LABOUR AND INDUSTRIAL LAWS
PATTERNS OF LABOUR
EXPLOITATION AND
CONTEMPORARY TRENDS
SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:
Dr. Virender Kumar Negi Lubhani Sangwan
Roll no.: 35/18
Semester: 9
Section: B
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This project could not have been successful without the help of many individuals and I would
like to take this opportunity to thank them all. Foremost, I would like to extend my deepest
gratitude to my Labour and Industrial Laws teacher, Dr. Virender Kumar Negi (Associate
Professor) for being such an able and supportive guide throughout the execution and
completion of this project. I would also like to thank the Library Staff of UILS for providing
me smooth access to various online resources and textbooks without which this project could
not have been possible.
Lastly, I would like to extend my gratitude to the authors and editors of various resources that
I have consulted in relation to this assignment. The due credit for the same has been given at
the end.
Thank you.
LIST OF CONTENTS
S.No. TOPIC PAGE No.
1. Exploitation of Labour 1–2
2. Indicators of Labour Expoitation 3–5
3. Patterns of Labour Exploitation 6–9
4. Conclusion 10
5. Bibliography 11
EXPLOITATION OF LABOUR
Exploitation of labour is the act of using power to systematically extract more value from
workers than is given to them. It is a social relationship based on an asymmetry of power
between workers and their employers. When speaking about exploitation, there is a direct
affiliation with consumption in social theory and traditionally this would label exploitation as
unfairly taking advantage of another person because of their inferior position, giving the
exploiter the power.
Karl Marx was one of the most prominent thinkers to focus on exploitation of labour.
According to him, the population is parceled out into two groups, the exploiters and the
exploited. The exploiters are the agents able to command goods, with revenue from their
wages that are embodied with more labour than the exploiters themselves have put forth-
based on the exploitative social relations of capitalist production. These agents often have
class status and ownership of productive assets that aid the optimization of exploitation.
Meanwhile, the exploited are those who receive less than the average product he or she
produces. If workers receive an amount equivalent to their average product, there is no
revenue left over and therefore these workers cannot enjoy the fruits of their own labours and
the difference between what is made and what that can purchase cannot be justified by
redistribution according to need.
In June 1998, in order to curb the exploitation of labour at an international level, the
International Labour Conference adopted a Declaration on Fundamental Principles and
Rights at Work and its Follow-up that obligates member States to respect, promote and
realize freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of all
forms of forced or compulsory labour, the effective abolition of child labour, and the
elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
In the Indian scenario, exploitation is the misuse of services rendered by others with the help
of force. The practice of exploitation violates the basic concept of the Indian Constitution, the
Preamble and opposes the Directive Principle of State Policy given under Article 39 of the
Page | 1
Indian Constitution which stimulates economic equality among the individuals. It is also
violative of Article 23 of the Constitution which provides right against exploitation.
Indian judiciary has also been a pioneer in prevention of labour exploitation and promotion of
rights of labour. In numerous cases has the scope and ambit of Article 23 been explained by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court to include various postulates of labour exploitation like forced
labour, bonded labour, low wages etc.
In the case People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India1, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court observed that the scope of Article 23 is vast and unlimited. It is not merely ‘begar’
which is prohibited under this Article. This Article strikes at forced labour in whichever form
it may exist as it violates human dignity and opposes the basic human values. Hence, every
form of forced labour is prohibited by Article 23 without considering whether forced labour
is being paid or not. Also, no person shall be forced to provide labour or services against his
will even if it is mentioned under a contract of service. The word ‘force’ has a very wide
meaning under Article 23. It not only includes physical or legal force but also recognizes
economic circumstances which compel a person to work against his will on less than
minimum wage. It was directed by the court to Government to take necessary steps punishing
the violation of the fundamental rights of the citizens guaranteed under Article 23 by private
individuals.
In Sanjay Roy v. State of Rajasthan2, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the payment of
wages lower than the minimum wage to a person employed in Famine Relief Work is
violative under Article 23. The State is not allowed to take undue advantage of the
helplessness of such people with an excuse of helping them to meet the situation of famine or
drought.
Therefore, the problem of labour exploitation has been prevalent since time immemorial and
various measures have been and are being developed to abolish it. However, in order to
abolish labour exploitation, it is first material to identify the indicators and patterns of labour
exploitation.
1
AIR 1982 SC 1943
2
AIR 1983 SC 328
Page | 2
INDICATORS OF LABOUR EXPLOITATION
In order to curb the menace and brutality that is labour exploitation, it becomes paramount to
first identify its indicators and the ways in which it is done. Some of the indicators that have
been identified and accepted are enumerated below.
BAD LIVING CONDITIONS
Exploitation can include exploitation through bad living conditions. This includes being
denied freedom of choice as to the location or living conditions, or being forced to live in
overcrowded conditions, in unhealthy or unsanitary conditions, or being forced to live in
conditions were there is limited or no right to privacy. This can also include exploitation
through being rendered homeless and being forced to live of the street.
EXCESSIVE WORKING HOURS
This is indicator reveals the nature of the exploitation through being forced to work excessive
hours and/or days. This includes the concept of forced overtime, being denied breaks, being
denied free time, having to take over the shifts, working hours of colleagues, or being on call
24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It also includes heavy or excessive workloads or excessive
quotas of productivity vis-à-vis the working hours.
HAZARDOUS WORK
Being forced to undertake hazardous work is also an indicator of exploitation. Hazardous
work relates to either the nature of the task to be performed i.e. working in hazardous
conditions without protection, work too difficult for the person to undertake, work too
difficult for a minor to undertake or a hazardous working environment i.e. extreme heat,
extreme cold or hazardous travel to the pace of work. This can also include degrading work
which is humiliating or dirty.
Page | 3
LOW OR NO WAGES
Low or no salary is an indicator of a form of exploitation. No salary relates to cases where the
individual is completely denied of his/her salary. This also includes cases where the
individual instead receives payment in goods or in kind payment. Low salary refers to cases
where the individual received less than the agreed upon salary i.e. deceived about wages or
where they are paid less than the minimum wage.
VIOLATION OF LABOUR LAWS OR CONTRACTS
No respect of or non compliance to labour laws or of the contract signed is also an indicator
of exploitation. This includes cases where the individual was forced to work without a
contract, where there was no respect to the contract signed, where the contract provided was
unlawful, or where the recruitment of the individual was illegal. It also refers to the nature
and conditions of the work such as deception about the nature of the job, deception about the
employer; deception about the possibility to work, deception about the number of working
hours, whether excessive or restrictive, deception about the working conditions, or
exploitative, precarious or illegal working conditions. Exploitation through no respect of or
non compliance to labour laws or of the contract signed also refers to payment issues for
example in cases where the individual is paid less than regular employees, or where the
payments are in cash only when other workers are paid in cheques/bank transfer.
BAD WORKING CONDITIONS
An indicator of very bad working conditions conveys the nature of the exploitation in being
forced to accept unacceptable working conditions, or being forced to work in permanently
changing locations. This also includes lack of sick leaves or forcing menstruating or pregnant
woman to work. It also means lack of provisions of food or shelter or imposing unnecessary
fines.
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION
Sexual exploitation is a type of labour exploitation specific to work within the sex industry.
This can include online sites, brothels, the adult entertainment industry and working on the
streets. It can also be prevalent in other labour industries where labourers are sexually
Page | 4
exploited by the employers or other fellow employees. It also includes forcing labourers into
sexual relations with others in lieu of payments or otherwise. It is important to remember that
victims of sexual exploitation can be any gender, age and race. However, females fall victim
to this type of exploitation more often than males.
LACK OF EXCESS TO EDUCATION
No or little access to education is way of exploitation of the labourer. This benefits the
employer as it helps in the continuation of the perpetual cycle of poverty among the labourers
forcing further generations into labour. Moreover, by forcing children into labour, the
employer saves money as often children are paid way less wages than adults. The employer
can also gain much by employing child labourers into industries which require children
owing to their small physical features.
Page | 5
PATTERNS OF LABOUR EXPLOITATION
The exploitation of labour has always been a menace owing to the balance of power in the
favour of employers by the way of greater access to resources by them. Resultantly, the
labourers have been systematically exploited whether by the way of forced labour, bad
working conditions, sexual exploitation, low wages etc. However, this has been a result of the
following factors which caused the patterns of labour exploitation.
DOCTRINE OF LAISSEZ FAIRE
The doctrine of laissez faire coincided with the modern industrialization of 18th century,
according to which the State has to perform only the primary function, i.e., protection of its
citizen from external aggression and internal disturbance and maintenance of law and order in
the society and not to interfere in the economic or other private affairs of its citizens.
Thus the relationship between industrialists as employers with their workers was held to be a
private economic affair between the industrialists and their workers and the state did not
make any interference in such relationship. Due to the policy of non-intervention adopted by
the laissez-faire, the industrialists as the employers were free to employ the workers on any
terms of employment without any interference by the State. This freedom of contract was
between two unequal parties. If on one hand there were the wealthy, powerful industrialist
who now emerged as the new class of employers, on the other hand, were poor and powerless
industrial workers.
The industrialists who were the employers of industrial workers enjoyed the freedom to
employ the workers on the terms without any legislative or any other kind of check upon their
freedom by the State. Resultantly, the industrialist, as employers employed workers on terms
which suited them best, ensuring them maximum profits, with total disregard to interests of
workers who were employed on extremely low wages, with long working hours without any
interval for rest. In other words, industrial law differed from industry to industry depending
upon the differences in the nature of the industrialist employer. For example, if the owner of
the industry was of kind heart, he imposed less harsh terms of contract of employment upon
Page | 6
his workers, whereas if the industrialist was greedy, he preferred such terms of contract of
employment which were harshest to the poor workers. Industrial worker, therefore, were
completely at the mercy of the owners of newly set up industries who were the employers
now. The terms of contract of employment were determined not only by the nature of the
individual employers, but most of the time by the competitive market also.
The State in the name of policy of non-intervention due to the prevalence of doctrine of
laissez-faire did not make any intervention to protect the interest of the workers. Rather, it
played the role of passive onlooker and the exploitation of the poor and powerless workers
continued at the hands of wealthy and powerful employers who were the owners of the newly
set up industries.
FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & DOCTRINE OF HIRE AND FIRE
In industries, the employers of the workers employed in those industries enjoyed freedom of
contract due to the policy of non-intervention due to the prevalence of doctrine of laissez-
faire at that time. The newly emerged class of employers who were the owners of newly set
up industries driven by the urge to maximise their profits totally disregarded the tenets of
workers who were employed in their industries. Succumbing to their good to maximise their
profits, they employed the workers in those industries at extremely low wages with long
working hours without intervals for rest.
In the name of freedom of contract those industrialists always reserved their right to dismiss
or discharge their workers at any time they like. The employers exercised the right to dismiss
or discharge their employees without any reason and without any opportunity to be heard.
Thus, any attempt on the part of workers to raise their voice against such harsh terms of
contract was thwarted immediately by the employers by discharging them from their services.
In such case, in the absence of the concept of social justice the employers justified those
dismissals and charges as they asserted that they exercised this power in accordance with the
terms of contract which the workers have entered into with them. Thus workers were bound
by the terms of legally binding contracts of employment of which they were parties. Whereas
in reality, the worker, as a party to the contract of employment, was not equal to the other
party, ie. the employer. In fact, those contracts of employment were between two unequal
Page | 7
parties. These unjust contracts were actually the traps, the harsh terms of which used to bind
the workers legally. Thus freedom of contract was in fact the freedom of the workman, either
to work for the employer in manner and on wages, the employer desired, or to starve.
The legal justice also worked against the workers as even the Courts were bound to give
effect to the terms of contract between employer and the workers, howsoever harsh or
arbitrary they may As both the workers as well as employers were bound by the terms of the
contract of employment. Due to the doctrine of laissez-faire the State did not interfere even
when the terms of the contract of employment were arbitrary or unjust and were prima facie
unconscionable, tilting highly in the favour of the employers to the great disadvantage of the
workers. Thus legal justice prevailed upon social justice in the name of freedom of contract.
DOCTRINE OF CONSPIRACY
The condition of labourers worsened further in the early phase of industrialization, when
doctrine of conspiracy started regulating the newly emerged industrial relations.
Upholding this doctrine, King's Bench in Rex v Journeymen Tailors of Cambridge, in which
the Journeymen Tailors were Indicted for conspiracy to rise their wages, held that a
conspiracy of any kind is illegal although the matter about which they conspired might have
been lawful, or any of them to do, if they had not conspired to do it.
Similarly, in 1786, five bookbinders were convicted of conspiracy leading to a Strike to
reduce the hours of labour from twelve to eleven. Scared by French Revolution the
Governing class of Great Britain prohibited the working class combinations in textile
industries and mining areas rigidly by passing Combination Acts 1799 and 1800.
According to the doctrine of conspiracy under common law, two or more persons could not
combine to do what they could legally do as individuals. These Acts forbade the formation of
unions. Thus workers in the newly set up industries suffered without sharing of their
grievances with their fellow workmen, as this was considered illegal in the early phase of
industrialization under Combination Acts, 1799 and 1800. The cruel restrictions on the
workmen, under Combination Acts, 1799 and in 1800 made them exceedingly restive and
Page | 8
they formed unions and went in for collective action despite all the prohibitions against
discriminatory Acts.
Then in 1824 with the efforts of Francis Place and Joseph Hume, these discriminatory
Combinations Acts were repealed by Combination Act, 1824. The Combination Act, 1824
legitimised the combination of employees. This Act in fact was death knell for doctrine of
conspiracy of common law that had caused great injustice to the workers. But this Act was
soon replaced by another Act next year, named Combination Act of 1825, in which the great
liberties that were assured to workmen in the Combination Act of 1824, were curtailed to
some extent. This Act legalised the union of workers, and strikes however it declared such
strikes lineal that were intended to oppress the employer.
Despite these Acts passed in the first quarter of the nineteenth century, discrimination against
workmen continued, as the statutes and the common law were not impartially applied to the
employers and his workmen .For instance, employers could be punished for breach of
contract by civil suit only; employees who violated a contract were punished as criminals and
could be imprisoned for three months even the statutes passed in the early stages of
industrialization oppressed the workmen and benefited the employers.
Thus, the industrial revolution put too much power in the hands of the employers. The
doctrine of laissez faire barred state intervention, giving an unrestricted right to the employers
to exploit the labour by the way of poor working conditions and wages and by hiring and
firing at will. Further, legislations like the Combination Act curtailed association between the
suffering labourers. As a result, the exploitation of workers continued unchecked.
Page | 9
CONCLUSION
The doctrine of laissez-faire lost its significance with the emergence of welfare state in the
20th century and with it declined labour exploitation as a welfare state not only performs the
function of maintaining law and order in the society and protecting its citizen from external
aggression but also ensures welfare of its citizen. Thus employer employee relations are no
longer private economic affairs between the employers and workers in a welfare state.
A welfare State ensures that the wealthy and powerful employers do not arbitrarily draft such
contract of employment which are unjustly against the interest of poor and powerless
workers. To restrain the employers from drafting unfair and unjust contracts of employment,
the welfare State has enacted various labour laws to regulate the industrial relations between
the employers and workers by fixing maximum daily working hours, interval for rest, weekly
holidays, fixing minimum wages for the welfare of the workers etc.
However, even with the emergence of welfare state, labour exploitation cannot be said to
have completely abolished. Till date workers face exploitation by the way of forced labour,
low wages, inhumane working and living conditions, sexual exploitation etc. This
exploitation is bound to continue till the scales are tilted in the favour of the employers in the
term of access to resources and wealth. Therefore, it becomes utmost imperative to provide
the labour access to education so that their perpetual cycle of poverty can be broken and the
future generations be saved from being pushed to such inhumane conditions.
The uplifting of labour becomes of utmost importance and can be done by initiative and
schemes, both by the government and the employers. Numerous legislations have been
enacted for protection of workers and numerous have been provided. However, all they await
is actual implementation at the ground level. This is where the problem persists. In order to
ensure its implementation, more awareness is required to be created with the help of various
governmental and non governmental organisations.
It is only then that the labour can be freed from the shackles of exploitation and lead a
dignified life.
Page | 10
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
1. Paul, Meenu. (2022). Labour & Industrial Laws. Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt.
Ltd. New Delhi.
2. Misra, S. N. (2019). Labour and Industrial Laws. Central Law Publications.
WEBLINKS
1. Rai, D. (2021, August 27). Right Against Exploitation. iPleaders.
https://blog.ipleaders.in/right-against-exploitation/
2. DeltaNet. (2022, March 31). What is Labour Exploitation?
https://www.delta-net.com/knowledge-base/compliance/modern-slavery/what-is-
labour-exploitation/
3. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---
declaration/documents/publication/wcms_105035.pdf
Page | 11
