Toyota halts car production in India amid labour row

[JI7]

Source: bbc

Toyota, the world's largest car maker, has halted production at its two factories in India amid a labour dispute regarding wages.

In a statement, Toyota said it was left "with no other option but to declare a lockout of the premises to ensure the safety of its workers and management personnel".

Located outside Bangalore, the two factories produce around 700 cars a day.

The lockout will affect 6,400 workers.

Toyota said that over the past 25 days, "certain sections of the employees have resorted to deliberate stoppages of the production line, abuse and threatening of supervisors thereby continuously disrupting business".

Read more: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-26607962

[cosmicone]

1. India has draconian labor laws from the socialist times

which give the workers carte blanche.

Some major reform is necessary so some fairness is established and the process of job creation doesn't stop.

The IT sector which was given a safe harbor from the draconian laws has created most of the employment growth in India.

[Skeeter Barnes]

3. We are the ones with draconian labor laws.

India's labor laws are progressive compared to ours. Sounds to me like Toyota had better pay up.

[Populist_Prole]

4. True that

Labor arbitrage is a bad thing no matter who does it and where they do it.

If a business requires a permanent underclass to be successful, then the hell with that business. I seem to recall a situation in US history where an entire region's economic vitality was made possible by an underclass. Bastards went to war to try to keep it so.

[cosmicone]

5. Actually, no

In the US, once a labor contract is executed, the workers are bound by it. If they breach that contract, they can be fired and new employees hired.

In India, the workers break contracts willy-nilly and demand more every time a new annual report comes out and wildcat strikes are extremely common with no punishment because no one can be fired once made permanent without massive machinations which employers usually lose -- no matter how incompetent a given worker is. In the US, unions make sure that their members are competent and work for the benefit of the company with their heart and soul as soon as a contract is signed. No such thing in India.

[Skeeter Barnes]

6. I am in favor of wildcat strikes. Workers taking direct action = Freedom.

[cosmicone]

7. Even when they are under a contract and the employer has not breached it? n/t

[Skeeter Barnes]

8. Direct action at any time. We should be free to withhold our labor and demand more pay.

And we don't know that Toyota has held up their end of the bargain. There could be circumstances that the article failed to mention.

[cosmicone]

10. I don't agree with that. A contract is a contract. n/t

[Skeeter Barnes]

11. I know which side you are on.

[brentspeak]

16. More interesting posts from "cosmicone"

The maid who was practically enslaved by Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade in Khobragade's NYC apartment? "A whining maid" who "schemed" and "committed treason" in cahoots with the "Christian fundamentalist" US State Dept. to persecute poor Ms. Khobragade:

Cosmicone:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014753486#post14

However, the Christian fundamentalist people in the State Department were responsible for this because the scheming maid was a christian and they helped her family escape.

I hope her (the maid's) in-laws who helped with this are charged in India and sent to prison for treason.

The US now has a maid and a chauffeur who have committed treason to get a US green card. I hope they are happy knowing that they can never return to India and see their families nor can their families come visit them in the US.

You can't make this stuff up.

[Codeine]

14. You're on the wrong side of nearly every issue, aren't you? nt

[cosmicone]

15. How is abiding by an executed contract voted on by membership wrong?

Or are the contracts utterly meaningless?

[littlewolf]

9. why Toyota will just close the plant and move here. nt /s

[quakerboy]

12. Can you explain something?

I dont know much about Indias labor laws. In fact, I know virtually nothing. Overall, I tend to believe that labor should be supported. Management has a large built in advantage in the process, and workers need as many protections to what power they do have as possible. So what you describe doesnt seem overly problematic to me. But it also seems counter intuitive.

What I do know is that over a hundred people died in a garment factory fire there toward the end of last year, and articles I read at that time seemed to indicate that the conditions present there were fairly typical, with employers trying to do things as cheaply as possible, even at the expense of worker safety. If the workers have such power as you describe, how did that come about? Did they just not care to work in a safe environment?

Similarly, A significant portion of various sectors of manufacturing and other labor have moved to India. If workers there have so much power, why would such a significant portion of towels available in stores (one exampe where I have done research, i imagine there are many other things as well) be made in India, when you can not find a single towel made in the USA in virtually any modern mall. Surely if they have the power, they would demand more money, and manufacturing would go elsewhere rapidly?

[cosmicone]

13. The fire you described was in Bangladesh.

Here is a wikipedia article that you'll find interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_labour_law

The main problem is that no employee can be laid off without government approval and such an approval is almost never granted. So even if the factory is making a product that no one wants, the entire workforce has to be paid and cannot be laid off.

In the US, companies adjust their workforce needs according to the demand for a particular product. Indian employers cannot do that.

Since most laws apply to companies employing 100 or more employees, manufacturers routinely subcontract to thousands of companies which employ less than 99 people each. This creates management and quality control headaches.

However, the main problem is that labor is not honorable in abiding by the contracts it has negotiated. If they did, it will work for everyone's benefit. Workers have every right to negotiate the best contract they can get but once they sign on the dotted line, they must fulfill their side of the bargain.

[quakerboy]

17. I was mixing up a pair of fires

I was indeed thinking of the Bangladesh fire, but I knew id seen one from India in the not too distant past. Not sure if this is the one I was conflating, or if there are more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Kolkata_leather_factory_fire


I do slightly question the appliciablilty of the Wikipedia article you shared. If the grid therein is to be believed, there are actually more worker protections in China than in the USA, which seems hard to credit, and makes me in turn question the conclusion the rest of that info would lead one to, that India is very protective of its workers.

In the US, companies more often adjust their workforce needs in order to move production elsewhere. In my experience the number of factories that close because a product is not in demand are fairly low. Detroit didn't close up shop because no one is buying cars, nor did all the domestic textile mills shut down because people stopped buying clothing. I would strongly guess that number of times when a factory closes in the US due to lack of demand is nearing nill.

That said, It could happen. Buggy whips and all that. Is there any law in India that prevents the company from shifting into producing a new product if the current product becomes obsolete in changing times?

Overall I would agree that contracts should be honored. But given the state of labor in the world at this time in history, I would on principle oppose taking any power away from them anywhere. I think that once you start, it always, without fail, continues to snowball until things go very wrong for people.

[Iliyah]

2. Don't forget that many tech jobs went to India

from the USA which pays far less.