The House reassembled after lunch at two of the clcok,



MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Shri G. Sanjeeva Reddy.

SHRI G. SANJEEVA REDDY (ANDHRA PRADESH): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I am thankful to you for giving me this opportunity. I stand here to support the amendment proposed by the hon. Minister of Labour with regard to the addition of the other backward classes to the Apprentices Act. Sir, this addition is not going to be much useful to the working class and to the industry itself. Today, time has changed. The Minister must try to understand the situation existing in the industry as well as in the working class. The Apprentices Act was brought about in 60's. Today, after global economy was introduced in this country, the whole country was industrialised, the whole situation has undergone a big change. Suiting to these changes, the Act should also be amended accordingly. A new idea should be brought about so that the Apprentices Act may be useful to the industry as well as to the workers. Today, it is not useful to anybody. Today, the Apprentices Act is not implemented by any of the industry in the country, what was implemented in 60's, 70's, 80's. Today, no industry is appointing apprentices, because apprentices are getting very meagre remuneration. They are getting about Rs.1600/- to Rs.2,000/- only. Even the private employers who employ apprentices are paying them about Rs.2,000/-, Rs.3,000/-, Rs.4,000/-. Still, apprentices are not ready to go to the industry. The apprentice, specifically, say that engineers who have passed engineering, diplomaholders, vocational trainers, then, ITI, are already in shortage in our country. There is a shortage of skilled workers in the country. Therefore, it is going to affect the industrial growth of our country. It must be seriously taken into consideration by the Government, because this whole system, this whole thinking, whole practice is not going to be helpful to the present economic atmosphere which was introduced in this country. Industries are coming up in a big way, multinationals are also coming up. They are demanding for skilled workers. Sir, even for running our planes, we are bringing pilots from England. Pilots are coming from outside the country. Similarly, engineers are coming from outside the country. Highly-skilled welders are coming from outside the country. Whatever skilled workers are there in our country, they -- because in our country, employers are paying less salary, less remuneration -- are going outside the country. Skilled workers are migrating to other countries, like Middle East, America, England, Germany. All these countries are flooded with Indian technicians, Indian skilled workers, starving the Indian industry.

(Contd. by PB/2C)


SHRI G. SANJEEVA REDDY (CONTD.): Today, the Indian industries are starving in a very big way. Sir, since I am in this field, therefore, I can tell this thing to my Government. Please look into it. Otherwise, it is going to affect the industrial growth of this country very badly. If you do not take a proper step, proper atmosphere would not be created. Therefore, the Labour Ministry has to understand this situation. Whatever the report says, the Apprentice Act has to undergo a big change in such a way that an Apprentice-cum-Training Act should be there.

Sir, with regard to remuneration also, today you are suggesting only Rs. 1600. For training purposes, who is going to be there for this meagre amount? Therefore, the minimum remuneration should not be kept less than Rs. 5000 so that it may be a little attractive for these people. It is not sufficient for the trainee who has passed the ITI or who is a diploma holder or for those engineers who are going for it in order to get a higher remuneration later. It is not sufficient for anybody to work there for two years, three years. Today, the apprentices are ineffective because the employers do not bother about the Apprenticeship certificate. They employ raw hand people, train them and utilise them for productive purposes. They require them for new technologies. Sir, to the workers whom we train, we give a certificate saying that on-job training was given to such and such person after passing the ITI. But the employer says, 'I myself can give a job training; what is the use of going for apprenticeship training?' Therefore, some sort of a change is required in order to attract the more skilled workers.

Another important point that I would like to mention, Sir, is that all matriculation people or tenth pass workers or young boys should be allowed to have training in the industry and a job guarantee should be given to them. Today, an apprentice can seek employment in an industry after working in a place as apprentice for two years. Then they say 'since your training is over, you can go away from my industry and seek employment somewhere else.' Sir, finding employment somewhere is not easy in our country. Jobs are not available in our country for those workers who are unskilled or semi-skilled. The job availability is there for skilled workers or highly skilled workers. Therefore, they have to create an atmosphere where a tenth pass young boy can work in an industry and get some technical training, instead of asking them to go in for ITI or for some engineering course or for some diploma or vocational training. It is not working that well nowadays as it used to do previously. During 1960s or 1970s, it had worked very well and we used to have a quota in industry and in a ratio of 1:6 or 1:7 an apprentice used to be appointed. But today it has not been the practice. No industry is appointing the apprentice; no industry wants to recruit them. No industry wants to take these apprentices in their industries because they are always finding a shortage.

Sir, the small-scale industry is one of the important industries, but here the apprentices do not go at all. Sir, small-scale industries have got fifty per cent employment potential and they are producing almost fifty per cent of the country's production. At this moment, the point is how to help the small-scale industry, the medium-scale industry through these technicians. That has to be planned here. We are only planning for major industries, big industries. We are not taking any interest at all in the small-scale industries. The small-scale industries should be taken up properly so that a technician can be employed there. A trained technician is required for the industrial growth.

Sir, another point that I would like to mention here is that for the ITI and diploma holders, on-job training should be encouraged and self-employment scheme should be implemented. A person can be trained for self-employment. Today, we are training the workers so that they can seek job. Why not we go for self-employment? The Government of India should apply its mind. In China today, the self-employment scheme has been introduced in a big way and millions of people are employed through self-employment schemes. In this way, they are able to fight out the unemployment problem of the country. Similar to that, in our country also, there is a good scope for self-employment, provided we give a good technical training and a good financial assistance. Some work should be reserved for those younger people who adopt for this self-employment scheme. That may give a very big relief to our country and also to our industry. (Contd. by 2d/SKC)


SHRI G. SANJEEVA REDDY (CONTD.): Sir, today, the employers themselves seek more workers; you may ask them. They recruit new hands and train them. Why does the Government want to spend money? Why are you not seeking the opinion of the employer? Industries must be asked to recruit 20 to 25 per cent of the people, raw hands, and train them at their own expenditure, because they earn good profit and they could provide them the training needed for that particular industry. We impart such training to people that is not required by the industry. Today, we need to impart training keeping in view the advent of new technology and new mechanised industries and that training could be imparted by the industries themselves. Such a clause should be included in the Apprentice Act. In fact, the Apprentice Act itself should be amended to be known as the 'Apprentice-cum-Training Act'. Such changes need to be introduced in the interest of the country. That is important; otherwise, shortage of trained and skilled people would have a bad effect on the country's industrial growth and employment potential. The country may not be able to attract investments if there is lack of skilled labour.

Therefore, I would humbly request the Minister for Labour to amend the Act keeping in view the prevailing situation and requirement. He may talk about Other Backward Classes, but there are no jobs and there are no training centres. Reservation for any caste or community would do nothing to help or benefit the poor people. They must create an atmosphere where workers could seek more jobs, get trained and earn more money. Migration of people to other countries seeking jobs could be stopped if our employers pay good salaries and sufficient money to the employees depending on their skills. Their skills should be recognized and valued by the Indian employers and they should be paid accordingly. Only then we could retain talent in this country.

With these words, I thank you, Sir, for giving me time.


֮ ֤ (ָ Ϥ): ֳ֯ן , ׿ ׬׮ִֵ, 1961 ӿ֮ ׻֋ ֕ ׿ (ӿ֮) ׾֬, 2006 ֤ ֵ ֵ , ײֻ ִ֣Ԯ ׻֋ ֛ , ָָ ӿ ׯ֔ ָ ״ֻ ׯ֔ ָ ׻֋ ֻ Ӆ ׾֬ ִ֬ ӿ֮ ֵ ֵ , ִ ׯ֔ ״ֻ ֵ ֳ ָָ ֮ ֵ ָ ָ ׯ֔ ׻֋ ָָ ֕ ӿ֮ ׾֬ և , Ӥ ׸ ֋, ֳ ׸ ֵ , ֮ , ִ ӿֵ ֟ ָָ ֻ ֿ֮׌ ֲֻ ֮ ׻֋ ׯ֔ ״ֻ ָָ ָ ָ ֲֻ ָ ֻ ׮֯ ֋, ָָ ׯ֔ ׿ ׿ 27 ָ ָ ׻֋ ׾֬ և

(ֿ: 2E/LP ָ)


֮ ֤ (֟) : ָָ ֻ֟ , ֓ ֮ օ ֢և ָ ֵָ ֮ , ֮ ׯ֔ ָ ׻֋ ֮ ֮֮ ִ ֵ , ֕ ־쓓 ֵֵֻ ײ֟ ֺ ֟ ӿ֮ ׾֬ ֻ ֋, օ

֮֮ߵ ֳ֯ן , ָָ ӿ֮ ׾֬ և , ׻֋ ֮֮ߵ ִ ӡ ֬և , ִ օ ָָ ִ ߅ , 7 ִָ֟, 2000 ִ ӲӬ ãֵ ״ן ָ ָ, 2002 ִ ӲӬ ãֵ ״ן , ֮ ߵ ׿ ׸֤ ָ ׻֋ ֮ ־֕ ָָ ׿ ׬׮ִֵ 1961 ӟԟ ׯ֔ ָ ־ã ׻֋ ֵ ׾֮֬ ֮ ֮ ߅ ִ ӡֵֻ ׾֬ ֮ , ӡֵֻ , ֮־ ֮֬ ӡֵֻ ִ ӡֵֻ ָ ײ֮ ֵ ֵօ ִ ӿ֮ ׾֬ ֮ ֮ ׾ֻӲ օ ָָ , ׾֬ ֮ ִ , ָָ ׻֋ ֬և ֡

ֳ֯ן , ֤֕ ֚ ֋ ָ ָ ִ֕־֤ ֙ ֮֟ ִ֕ ֕, ֟ ׯ֔ , ֲ ֿ֌ ִ ֋, ֲ ߸ ָ߲ օ ׯ֔ ֚ ֤֕ ֤ ָָ ו֮֟ ִ , և ֜ ևԅ ֲ և ֙ ִ ֲ ִ֕ ֿ֌ ָ ׮ִ ׻֋ ־ֿ ׯ֔ ָ פ ֋ ӲӬ ֟ Ӭ , ߴָ־ , . ִ ֮ , ֳ ׾ָָ֓ ִ֕ ׯ֔ , ֟ , ֕ ָ ִ֕ ָܵ֬ ֮ ִ ֋ ӲӬ ׾֮֬ Ӥ ֮ ָ ־ã ׻֋ 㓔 14,15,16 335 ֮֮ ִ ִ֕ ׯ֔ , ֟ ֳ ָܵ֬ ״ֻ

֮֮ߵ ֳ֯ן , ߵ ׿ ׸֤ ׾֬ ֵ ֵ , ִ ߮ ϴ ֟ ׬׮ִֵ ָ 3 () ֻ ד֟ ן, ד֟ ֮֕ן ׻֋ ׿ ã֮ ָ ֲӬ օ (akg/2fָ ָ)


֮ ֤ (֟) : ֕ ָָ ӿ֮ և ӿ֮ ָ ׯ֔ ִ ״ֻ ׻ֵ ֵ

ָ ֯ ֟ י ߙ ׮֬׸ ֟ , (ִֵ ә) ֓߻ ֮֮ ִ ӿ֮ ָ օ

ָ ֟ ӿ֮ ׾֬ ִ׮֟ ׿ ִד֟ ָָ ֵ֕ ׮ֵ ֓ ָ פ ֋օ ׿ ֚ , ߵ ׿ ׸֤ ִָֿ ߵ ָָ ָ פ ־ֵ ׻֋ ד֟ ׿ ֻ ֿ֮׌ ָ ִ ׿ , ֮ ֮֜ ִ ֵ: ֟ ֲ ׸ ׻֋ ׮֟ , ִ ֻ ׌ֵ ֟ ߅ ׮׿֟ ִ ֵ֟ ״ֻ ֻ ֮֮ ִ ָ ֟ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ , ֟ ֮ ֯ ԟ: ִ֨ י ֟ , ֮ ִ ָ, ֤֮ ִ ָ ֮ ״ֻ֟ ߾ֵ֮֮֯ ׿ ֟ ֤ ִ֬ ֮֮ߵ ִ ӡ ׮־ ׿ ֻ , ו֮ ָ ִ , -- ֮ ָ֮׿ ֿ ֋, ֤ߵ ֮֕ן ֤ ѓ ָ , ׮־ ֮ ָ֮׿ ֺ ֋ ߾ֵ֮֮֯ ֻ

: ָָ ָ ֋ ֋ ӿ֮ , וִ ׯ֔ ״ֻ ֟ և , ִ֣Ԯ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ן ֮־֤ ֮֯ ֮ ָ פ, - ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

SHRI K. CHANDRAN PILLAI (KERALA): Sir, this is an important Bill. Initially, I want to totally support the suggestions and the opinion given by my senior colleague, Shri G. Sanjeeva Reddy. He is the President of INTUC also. He spoke on the Bill from his experience in this field. Regarding the Bill and its amendment provisions, there are three amendments in this Bill. Basically, the intention is to ensure reservation for OBCs in apprenticeship. Actually, it is a delayed one. But, there is no hesitation from our side to support it and such a provision was very much necessary. But, while looking at the overall economic scenario of the country with a global view, the need of the hour is that basic change in the Apprentices Act has to be in toto. With a holistic approach, we have to re-work the entire structure of this Act. That is my opinion. Why am I saying this? See, we are with an ambition to sustain the growth rate for which we have now initiated certain measures in the agricultural sector though distress has still not abated.

(continued by 2g - gsp)


SHRI K. CHANDRAN PILLAI (CONTD.): To cater to the needs of the economy, training of the employment force is very, very significant. Now, India is in a special position. As far as Indian population is concerned, demographically, fifty four per cent of our population is below twenty five years. This is a rare placement amongst other countries of the world. So, the total available set up or the infrastructure in the training field is not adequate to cater to the needs of the economy. Of course, in the two Budgets, we initiated certain expansion measures for the ITIs and polytechnics. It is there. I accept it. The ongoing job training in the industrial establishments is a vital area, which is being taken care of by The Apprentices Act, 1961.

After fifty years or so, we are not touching the basic lacunae of this Act. Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, through you, I want to lay stress on this point. One aspect is that Section 8, sub-section 3 is actually envisaging a kind of flexibility. In a sense, this flexibility is among trades. But there is no point to enhance the available quota. Quota is the same and the flexibility is working within that. The actual demand is to enhance the quota itself. That is the need. It is not addressed here. That is why I said that it is not a holistic or comprehensive approach.

Another area is related to instruction charges. There is no harm in taking it away from the Government and entrusting it on the employer. It is coming to only thirty or thirty+ rupees per head in the course period.

But along with this thing, I would like to specifically ask the Minister to look into the factor where the stipend rates are now provided. INTUC President, and, my colleague, Shri Sanjeeva Reddy rightly pointed it out. So, a proper measure should be undertaken by the Government to enhance that amount so that, at least, the basic needs can be fulfilled. They are coming to industrial establishment from distant places and stay there. They get canteen facilities and stipend and that is all. I myself worked as an apprentice for a period of two years in an industrial establishment. I know it. For accommodation or other such things, there is no provision. So, that area should be addressed properly to see that these things are extended to them.

Sir, the question of stipend is not the only point. I would like to mention here that a kind of exploitation is also going on in the apprenticeship. It is applicable both to the public and private sector. Against the permanent vacancies, engagement of apprentices is taking place in the country and they are heavily under paid. There is no mechanism to monitor or to discourage this menace. Is there such a provision in this Act to curb that? It is not there. Nowadays, the contractual employment, outsourcing is the practice in the industrial sector also as it is there in other sectors. The victim is the worker or the apprentice, the unemployed youth.

So, proper monitoring mechanism should be evolved to see that it does not happen in our industrial establishments. While I am saying that this is applicable to public sector industries also, it means that the public sector is acting as a model employer in the country, and, in such a system also, this is happening by which the number of permanent workers is coming down in various industrial establishments. I am not saying it is the situation in every industry. But it is there. I can cite immense examples. So, that is the major area where we have to revisit to see that it is effectively curbed.

Another matter to which I would like to put before the hon. Minister is that, in the coming years, Asia is going to become a major hub for the skilled and talented workforce. (Contd. by sk-2h)


SHRI K. CHANDRAN PILLAI (CONTD.): And, India too is going to be one major contributor to this. With that perspective in mind, with a futuristic perspective, we have to re-structure the entire thing with a visionary approach. I totally agree with the limited purpose of this amendment. I have said it earlier. There is no dispute on this. But, we are not addressing the real issue. It is a piecemeal type of an amendment. It is very necessary from the social point of view. I accept that. But, while touching an area where the enactment took place 50 years, these major issues and the changes occurred in the economy and in the country in toto have also to be taken care of. I am expecting a proper legislation at the very first chance. With these words, I am concluding. Thank you. (Ends)

SHRI S. ANBALAGAN (TAMIL NADU): Thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir. On behalf of AIDMK Party, I welcome the Apprentices (Amendment) Bill, 2006. I come from Tamil Nadu. Great leaders like Periyar, Anna and MGR have spent their life for the empowerment of the deprived. My leader, Puratchi Thalaivi, gave Constitutional guarantee for the 69 per cent reservation in Tamil Nadu by getting included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution. Hence, our support for this Bill is wholehearted. Sir, clause 2 of the Apprentices (Amendment) Bill, 2006, seeks insertion of a new section 3B in the principle Act of 1961. It is for reservation of training places for Other Backward Classes in designated trades. It is a welcome move. There is no other thinking about it. However, I would like to point out that a recommendation in this regard was made by the Central Apprentices Council way back in 2002. After an inordinate delay, now the Government has come up with a Bill for reservation of training places for OBCs. Now, it should be implemented at the earliest. Sir, the second amendment aims to provide flexibility up to 50 per cent in the matter of engagement of apprentices in the trade. As per the principal Act, the flexibility of 20 per cent is presently available. I have apprehension that the proposed amendment may benefit only the traders, not others. The apprentices are paid only stipends, not salary. As such, this may indirectly benefit employers. Moreover, this may be a hindrance to the youths in getting permanent jobs. So, suitable amendments should be carried out to the principal Act. In effect, the proposed amendment will reduce the number of permanent jobs available in our industrial establishments. Moreover, stipend to apprentices should also be increased, when 50 per cent of the employees will be apprentices and 50 per cent of the work will be done by them. With above suggestions, I welcome this Bill. Thank you.


(Followed by 2j-KLG)


֮֕ן ֤ (ײָ) : ֳ֯ן , ֯ ֮ פ, ׻֋ ֯ ֮־֤ ו ֟ , ײָ ֕ , ֮֮ߵ Ը ֟ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֻ ֤ ֤ ֟ ָ ָ ׯ֔ ׻֋ ֨ӟ ֵ֮, ֨ӟ ... ָָ , ִ ־ã ֟ ָָ ֮ ֮֟ , ־ã ֟ ִֻ ֟

, ײֻ ֵ ֵ , þ֟ þ֟ ׻֋ ָ ִ ׾ ӡ , ִ ָ ׻֋ 100 פ ָ ־ã ָ Ӿ ָ , ֻ 100 פ ָ ״ֻ ָ ֢ ״ֻ, ָ ײֻ ֋ӯֵֻ֛ , ו֮ خ ־ã , ָ֮ ִ , ָ خ ״ֻ , خ ֋ خ skilled ֵ֮ ֋, ו ױ ָ֮ ִ ״ֻօ

, ֤ ֟ ֕ ֯ ֻ և, ֯ ֋ӯֵֻ֛ ㋙ , .. ֜-׻ , .. ֜-׻ , ֲ ״ֻ, skilled ׮ خ ֵ , ָ֮ ִ ֜, ״á ִ , ל ִ , ֯ ״ֻ ״ֻ֟ ״ֻ֟ ָ ָ خ ־ã ָ خ ־ã , ׻֋ , haves , ӯ֮ have-nots , וִ֮ ָ֤֟ ׯ֔ , ׻֋ خ ־ã

, ֮֮ߵ ӡ ײֻ ֋ , ָߵ ײֻ ׻֋ ׻֋, ֛ ׻֋ خ ־ã ֋, , ״֡ ֯ ֻ ߮ ׻֙ ֟ ו֋, ֮ خ ֻ , ֛ , have-nots , ׻֋ Ùևӛ ־ã ו֋ ֮ ֮ ״֡ ִ Ùևӛ , ִ Ùևӛ ִֻ ָ֮ , خ ״ֻ, خ ֋, ָ ֯ ׻֋ ֻ ߮ ־ã , خ ֋ ָ߲ , خ ֋? ׻֋ ֯ ֤ ָ֮ خ ֋, ׻֋ , Ùևӛ ֯ ׮֬׸ ֮ ֟ ־ã ֮ ָ֮ ֻ ָ , خ ֋, ָ ֛ י׿֯ ׻֋ ״ֻ , ֓ ֮ ֮ خ ֋ ׻֋ ײֻ ִ֣Ԯ ױ ׻֋ ־ã ֺ 2/ ָ


֮֕ן ֤ (֟) : ָ ֟ ֛-֛ خ , և00և0 ֛-֛ , ָ Ù ־ã , خ ֻ , ׻֋ ־ã , خ ߾ֵ֮֮֯ ֮֬ ״ֻ

ױ ֯ ִ֬ ӡ ׮־ ֟ ֺ ֻܵ ײֻ ִ֣Ԯ (ִ֯)

SHRI SHARAD ANANTRAO JOSHI (MAHARASHTRA): Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, for giving me the floor to talk on this Bill. Sir, the Bill is crawling at a very slow pace. Originally, it was supposed to be presented here by Shri Chandrasekhar Rao. Now, it is being piloted by Shri Oscar Fernandes and I don't know by the time it actually becomes an Act and operative, how many changes will have taken place by that time. There were three elements in the Bill and I was expecting some clarifications from the Minister's initial statement. It did not come. He read out the statement that is already enclosed with the Bill, which is not quite sufficient and I would very humbly submit that in replying to the debate, the Minister would give clarifications on a certain number of subjects. Sir, the purpose is to increase the flexibility in the number and increase the number. There were two questions that occur to a person like me. Firstly, having a larger number of apprentices is a matter of advantage for the employer also. It's a matter of advantage for the society, for those who expect to become enrolled in the industry. But, the employers also get cheap labour or cheap operatives to work in their hands. As was mentioned by Rajniti Prasadji, unless we stipulate as to what would be the salaries and the remuneration, it would be futile to talk about the percentage of trainees that ought to be included.

Sir, the proportion of twenty per cent for management graduates itself appears to me too high. For example, even in the Administrative Services in India, your proportion doesn't go beyond ten per cent including two years' of probation. Why are you imposing a percentage of twenty which was high enough as it is? And if you make it 50 per cent, you will bring down the quality of training because for every apprentice that you engage, there has to be some kind of backdrop or some kind of support -- people who will look after their training, who will see to it that they get properly trained and, at the same time, they are also given the necessary theoretical training. Unless that kind of a provision is made, talking about 20 or 50 per cent would not make any sense. I would request the hon. Minister to reveal to the House exactly the mathematical basis on which he came to the conclusion of increasing from twenty per cent in 1961 or 1971 to 50 per cent in the year 2006.

Secondly, Sir, the idea that there should be a theoretical training that should support the practical training itself is a very good thing. In fact, the two go together. Because we use the word 'apprenticeship', the idea is not very clear. In modern industry, the word that is used is 'Training within Industry', TWI. And if you had used the word 'TWI', I think, it would have been quite clear that the training to be given is not only of a practical industry, but also of a theoretical industry. What I have not understood is, why is it that the Government which carried the responsibility of this theoretical training till the year 2006, is suddenly trying to shirk the responsibility and hand it to the employer? At the same time, it is imposing an additional burden of what is called the social justice, the social equity. When that kind of burden is imposed on the employer, there should be an attempt to make the engagement of apprentices more attractive to the employers. Instead of that, you are making it less attractive. I would like to have some explanation on that subject also. (Contd. by MKS/2L)


SHRI SHARAD ANANTRAO JOSHI (CONTD.): The third thing is about reservation for the OBCs. I do not understand why this third purpose was added into the Bill. There could be two motives. Number one; of course, there is some kind of a political competition to get laurels about giving the OBCs their share, and some Ministers are trying to monopolise the whole credit. Possibly, our Minister of Labour is in the race. But, I think, there is another risk. The two aspects, increasing the flexibility and increasing the theoretical training aspect, would have come in as a welcome measure, but because you have added the OBC reservation aspect, it is more than likely that along with other OBC Bills which are pending in the Supreme Court, this Bill will also be stayed and even the good parts of this Bill would not become operative.

Sir, on three occasions, in this House, I have opposed the Bill on the question of OBC reservation, and every time, I have given the arguments and every time, I have asked for division and voted against it. ...(Interruptions)... Mr. Narayanasamy, will you please behave like a whip? And every time, I have said that this Bill will not go through the Supreme Court and it has not gone through the Supreme Court.

While the present and the last amendment still stands straight, I do not really understand why the Ministry of Labour and Industry is in such a hurry to get the OBC quota for apprentices.

Sir, there are a number of arguments which I briefly summarise. The merits and advantages brought in by the system of reservation have not been proved at all. There are some advantages and some disadvantages, but the greater disadvantages have been in the nature of politicising the society and making the society more caste conscious.

Number two, by the year 2010, in any case the entire policy of reservation is due to be reviewed, and at this time, this unseemly hurry of showing that certain people care more for the OBCs than the others, appears to be entirely politically motivated.

Sir, the question of creamy layer has not been settled yet, and even the Supreme Court has asked what is the statistics that you have about the total number of people belonging to OBCs and how is it related to the number of posts that are reserved. Sir, in this Bill you will find that the actual wording is that the proportion is not described. If they had said 27 per cent, that would have actually made the things easier. But what they say is: "Such as may be prescribed, having regard to the population of Backward Classes in the State concerned." So, the proportion is, again I do not know why, left to the employer or to the apprentice adviser. It is not very clear.

And, Sir, the most important thing is, I tried to go through the annexed original Act, 1971, and whatever is annexed here does not contain the provision which makes a reservation, in the apprenticeship clause, for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Now, I do not understand what forms the basis of having the addition of section 3B when section 3A itself is not complete. I would like the Minister to kindly give an explanation on that subject also.

` Sir, as I voted against all the Acts, all the Bills providing reservation for the OBCs up to now, I am going to keep my record. Unless the Minister is able to explain why he has found it necessary to add this OBC factor in an otherwise healthy Bill, I am going to oppose the Bill, Sir, and if it comes to a vote, I am going to ask for division; kindly note that, and I am going to vote against it. Thank you very much, Sir. (Ends)

Ӭ ֤֕ (ָ Ϥ) : ֳ֯ן , ׿ (ӿ֮) ׾֬, 2006 ִ֣Ԯ ֮ ׻֋ ֛ ֣ ֣ ֮֮ߵ ӡ þ֟ ֻ , ׾֬ ֋ , ׯ֔

ֳ֯ן , ֤ ִ֬ ֲ . օ ֲ ֲ . , ד֟ ן ד֟ ֮֕ןֵ ֮ ... 2M/VNK ָ ֿ:


Ӭ ֤֕ (֟) : ִֵ ֣ף֟ " ֮" ׳ֵ֮ ֻ ו ָ ד֟ ן ֋ ד֟ ן ֣ ד֟ ֮֕ן ֲ ָ פ ׯ֔ ן ֲ . ֺ ן ֕ , ׻֋ ׾֮֬ 㓔 340 ־ã פ ׯ֔ ֵ֮ ֵ ֵ֮ ֋ ֵ ֵ֮ ׸ ָ ָ פ ֋ ָ ֮֮ ֵ ֻ ֵ ֣ ָ ֵ ӛ ֵ, ׾֮֬ 㓔 340 ע ֻ ֵ ןֵ֯ ָ , ӛ ֵ ֺ օ ָ ֮֮ ֲ ӛ ֵ , ִֵ ׿ ׾֬ ӿ֮ ִֵ օ ӛ ֵ ־ã פ ׯ֔ ֲ֤ 52 ָ 52 ָ 27 ָ ָ ־ã פ , 1961 ֮ ָ 3() ָ ד֟ ן, ד֟ ֮֕ן ׿ ã֮ ָ ־ã , ׯ֔ ֲ ӛ ֵ , ֤ ִ ӿ֮ , ָָ ׸ãֵ , օ ׾ֻӲ օ ֕ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ֬և ֋, ß ֋ ׯ֔ ֋ ־ֿ ד֟ ן, ד֟ ֮֕ן ֣ ֣ ׾֬ ָ 3() ׯ֔ ׻֋ ־ã և , ֕ ֮ܵ ֟ ָ ־ã , ָ ֟ ִ֣Ԯ ֣ ֣ ׮־ ָ ָ ֵ־֟ , ׮֕ ָ ־ã ֟ , ֤ ִ֬ ӡ ׮֕ ָ ־ã ׯ֔ ד֟ ן, ד֟ ֮֕ן ָ ־ã

֣ ֣ ָ ָ ֤õ ׿ ֮ ׿ ֤֮ ״ֻ֟ , ß׾ և ֮ ֤֮ , פ ־ã ֲ ϟֿ ׾֬ ִ֣Ԯ ֮־֤ (ִ֯)

(2n ָ )


SHRIMATI N. P. DURGA (ANDHRA PRADESH): I welcome the Bill moved for consideration by the hon. Minister as it is in tune with the aspirations of the Other Backward Classes in the country. Sir, the objective of the parent Act is to regulate and provide training to apprentices in industry and utilise the facilities available in the industry for imparting on-the-job practical training, which varies from 6 months to 4 years, to technical students. It was amended thrice since its enactment in 1961 -- firstly, in 1973, to bring in engineering and technology as graduate or technician apprentices; secondly, to include 10+2 students who come from vocational stream of education; and thirdly in 1996. Now, I think, there are only 153 trades designated for trade practices and there are only 2.3 lakh seats available in establishments of Central and State PSUs and private sector. Now, in this era of globalization, productivity and production have to increase and this is possible only through skill upgradation of the workers. And, now, many more trades have come in, particularly in IT, telecommunications, etc. So, I request the hon. Minister to designate more trades for trade practices. The other point is that now we have got only 2.3 lakh seats available in all establishments. With disinvestment, mergers, lockouts, etc., these seats have also come down in the CPSUs and State PSUs. So, I request the hon. Minister to make sure that private establishments or industries provide training to more and more apprentices by increasing their mandated strength of in-take. The problem is that private companies are not inclined to engage apprentices as per the quotas fixed for them in relation to the skilled workers employed by them. To address such issues, there are State Apprenticeship Advisers to make sure that private companies or industries strictly adhere to norms. But the problem is that the State Apprenticeship Advisers are hesitating to take legal action against the defaulting companies. Even the Government is not keen to address this basic problem. To address this problem effectively, the Standing Committee on Labour has recommended increasing the penalty under Section 31 which is now Rs. 500 to a minimum of Rs. 3,000 and maximum of Rs. 6,000, in 1995. But, when the Act was amended in 1996, this recommendation was not accepted. So, now, the penalty is only Rs. 500 if any private company fails to comply with the provisions of the Act. So, I strongly believe that this has to be enhanced to, at least, a minimum of Rs. 25,000. I don't agree with the argument of the DG of Employment and Training who says that we need to play a positive and proactive role in persuading the employers of private and public sector rather than going in for punitive approach. But, when you are not able to persuade them, the option left before you is nothing but penalizing them. So, I suggest for consideration of the hon. Minister to increase the penalty.

I wish to know from the hon. Minister is whether there is any scheme before the Ministry for apprenticeship under which unskilled jobless matriculate youths are trained in different industries, because we also have more and more non-technical and unskilled jobless youths in the country screaming for jobs. If there is any such scheme, I request the hon. Minister to explain the same.

Even though it is welcome that the Government is now making it mandatory for employer to meet the expenses required for training in a company, I wish to know the reasons behind this shift from meeting the cost by Government and now imposing on the employer by replacing Section 10(2) of the Act.

Finally, it is good that Bill paves the way for reservation for OBCs in apprenticeship training. But, I did not find any mechanism which ensures strict implementation of the objective of the Bill. So, I request the hon. Minister to explain how he is going to ensure strict implementation of the proposed legislation. Thank you.

DR. E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN (TAMIL NADU): Sir, I fully support the Apprentices (Amendment) Bill, 2006. This Bill is very much essential. The downtrodden people chose to go in for school level education, but due to poverty and social conditions, they could not pursue it further. Then they went in for industrial training institute, which was contemplated in the Third and Fourth Five Year Plans. This enactment was made during the period of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru.

(Contd. By RG/2O)