Editorial 1: Factory accidents, a pointer to rusty inspection reform
Context
The recurrence of the same kind of industrial disasters highlights the need for more meaningful reforms in the inspection process.
About
- An explosion of a reactor in a chemical factory in the Dombivli Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) area in May 2024 resulted in the loss of lives and injuries to workers and people.
- It also caused damage to factories, shops and residencies in the neighbourhood.
- Newspaper reports show that fatal industrial accidents were frequent in 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2023.
- It is now known that the boiler in the chemical factory was not registered under the Indian Boiler Regulations, 1950.
Poor inspection
- In 2021, in Maharashtra, 1,551 of 6,492 hazardous factories were inspected, i.e., a 23.89% inspection rate. And, 3,158 out of 39,255 registered factories were inspected, i.e., an 8.04% inspection rate.
- The poor inspection rates could also be due to a shortage of personnel among other reasons.
- In Maharashtra, the appointment rate is just 39.34%; 48 out of the 122 sanctioned officers were appointed. The all-India figure was 67.58%.
- Even the sanctioned posts relative to the number of registered factories have been inadequate to ensure that every factory is inspected in a year.
- The inspection rates are poor because of the heavy workload of the inspectors.
- The prosecution rate, i.e., the number of prosecutions decided as a percentage of total prosecutions (including pending cases) was 6.95% in Gujarat; 13.84% in Maharashtra, and 14.45% in Tamil Nadu. As a result, inspections lose their “deterrent effect”.
- From the data, it is clear that labour market governance through the labour inspection system is weak and does not perform efficiently.
- However, employers call it pejoratively as “inspector-raj”, implying harassment and prevalence of compromising practices such as bribes.
Need for the right reforms in inspection
- The criticism is not without merit. Given the vast universe of inspection, the inspectors may “target” and “harass” several factories/establishments, exhibiting state power and also attempting to secure bribes.
- Also, Employers are as guilty as the labour inspectors, and tackling the “supply side” of “rent seeking” is as important as reforming the “demand” side.
- Reforms of the inspection system are necessary but not of the kind initiated in most States in response to employer criticism.
- Self-certification, randomised inspections, online inspections, and third-party certification have been introduced by ruling political parties at the all-India level and in many States.
- These changes violate several articles in the International Labour Organization’s Labour Inspection Convention (081), 1947.
- According to the Convention, there must be sufficient qualified and well-provided inspectors and they shall enter the establishments freely and without prior notice at any time to secure due compliance of the labour laws, among others.
- Instead of liberalising the inspection system, governments must ensure a strong labour market governance by implementing the provisions of the ILO Convention.
- Given the fast-paced changes taking place in technology, and the use of hazardous and chemical substances, the increased need for inspection is felt.
- Inspectors can both “inspect” and “facilitate” due compliance of laws by providing suitable advice to employers and unions. This is recognised by the ILO Convention.
Penalties for the enforcer
- If a firm or a trade union does not comply with laws, they are prosecuted by the state.
- There must be a penal system for the enforcers also which will pave the way for complete legal compliance.
- The recurrence of the same kind of industrial disasters shows a lack of learning by the government.
Way forward
- In the name of reforms and a lean government, the state cannot abrogate its fundamental duty — to ensure a safe working and living environment. It should carry out meaningful reforms to ensure an “efficient” and “ethical” labour inspectorate.
Editorial 2 : Avoidable tragedy
Context
The stampede on Tuesday at a religious congregation at Hathras in western Uttar Pradesh, claiming over 120 lives, is only the latest in a series of such tragedies in the country.
Stampedes claiming lives
- Stampedes at public gatherings and events have tragically claimed numerous lives across India over the years, with the recent incident at Hathras serving as a stark reminder of the urgent need for preventive measures.
- These accidents often result from overcrowding, inadequate crowd management, and a lack of preparedness. Addressing these issues requires a multifaceted approach involving infrastructure improvements, better planning, and heightened awareness.
How to deal with such accidents?
1. Enhanced Infrastructure and Venue Design:
- Improving the infrastructure of venues where large gatherings occur is crucial.
- This includes ensuring sufficient entry and exit points to prevent bottlenecks, as well as wider passages and clear signage for easy navigation.
- Designing venues with adequate seating arrangements and designated standing areas can also mitigate the risk of overcrowding.
2. Advanced Crowd Management:
- Event organizers and authorities should employ trained personnel to oversee crowd flow and intervene promptly in case of congestion.
- Utilizing technology such as crowd monitoring systems and CCTV cameras can provide real-time data to anticipate potential issues and manage crowds more efficiently.
3. Public Awareness and Education:
- Raising public awareness about crowd safety measures is essential.
- Through campaigns and public service announcements, attendees can be educated about the importance of orderly conduct, following instructions from authorities, and staying calm in crowded situations.
- Promoting a culture of mutual assistance and responsibility among attendees can also contribute to preventing panic and stampedes.
4. Regulatory and Legal Framework:
- Enforcing stringent regulations and guidelines for event organizers is necessary.
- Authorities should ensure that organizers comply with safety standards, including crowd capacity limits and emergency preparedness protocols.
- Regular inspections and audits of venues can help identify and rectify potential hazards before events take place.
5. Emergency Preparedness and Response:
- Having a well-defined emergency response plan is critical.
- This includes having trained medical personnel on-site, accessible first aid stations, and clear protocols for handling medical emergencies and evacuations.
- Conducting regular drills and simulations can help ensure that staff and attendees are prepared to respond effectively in case of emergencies.
6. Collaboration and Stakeholder Engagement:
- Effective prevention of stampedes requires collaboration among various stakeholders including government agencies, event organizers, venue owners, and local communities.
- By working together, sharing resources, and coordinating efforts, stakeholders can implement comprehensive strategies to enhance safety and prevent tragedies.
Conclusion:
While stampedes at public gatherings represent a significant challenge, they are preventable through proactive measures and collective action. Ultimately, ensuring the safety and well-being of all attendees should be the foremost priority in planning and organizing public events.
