A Review of Legal and Regulatory Frameworks for Beedi Workers In India

Aims and Objectives: The research aims to analyze the impact of evolving legal and policy frameworks on beedi workers, map and review changes in regulations related to their work and livelihood, and assess the implementation of existing sectoral laws and the performance of schemes under the Beedi Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1976. Additionally, it will examine potential issues arising from the enforcement of new labor codes.

Methodology: The study involved an analysis of available secondary materials concerning issues related to beedi workers. Additionally, it included a review and analysis of laws at both central and state levels to highlight the inter-state diversity in implementation.

Findings:

• The beedi industry, characterized as a footloose industry, has shifted production bases across states over the last five decades. Currently, West Bengal, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, and Odisha have more than 97% of beedi workers.
• Women, who comprise a large number of beedi workers, often face invisibility due to home-based production. The ‘buying-selling’ production mode excludes them from legal entitlements, exploiting their low bargaining power and paying them low wages.
• The newly passed Social Security Code, Occupational Safety and Health and Working Conditions Code, and Wage Code have subsumed earlier laws protecting beedi workers. Manufacturers evaded previous laws by practicing self-employment production modes, which were not covered by law. Systemic barriers for registration and issuing identity cards kept many workers from accessing welfare.
• Self-employed workers, who were earlier not eligible for social security entitlements, remain in ambiguous territory under the new codes.
• Unionization has weakened over time, replaced by SHGs, resulting in weaker negotiations with employers.
• Due to health hazards associated with beedi production, the government has initiated alternative livelihood projects for beedi workers. However, trade unions remain skeptical about the sustainability of these initiatives.
• Central government and some states have extended RSBY and ESIC facilities for unorganized sector workers. PMAY for housing and PMMVY for maternity benefits currently cater to unorganized sector workers.
• The merging of labor laws into labor codes is removing existing welfare schemes, with unclear alternatives offered by new codes.

Recommendations:

• Address systemic barriers for registration and issuance of identity cards to ensure workers access their entitlements.
• Develop clear provisions under the new labor codes for self-employed workers to ensure they are covered by social security entitlements.
• Strengthen unionization and collective bargaining to improve negotiations with employers.
• Ensure the sustainability of alternative livelihood projects for beedi workers.
• Clarify and enhance provisions offered by new labor codes to replace existing welfare schemes effectively.