divide and rule. As said earlier, however, efforts to bring them under federal umbrellas may help to overcome many of these problems.

Institutional Development

The government has also been taking necessary steps to institutionalise the process and provides institutional support to labour- management relationship in the country. In 1974, labour department was established under the ministry of industry to look after issues regarding industrial relations. In 1981, labour ministry was established in consideration to the growing importance of this sector. Besides, necessary regulations have also been formulated. Nepal Factory and Factory Workers Act was promulgated in 1959. The act provisioned minimum wages, working conditions and facilities to be provided and the act was modified on various occasions. In 1992, two major acts the Trade Union Act and the Labour Act were enacted giving a whole new thrust to the system and mechanisms of industrial relations. Thus, the restoration of democracy has enable to enact due rights of the labour in Nepal.

Industrial Disputes

Industrial disputes have been on the rise in Nepal due to multifarious reasons. Political development has always provided impetus to disputes. It should be mentioned that industrial disputes are major features of the industrial climate. Poor industrial climate will inhibit the investors from investing, thus, slowing the pace of industrialisation. At a time, when we are forwarding strategies to attract foreign investors, this will definitely not be an appropriate signal. There is every reason to believe that without working towards improving the industrial relations scenario it may be naïve to expect foreign investment. Smooth industrial development can be attained only through creating better industrial environment and harmonious industrial relations can play a substantial role to promote it.

The history of industrial disputes shows a steady growth in Nepal. The first industrial dispute in Nepal took place in 1947 when strikes were called in all factories in Biratnagar under the leadership of Man Mohan Adhikari and G. P. Koirala. This strike was politically motivated and the then Rana regime violently suppressed it. In the period 1951-1979, 74 strikes were recorded officially which is not much by any standard. In 1979-80, the number of strikes went up significantly in all industries and sectors including virtually almost all-public enterprises. This is in consonance with the popular movement to restore democracy leading to the referendum. Similarly, the spate of strikes grew along with the popular movement in 1990. After the restoration of democracy, the number of strikes further went up probably aided by the liberal democratic environment. It may be good to see workers’ rights being firmly established with the restoration of democracy but serious doubts have also emerged about the industrial climate in the country. It is attributed that one of the reasons for increasing foreign labour in Nepal especially from India is because they are easy to handle and do not engage in union activities. This will not only contribute to undermine the labour movement but will also not really promote a healthy industrial environment. The recent industrial relations problems are presented in the following table.

The table shows that there has been a decline in the industrial disputes and progress in the dispute settlement mechanism. This shows a very favourable situation.

Analysis of strikes reveal that most of the disputes are caused by financial grievances. The foremost demands were found to be for wage increase and increase of allowances and facilities. A few other have taken place for reducing working hours and improve working conditions. In terms of industry, jute, textile, match and cigarette industries were found to be most strike prone. In terms of regions, Biratnagar is most strike prone followed by Kathmandu. Similarly, all industrial estates were found to be strike prone. Both political causes and genuine grievances are responsible for industrial disputes in Nepal.

Besides strikes, lockouts and bandhs have also taken place. These industrial disputes are more serious with far reaching consequences. The first lock out in Nepal was effected in Biratnagar Jute Mill on July 15, 1953. Lockouts have been fewer but have been effected time and again by industries. Similarly, the first bandh was organised in Bhadrapur in October 1957. After 1990, the spate of bandhas went up significantly in Nepal but they were not due to industrial reasons.

Growth in industrial disputes may not be very encouraging. At a time, when we have to pursue faster growth, this may be a serious hurdle. However, it is equally true that the democratic rights of the workers must be preserved. At present, the wage level is very low and the working condition poor. Further there are problems like gender discrimination, child labor etc. Along with, the need for improving competitivenees of industries is also very high in the liberal market situation. It may be reiterated that human resource is the chief resource for any productivity-improvement-drives and this can be achieved not by antagonizing them but by involving their participation. This must be the approach for development of healthy industrial relations. This will also aid to uphold the democratic rights of the union.

(Courtesy: NEFAS/FES Publication)

Headline | 5 Question  | Editorial | 2nd Impression | International | Past