Re: EVERY DAY WE FIND STORIES ABOUT HOW INDIA
by Bomb Bhole on May 21, 2011 08:15 PM
@such jano.. and you were born out of one such shithole.. didnt you know this truth? ha ha
Re: Re: Indian Tea gardens exploit tribals and Gorkhas
by Bomb Bhole on May 21, 2011 08:18 PM
loan shark.. u've a point but that doesnt justify exploiting the ignorant labourers. Infact it's a nexus between typically crooked marwari businessmen and the WB govt which has worsen the situation and created such a work culture across Bengal!
Re: Re: Re: Indian Tea gardens exploit tribals and Gorkhas
by Bomb Bhole on May 21, 2011 08:20 PM
well when i say WB govt, I obviously mentioned the useless commies..
Its disgraceful seeing so petty amount passed as wages to labourers who work so hard..Apart from completing economic goals , companies should also take into account social responsibilities which would create loyalty at work
No industries is what Datta Samant, Rajan Nair & their CPM counterparts took us to. Now that something good is happening you media again extoll the virtues of trade unions. Did you happen to notice the cost of funds, cost of selling at Harrods, tea yields, climate related losses, transit costs & losses, cost of retailing, duties & taxes, money given to politicians & bureaucrats, etc? Just compare the sale price to the plucker's wage. You should be ashamed to call this journalism.
Re: Rediff, please spare us the 70s style trade unionism
by Manish Varma on May 21, 2011 07:42 AM
Manoj - Whatever be the cost of Selling at Harrod's and other expenses, there has to be a minimum decent pay and facility for the grassroot level workers. High operational cost is "inefficiency", and should not be a reason for exploiting the poor. BTW, it was not "Dutta Samant", but the "greed" of textile mill owners of Mumbai, which killed this industry in Mumbai - The textile business players are still making money in other cities and made double the money by selling the prime lands in Mumbai.
Re: Re: Rediff, please spare us the 70s style trade unionism
by Your Persona on May 23, 2011 06:57 AM
@Manish, "minimum decent pay" is subjective. To worker A, Rs 200 might be minimum decent, to starving worker B it might be Rs 20.
Companies will try to reduce their costs and maximize their revenue. If they raise the price too much, customers will stop buying and they will incur loss. If they reduce the wages too much, a critical mass (the minimum number required to maintain the production) of workers will stop working and again they will incur loss.
The law must only ensure that the employers cannot force workers to work for them. If the workers are free to go elsewhere if the wages are low, the most balanced wages - acceptable to both the companies and the workers - will be arrived at.
Re: Rediff, please spare us the 70s style trade unionism
by Saheb Nagori on May 19, 2011 03:35 PM
Whatever it is the minimum income for any menial or intellectual work should be more than purchase price parity (PPP) of the country. For India it is US$ 3,339 or Rs. 157,000 annually. These labours are getting just 1% of what they should be paid. Besides, less than 50% of the population is actively employed. If it requires employer (not labour) law reforms, do it.
Coming to costing, cost of funds is highest in India. Elsewhere it is 4% or less. Unless there is corruption in Harrods, cost of selling should not be a factor. When supply chain is efficient, cost of retailing is competitive. Crops can be insured. So, climatic losses paid by the agency. Tea yield is close to 100%, except every percent does not go to super premium category. Duties and taxes are recovered through the consumers. Paying bribes is a businessman's choice.
The next big change came around 2000 when a handful of entrepreneurs bought a host of the "sick and abandoned gardens" and converted Darjeeling into a niche brand.
The credit goes to these above people , and with political people will behave like they are paying increased wages from their pocket and worker will forget to thanks company for increased wages and will thanks the political goons as if they made the business profitable.
The Moral is if wages are increased do not forgot to say thanks to company also.
Re: Politics
by ashish nigam on May 19, 2011 03:11 PM
Man why wd they thank the company for increasing the wages, the company did not increase the wages by will but they were forced to do so. Second thing that please understand the business model before putting a crap as a comment, goverment across the world tries to keep a check that no company gets a monopoly in the sector or prices its products with steep profit margins and that is why govts try to keep competitive atmosphere in all the sectors. And for your kind info, all this is done not for fun but to ensure that the common man has access to the products manufactured by the company that was able to stand on its feet by getting sops from tax payer money and also high pricing indirectly gives rise to inflation, if a builder sells a 10 lac rupees flat for a crore then the obvious outcome will be that the cement company will raise its price and the chain will continue making the common man's life miserable. The situation will be in control if the builder and the cement companies shares their profit with their labours by increasing their wages, else after few years the rise in inflation will make their life miserable. The author is correct in comparing the price of the product with that of wages.
