The Liberal Error

Jug Suraiya is definitely not a Reichwing editor. If anything, this humorist and satirist, creator of the hilarious "Dubyaman" cartoon strip, is anti-state, pro-market, pro-liberty and pro-people. He is a true liberal.

But this time Jug has erred on the side of excess liberty. He believes that the right to a "voluntary strike" must be upheld as a fundamental right of all workers. Bandhs, which are "non-voluntary" and based on coercion, should be banned. Voluntary strikes must be allowed.

Actually, strikes are not "voluntary" in the sense that the individual worker chooses to strike work. Rather, it is the trade union, a "collective" body, that declares a strike. The union is a monopoly supplier of labour – and this monopoly is maintained by coercion. During a strike, the unions use force to prevent non-unionized workers from entering the factory.

Yet, the union's coercion begins well before the strike is called. It begins with the "threat to strike" – and the threat itself is a coercive act. It is blackmail.

Further, both the strike threat as well as the strike itself are violations of contracts – contracts that the workers have signed with the management, promising to work peaceably for X hours a day in return for a specified wage.

Of course, an individual always has the right to strike. But since this cannot be coercive, the management has the equal right to employ someone else. Only if he is indispensable will the individual striker end up with a pay hike.

It is a part of the folklore of the Left that "collective bargaining" (a term coined by Beatrice Webb) is necessary for the working class because as individuals they have no "bargaining power" vis-à-vis the management.

This is a totally false representation.

Management is tied down to the machines they have invested in. This capital is totally immobile. It is labour, on the other hand, that is fully mobile, free to seek employment anywhere else.

The idea that all strikes should be illegal may strike Jug Suraiya as inherently illiberal. Yet this is precisely the error that the British Liberal Party made in 1906 when it passed the Trade Disputes Act. It was liberalism that underscored the rights of the working classes, for there was no real Labour Party then. Indeed, British liberals always upheld the rights of the workingman – beginning with Lord Shaftesbury's reforms. British liberals in 1906 held notions exactly similar to those that Jug Suraiya holds today.

But in passing the Trade Disputes Act of 1906, the liberals dug their own grave. The liberal party died out almost immediately. And the Labour Party rose from its ashes. A contemporary noted "the strange death of liberal England."

The liberals of India must learn from British history. It is because of wrong-headed liberalism and wrong-headed sympathy for the workingman that Britain lost its pre-eminence as an industrial power. Ultimately, the working classes of Britain lost heavily.

Trade unionism can never raise the wages of all workers. It is inherently coercive and can secure better terms only for those workers within the labour combination. Therefore, unions should not have any legal privileges. There should never be a "right to strike."

I can suggest some essential reading for Jug Suraiya. The late Professor WH Hutt has written extensively on the "strike threat system" and the economics of trade unionism. Some of his books are available at the library of the Centre for Civil Society in New Delhi.

Indeed, we all sympathize with the poor worker. But that should not blind us to the ugliness, corruption and blackmail that trade unions represent. The Rule of Law must be impartial. Justice must be equal for all. Since all strikes are necessarily coercive, and violations of contract, they should be banned.

The working classes have all to gain from peaceful industrial relations. Their wages – and by this I mean the wages of ALL workers – can rise only when more and more capital is invested. There is an inherent harmony between the interests of the workers and those of the owners of capital. Indian liberalism today, having learnt from Britain's mistakes, must never allow their sympathy for workers to be exploited by trade unionists.