Pushing back the 'forwards'

 

By R.N.Bhaskar


August 24, 2006 (Published in the DNA). pdf version available here (2006_08_DNA_Pushing_back_the_forwards_548kb)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The recent move of the state government of Maharashtra actually makes a mockery of the entire issue of what constitutes ‘backward’, and which classes should be eligible for ‘reservations’ in colleges and jobs (in government and government aided offices and institutions).  In fact, such a move ignores some of the harshest economic realities that are visible to almost any serious observer of the Indian economy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In any other developed country such a move would have shocked the national conscience.  In Maharashtra – which appears to be on its way to becoming increasingly crass and insensitive to the finer points of equity and fair play – the news has passed off with barely a whimper.


On 17 August, 2006, ignoring opposition from some ministers, the state cabinet decided to increase the income criteria for quotas in the OBC (Other Backward Classes) non-creamy layer from Rs.3 lakh per annum to Rs.4 lakh per annum.  In other words, the state government believes that even if a person earns over Rs.35,000 per month, he can legitimately continue calling himself a member of the backward classes, and avail of benefits provided by the government to such people.
<> 

The move could actually make India’s citizenry ask the government to explain some other anomalies:

 

  1. If Rs.35,000 per month is a salary that should justify a person being ‘backward’, why should the Income Tax provisions apply to anyone earning any amount upto this ceiling?  The tax-free limit too should be pushed up to Rs.4 lakh a year.  If common citizens are considered to be rich enough to pay tax once their earnings go beyond Rs.10,000 a month, then surely someone ought to be wrong – either the income tax authorities or the members of the state cabinet of Maharashtra.

 

  1. And if Rs.35,000 per month is not considered to be good enough to push a person from being ‘backward’ into the ‘not-backward’ community, then surely this should call for a total overhaul of the Minimum Wages Act which deems that the minimum wages for skilled workers should be Rs.7,500 per month.  Obviously, a skilled factory worker cannot be kept backward!  The state should revise his wages too beyond the Rs.35,000 per month mark.

 

The recent move of the state government of Maharashtra actually makes a mockery of the entire issue of what constitutes ‘backward’, and which classes should be eligible for ‘reservations’ in colleges and jobs (in government and government aided offices and institutions).  In fact, such a move ignores some of the harshest economic realities that are visible to almost any serious observer of the Indian economy.

<> 
For instance, the average income of the factory worker seldom goes beyond  Rs.20,000 per month.  And do remember that all the workers in the country’s organised workforce  comprise less than 3% of the population (see table).  According to the 2000 census, the public sector accounted for 19,314,000 workers, the private sector 8,646,000 workers, thus bringing the total employment in the organised sector to 27,960,000 people.  That comes to just around 2.8% of the population. 
<> 

What the government of Maharashtra now wants to do is to virtually reclassify all the workers in the organised sector as the backward classes. This is because, according to its latest dictac, anyone from the backward classes who earns less than Rs.35,000 per month should continue to be called ‘backward’ and should be allowed to enjoy the benefits that were meant for people who are actually backward. Thus, the government’s new rules actually push the forward classes backward.
<> 

This is progressive thinking indeed!!!

 

Organised Sector Employment by industry


 

March end 2000

% to total population


 

'000s

'000s


 

 

 


Public Sector

19,314

1.93


   Agriculture, etc

514

0.05


   Mining & quarrying

924

0.09


   Manufacturing

1,531

0.15


   Electricity, gas & water, etc

946

0.09


   Construction

1,092

0.11


   Wholesale & retail  trade, etc

163

0.02


   Transport, storage and communications

3,077

0.31


   Services*

11,067

1.11


 

 

 


Private Sector

8,646

0.86


   Agriculture etc

904

0.09


   Mining & quarrying

81

0.01


   Manufacturing

5,085

0.51


   Electricity, gas & water etc

41

0.00


   Construction

57

0.01


   Wholesale & retail  trade etc

330

0.03


   Transport, storage and communications

70

0.01


   Services*

2,081

0.21


 

 

 


Total  Employment

27,960

2.80


   Agriculture etc

1,418

0.14


   Mining & quarrying

1,005

0.10


   Manufacturing

6,616

0.66


   Electricity, gas & water etc.

987

0.10


   Construction

1,149

0.11


   Wholesale & retail  trade etc.

493

0.05


   Transport, storage and communications

3,147

0.31


   Services*

13,148

1.31


Other Sectors

27,963

2.80


      *    Including financing, insurance, real estate etc. and community, social and personal services.



 

 





© 2006 e-Convergence Technologies Ltd.
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Sitemap | Contact Us