Overview: Master-Slave Relations and Labour Law | Labour and Industrial Law - CLAT PG PDF Download

Introduction

• Labour and employment law in India is often referred to as "Industrial Law," which plays a crucial role in supporting the country's economic growth through industrialization.
• Industrialization involves the collective efforts of various stakeholders, including labourers, supervisors, managers, and entrepreneurs. The concept of a welfare state emerged in India post-independence, leading to the establishment of numerous labour laws aimed at ensuring welfare, equitable rights, social justice, and the participation of labour as a key stakeholder.
• These laws address various aspects such as health, safety, welfare, protection against oppressive terms, facilitation of workers, industrial disputes, social insurance, and welfare schemes.
• Labour laws govern employment in different types of organizations, including manufacturing, trading, and shops. They cover administrative rulings, compliance requirements, and legal rights and restrictions on workers and their organizations.
• The origin and authority of these laws stem from the Constitution of India, which emphasizes the dignity of human labour and the protection of workers' interests. Labour law reforms are ongoing to address the evolving needs of workers in a dynamic economic environment.
• Labour is a subject in the Concurrent List of the Constitution, allowing both Central and State Governments to enact legislation, with certain matters reserved for the Centre.

Historical Aspects: Master and Slave Relationship

• Since the Industrial Revolution, the law and practice of the capital-labour relationship, a crucial aspect of the master and servant relationship, have undergone significant evolution. Understanding this evolution is essential for grasping the significance and development of industrial jurisprudence.
• During the early stages of capitalism, the relationship between the capitalist and the labourer was governed by the principle of master and slave. In this framework, the capitalist was considered a person, while the labour was treated as a thing. The capitalist did not employ the labourer; instead, he either bought or obtained him. This relationship was based on coercion rather than free will, with status, not contract, determining their relationship.
• As time progressed and the labourer's position improved from slave to serf, he gained limited rights. However, the capitalist retained most of his coercive powers over the labourer. As a serf, the labourer was neither completely unfree like a slave nor fully free like a servant; he was a mix of both. Once again, status predominantly determined the relationship between the labourer and the capitalist.
• Eventually, the capital-labour relationship shifted from being based on status to being based on contract. The relationship between the capitalist and the labourer became one of master and servant. In theory, they were free to acquire rights from and impose duties upon each other through voluntary mutual contract, although this freedom was often illusory. The prevailing policy of laissez-faire, allowing the bargain between the capitalist and the labourer to be whatever they liked, combined with the capitalist's superior social and economic position, rendered the freedom of contract meaningless.
• In the contemporary industrial era, the evolution of the capital-labour relationship is marked by the recognition of two distinct social groups: the Capitalist and the Labourers. Each group possesses different social and economic positions, necessitating State intervention in the capital-labour relationship to protect and balance the contracting claims of these groups.
• The enhancement of industrial laws and State support for trade unionism and collective bargaining are key features of the new capital-labour relationship. While the relationship remains one of master and servant and is based on the freedom of contract, this freedom now represents the collective freedom of a group or union of labourers rather than the individual freedom of a single labourer.
• The contract is no longer an individual agreement between the capitalist and the labourer but a 'collective agreement' between a group or union of labourers and the capitalist or group of capitalists. In this new framework, the labourer is no longer a condemned slave, an unfree serf, or a submissive servant; he is a free member of a group or union of labourers, now referred to as an 'employee' or 'worker.'
• However, this recognized right has evolved in response to the changing needs of the State and employers.

The Nature of Master and Servant Relationship

• A servant is an individual who works for another person, known as the master, either with or without payment. The relationship between master and servant arises when the tasks performed by the servant are under the direction and control of the master and are subject to the master's knowledge and consent.
• According to Advocate S. R. Samant, the terms "master" and "servant" imply a relationship of domination and submission. In this legal framework, the master holds authority over the servant, who is obligated to obey the master's orders. Essentially, the servant is under the master's control and bound to follow their instructions. The master is considered superior to the servant, while the servant is inferior to the master. The concept of equality before the law is absent in the master-servant relationship, where the legal rights of the master are determined by their economic and social power. The maxim "the strong is never wrong, and the weak must be meek" reflects the dynamics of this relationship, where the master is the ruler and the servant is the ruled.
• In contemporary times, with the rise of democratic values and social justice, the terms "master" and "servant" have largely been replaced by "manager" and "worker" or "employer" and "employee." This shift aligns with the ongoing social revolution, sometimes referred to as the "New Industrial Revolution" or the "Second Industrial Revolution," in the sphere of industrial relations.
• The change in terminology from "master" and "servant" to "manager" and "worker" is significant in that it reflects a shift away from the notions of domination and submission. The new terms, taken at their literal meaning, describe functions rather than the hierarchical relationship inherent in the master-servant dynamic.
• However, despite the outward dignity and respect associated with the new terms, the transformation is more apparent than real. The relationship between employers and employees, formerly known as master and servant, remains largely unchanged in substance, even if the nomenclature has evolved. The improvement in the relationship between employers and employees, which ought to have followed the change in terminology, has not materialized. This incomplete transformation has given rise to a problem known as the human relations problem.
• The goal of achieving harmonious and amicable relations between employers and workers could not be realized within the framework of prevailing legal thought, principles, or traditions. A new approach based on different legal philosophies was necessary to pave the way for social justice and equitable distribution of profits and benefits arising from industrial activities between industrialists and workers. This approach aimed to provide real protection to workers against adverse effects on their health, safety, and morality, rather than merely ensuring compliance with employment contracts.
• Consequently, the need for Industrial Jurisprudence became imperative and sociologically necessary, marking a departure from the laissez-faire approach rooted in the so-called natural rights of individuals.

Constitution and Labour Laws

• The Constitution of a country serves as its fundamental law, providing the basis for all other laws, including labour laws. It outlines the framework for governance and the relationship between the state and its citizens. All branches of the government, including the executive, legislative, and judiciary, derive their authority from the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.
• The Constitution not only establishes political principles but also defines the procedures, powers, and duties of various government institutions. It plays a crucial role in the nation's progress and serves as a vehicle for social justice and equity.
• In India, the Constitution emphasizes the dignity of human labour and the protection of workers' interests. This is reflected in Chapter III (Articles 16, 19, 23 & 24) and Chapter IV (Articles 39, 41, 42, 43, 43A & 54). These provisions are in line with the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy. Labour laws in India are also influenced by international human rights standards and United Nations conventions, which advocate for rights such as the right to work, protection against discrimination, prohibition of child labour, social security, and collective bargaining.
• Labour is a subject in the Concurrent List of the Constitution, allowing both Central and State governments to legislate on labour matters. The extent of state intervention in labour relations varies with economic development. In developed economies, state intervention is limited, while in developing economies, like India, the state plays a more significant role in regulating labour relations to ensure equitable growth and distribution of resources.
• The framers of the Indian Constitution recognized the need for a welfare state and a federal structure. Labour-related entries are present in all three lists of the Constitution, with the most important ones in the Concurrent List. These include industrial and labour disputes, trade unions, and various aspects of social security and welfare.
• Labour legislation in India, such as the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, reflects the objectives outlined in the Directive Principles of State Policy. These laws aim to promote social welfare, protect workers' rights, and ensure just and humane working conditions.
• Over time, there have been amendments and adaptations of central labour laws to meet local needs, often with the assent of the President of India or through rule-making powers delegated by Central Acts. This allows states to customize central laws to suit local contexts while ensuring the effectiveness of labour regulations.