Mumbai and its Mills

Meena Menon Ritu Dewan Kanchan Parmar

 New industries, growth of IT & knowledge sector  Global division of production; informalisation &

breaking up of production process; race to the bottom, low wages, contract labour

 Growth of tertiary and service sector  Post liberalisation: erosion of protective

legislation; disappearance of even minimum social security; anti worker & anti-union legislation

 Migration (Reverse?)

 Erosion of unionisation; issues of TU formation

for small scale, informal sector, women

 Non-adaptation of TUs to new situation  Low level of integration of these changes in

strategies of working class movements

 New sectors & employees do not see themselves

as workers: perception as urban middle class

150 yrs of political & economic struggle & organisation  1907: First political strike of workers in India:

7-day strike for release of Tilak; 15 dead

 1930: Martyrs in Independence struggle. eg

Babu Genu

 1956-60: 22 of 105 martyrs in struggle for

formation of linguistic state of Maharashtra

Workplace based struggles, strikes on economic issues, demands fought for and won:  1890: First trade union in India: Lokhande &

Phule’s Bombay Mill-hands Association.

 1911: Work hours limited to 12.  1940: DA as part neutralisation of price rise.

 Historically indigenous & labour intensive  Govt. obsession with global markets, at cost of

domestic markets. Only garment was exportoriented.

 MFA & Trade quotas  Decline in profits in the textile sector, focus on

with bigger and quicker profits.

 Siphoning off of profits to other industries; no

plough-back of capital; no repairs of old or purchase of new machinery; technology.

 Emergence of outsourcing as ‘cheaper’ option.

Most of production of cheaper blends for domestic production in ‘power-loom towns’ of Bhiwandi, Malegaon, Icchalkaranji.

 Wages half of that paid in composite mills  Conversion of 8-hour to 12 hour shifts  Little legal protection. No right to organise

 Strike broken, union broken, signing of

humiliating conditions when returning to work

 1982: pre-strike, 2.50 lk workers on rolls.  Post-strike: When mills opened, 1 lk

workers did not get jobs back, most of them leading organisers.

 Some went back to their villages  Some moved to un-organised sector  Some became small entrepreneurs.  Workers of closed mills began to

organise

 RMMS: only union that existed for a

while, although it continued to be seen as pro-management & ineffective.

 BGKSS: (1989) independent Bandh Girni

Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti (Closed Mills Workers Action Committee) formed by workers of the 10 mills still closed after the strike

Main issues  Reopen mills.  Justice for 25,000 out-of-work workers. Tactics  Enlisting support of all political parties & trade unions in the area.  Rainbow coalition built an organisation, movement, & several issues despite skepticism expressed by large part of political community

 1990: fast unto death at gates of closed New      



Great Eastern Mills Formation of mill committees Girangaon celebrates return to militant traditions. CM assures resolution in three months. Take over of New Great Eastern Mills Legislation enacted to revive closed mills. Mill owners get permission to sell mill lands, but only for revival. Revival is temporary & halfhearted but workers did get dues Ostensibly land could be sold only for revival, but enough loopholes to allow mill owner-builderdeveloper lobby to commercially exploit sale without running the mills.

1992: Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti (Union)  Demands: save jobs, save textile industry, stop sale

of mill land.

 Organisation of mill chawl tenants: to stop eviction  Community organisation: Girangaon Bachao Andolan

(Save Girangaon Movement)

 Rojgar Hakk Samiti (Committee for jobs) for children

of mill workers & others demanding that local people be given jobs in the area as promised in DCR Amendment.

 Not able to link with garment & power-loom

workers; ‘emergency ‘nature of struggle

 Not able to link at national level with other out-

of-work workers: few activists, little money.

 Lack of interest on part of national central TUs  Not able to make an issue of demand for land for

the city which is rightfully due under the law

 No success in reforming textile policy, or

reviving sick mills, given lack of interest of the industry per se.

 Textile mills almost all closed now, 600

acres turned into prime real estate

 GKSS, & others, fought for & won a share

of the land

 Workers are being given ‘cheap’ houses

in lieu of jobs: 6948 units distributed under ‘lottery’ on 28 June 2012

 1.4 lk more such houses ‘promised’.

 Mumbai’s textile workers have a special

history, a special relationship with Mumbai: fight for their right to the city.

 What happened to textile workers

symptomatic of what is happening to urban poor everywhere.

 Working Class movement essential to

protect the vulnerable sections of urban poor

 Example of mill workers illustrates new ways of

organisation.

 Impact of globalisation & its inherent crisis on

working class, & acute need for social protection

 Urban poverty & marginalisation creating conflict

& violence

 Trade unions need to understand new situation,

accordingly formulate demands, adopt new strategies.

…………………Thank You