KARACHI: Labour ministry comes under the microscope: Question hour
KARACHI, Feb 3: In a largely subdued question hour, Sindh Labour Minister Amir Nawab answered queries from members of the house regarding the retrenchment of workers from a Tando Mohammad Khan sugar mill as well as the state of technical training offered in the province, among other questions, during Tuesday’s Sindh Assembly session.
The Pakistan People’s Party’s Nadeem Ahmed Bhutto had asked the labour minister if it was a fact that the services of the employees of Faran Sugar Mill located in Taluka Shaikh Bhirkyo, Tando Mohammad Khan, had been illegally terminated by the management on April 13, 2003. He wondered that if this was true, what were the names of the employees, what the government intended to do to reinstate the workers and when they would be reinstated.
In the written reply, Mr Nawab said that the services of 436 workers had been terminated after obtaining their voluntary resignations under the ‘golden handshake’ scheme. He added that the directorate of labour had filed a complaint in this regard before the Sindh Labour Court No VI, Hyderabad. The court had ruled that in this particular case, there was no forcible termination and the workers had voluntarily resigned after receiving a handsome amount.
Apparently not satisfied with the written explanation, Mr Bhutto said he did not believe the golden handshake was voluntary and again asked the minister if the workers had been forced to quit. The labour minister pointed to the court decision and said there was ample proof that the separation was indeed voluntary as the workers had been consulted in this regard.
When asked what the government had done for the workers, Amir Nawab reiterated that the labour department had gone to court against the retrenchment, where the court had decided that the law had not been violated. Clearing the air, Speaker Nisar Khuhro said the issue was settled hence no further initiative on behalf of the government was required.
When an MPA asked that if the separation was indeed voluntary, why had the government gone to court, the labour minister said that it was the government’s responsibility to inquire into the retrenchment to ensure the workers were not forced to quit.
Disability benefits
Syeda Marvi Rashdi of the Pakistan Muslim League-Functional had asked the minister if employees working in industries were given the privilege of compulsory insurance in the case of natural death, injury and disability, and if so, what was the amount of compensation payable.
Mr Nawab replied that employees were entitled to insurance in the aforementioned cases. He said the maximum amount in case of death or 100 per cent disability was Rs200,000 while the minimum amount depended on the nature of the disability.
When the PML-F member asked if there was any difference in the compensation amounts between temporary and permanent workers in her supplementary question, the minister replied that the amount was the same and was payable within 15 days.
A questioner asked that in case of permanent disability, was a family member of the affected worker entitled to a job. Amir Nawab replied that there was nothing in the law but some institutions – following union agreements – did provide such facilities.
Marvi Rashdi asked why the West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Orders) Ordinance 1968 retained the nomenclature when East and West Pakistan no longer existed.
Mr Nawab agreed with the member and said that many things needed to be changed, adding that he would raise the issue with the federal government.
National People’s Party legislator Arif Mustafa Jatoi had asked the labour minister how many technical training centres existed in Sindh – district-wise – and what type of training they offered. In his written reply, Amir Nawab said the details had been placed on the table of the house.
In his supplementary question, Mr Jatoi asked how many people were being trained at such centres, to which the minister replied that this was a fresh question. The NPP lawmaker asked for an approximate figure and when the speaker also asked the labour minister for an approximation, he said that the number varied at each institution as it ranged from 45 to 3,000 trainees.Asked about the fees for the training centres, Mr Nawab said these also differed according to the institution as apart from regular training programmes, youths were being trained under different schemes such as the Prime Minister’s Scheme and Benazir Bhutto Youth Development Programme, where trainees got stipends ranging from Rs4,000 to Rs7,000.
Job placement
When a lawmaker asked if the trained youths would be provided job placement, Amir Nawab replied that for the first time the demands of the market were being taken into consideration as industrialists, labour leaders and other stakeholders had been taken on board to ensure trained people had work opportunities.
Arif Jatoi had asked for the month-wise number of scholarships granted to children of labourers between Jan 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008. In his supplementary question, he asked what was the amount of the scholarships, to which the labour minister replied that there were different amounts for different levels such as intermediate, graduate, post-graduate, etc.
However, Mr Jatoi did not seem satisfied with the minister’s reply that 55 children of labourers had been given Rs52,560 between Jan 1, 2007 and April 30, 2008 through the Mine Labour Welfare Organisation Sindh. He said the amount came to about Rs900 per child, which was like giving eidee to the students.
When an MPA asked Mr Nawab if the children of wage earners and temporary workers qualified for scholarships, he said those institutions registered with the government came under the law, while unregistered units did not.
When, in a supplementary question concerning the number of unemployed people registered with the Hyderabad district Labour Exchange, Mr Jatoi asked whether out-of-work people were gaining any benefits from registration, the labour minister replied that if people were not getting employed, why would they register with the government.
The NPP member also cast doubt over the authenticity of the unemployment figures the labour minister had given in his written reply.
A female lawmaker had asked if the salary of women workers was on a par with their male counterparts, or if it was lower, to which Amir Nawab replied that as per the minimum wage and pension laws, there was no difference between male and female workers.
The labour minister promised to furnish the replies to unanswered questions in the next session.