Why is it in the News?

India is reportedly poised to replace the minimum wage with the living wage system, with the transition anticipated to occur by next year.

Context:

• India is reportedly considering shifting from the minimum wage to the living wage by 2025.
• India has approached the International Labour Organization (ILO) to help it chalk out a framework to assess and operationalize the living wages.
• India has asked the ILO to help it in “capacity building, systemic collection of data and evidence of the positive economic outcomes resulting from the implementation of living wages”.
  • Earlier in March, the United Nations agency forged an agreement on the living wage, which was also endorsed by its governing body.
• India, a founding member of the ILO and a permanent member of its governing body since 1922, passed the Code on Wages in 2019.

What is the Current Wage System in India?

• National Floor Level Minimum Wage (NFLMW): Established under the Code on Wages 2019, the NFLMW is determined by the government, requiring establishments to set minimum wages not below this level.
• Flexibility in Minimum Wage Standards: Section 5 of the Code on Wages 2019 prohibits employers from setting wages below the NFLMW, though states have the discretion to revise minimum wage rates as needed.
• Presently, the National Floor Wage stands at Rs 178 per day.

What’s a Living Wage?

• The International Labour Organization (ILO) defines the living wage as the level of remuneration “necessary to afford a decent standard of living for workers and their families, taking into account the country's circumstances and calculated for the work performed during the normal hours of work”.
• This decent standard of living includes being able to afford food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transportation, clothing, and other basic needs including a provision for contingencies, says the Global Living Wage Coalition.
• The goal of a living wage is to ensure the employees get an income enough for satisfactory living standards as well as reduce poverty.

What is Minimum Wage?

• Minimum wage refers to the legally mandated lowest level of compensation that employers must pay employees for their work over a specified period.
• While minimum wage endeavors to prevent low pay, living wage extends beyond by ensuring income is adequate to meet necessities like food, shelter, clothing, and other essentials, addressing the risk of workers falling below the poverty line despite earning minimum wages.
• In India, minimum wage calculation factors in variables such as the state of employment, the skill level of the worker, the nature of their job, and other pertinent factors.

Living Wage vs Minimum Wage:

• Definition: A living wage is the income required to meet basic needs and maintain a decent standard of living, while minimum wage is the lowest legally mandated compensation for workers.
• Purpose: A living wage seeks to address the risk of workers falling below the poverty line, while minimum wage aims to prevent low pay.
• Mandatory vs Voluntary: Minimum wages are legally required, whereas living wages are voluntary unless the government sets the minimum wage at the living wage level.
• Calculation: Living wages consider basic necessities and a decent standard of living, while minimum wages factor in variables like skill level, state of employment, and job nature.

Pros and Cons of Living Wages:

• Living wage is a divisive issue. Proponents of the living wage say people get paid more, leading to a rise in employee satisfaction.
• A boost in employee morale is likely to result in higher productivity.
• It also saves recruitment and training costs for companies as employee turnover falls.
• On the other hand, critics of the concept say companies may cut back on hiring if forced to pay increased wages, creating more job losses.
• Opponents also argue that imposing a living wage means creating a wage floor, which would hurt the economy by impacting businesses, especially those that cannot pay hiked salaries.

How Does Living Wage Benefit India?

• India has over 500 million (50-crore) workers, of which 90 percent are in the unorganized sector, noted ET.
• The national floor level minimum wage (NFLMW) – an amount below which no state government can fix the minimum wage – was Rs 178 per day or more depending on the location in 2023.
  • This was set at Rs 176 per day in 2017 and has not been changed since then.
• Currently, some states pay workers in the unorganized sector even below the NFLMW.
• The Code on Wages, 2019 was passed by Parliament states that the minimum wage cannot be fixed below the national wage floor.
• However, this code, which is binding on all states, is yet to be implemented.
• If India replaces the minimum wages with living wages, workers are expected to earn more.
• According to the ILO, the living wage has to be calculated following its principles and wage-setting process.

Conclusion

India's pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 hinges on strategic shifts, such as transitioning from minimum to living wages, to uplift millions from poverty while safeguarding their welfare. This is particularly pertinent against the backdrop of escalating income inequality, highlighting the imperative for a revamped wage system. As poverty rates decline yet inequality persists, a more equitable approach to wages becomes paramount, underscoring India's commitment to inclusive growth and social justice.

International Labor Organization (ILO):

• The International Labor Organization (ILO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations, founded in 1919 to promote social and economic justice through the establishment of international labor standards.
• The ILO operates with a unique tripartite structure, allowing governments, employers, and workers to engage in dialogue and decision-making on labor matters.

Key Roles and Functions:

• Setting International Standards: The ILO develops and adopts international labor standards in the form of conventions and recommendations, covering areas such as freedom of association, collective bargaining, child labor, forced labor, and non-discrimination.
• Technical Assistance and Capacity Building: The organization provides support to member states in enhancing their labor administration, labor inspection, employment policies, and social protection systems.
• Monitoring and Supervision: The ILO monitors the application of international labor standards in member states, offering guidance and assistance in their implementation.
• Research and Knowledge Sharing: The organization conducts research, collects data, and disseminates information on labor-related topics, facilitating evidence-based policy-making and dialogue.
• The ILO plays a critical role in promoting decent work, social justice, and labor rights worldwide, fostering cooperation among its 187 member states to address labor-related challenges and achieve sustainable development.
• The ILO headquarters are located in Geneva (Switzerland).

Why is it in the News?

The Mahatma was deeply sympathetic to the plight of the Jewish people in Europe. But he was against Zionists and the attempt to create a state of their own by force in Palestine, which was already inhabited by the Palestinian Arab people.

What was Mahatma Gandhi’s Views on Jews and A Separate Jewish Homeland?

Gandhi was deeply sympathetic to the Jewish people.

• The Mahatma always made it clear that he had deep sympathies for the Jewish people who had historically been unjustly persecuted for their religion.
• In his article ‘The Jews’ he said, “My sympathies are all with the Jews. They have been the untouchables of Christianity. Religious sanction has been invoked for the justification of the inhuman treatment meted out to them.”
• He further said that the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history and expressed his concern with Britain’s policy of placating Adolf Hitler at the time (before World War II broke out).
• He wrote that“If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified.

Yet, he did not support a Zionist state in Palestine.

• Gandhi opposed the establishment of a Zionist State in Palestine, contending that imposing Jews on the Arabs was both wrong and inhumane. He considered it a crime against humanity to diminish the dignity of the proud Arabs by restoring Palestine, either in part or wholly, as the national home for the Jews.

What are the Reasons Behind His Opposition to A Jewish Homeland?

• Religious Text as a Pretext: Mahatma Gandhi contended that the creation of a separate state based on religious grounds was unjustified.
• He believed that Palestine already belonged to Arab Palestinians, and the British-facilitated settlement of Jews was inherently violent.
• In his view, a religious act, such as Jews returning to Palestine, should not involve the use of force through the bayonet or the bomb.
• Goodwill of Arabs: Gandhi asserted that for Jews to settle in Palestine, it was essential to have the goodwill of the Arabs.
• He argued that this goodwill could only be achieved by forgoing the use of the British bayonet in the process.
• Contradiction to Global Struggle: Gandhi opposed the concept of a Jewish homeland, seeing it as contradictory to the broader struggle for increased rights that Jews were pursuing across the globe.
• He wasn't alone in holding this view, as it was shared by others during that period.
• Forced Relocation Concerns: He questioned the practicality of confining Jews to Palestine, wondering if they would appreciate being compelled to leave other parts of the world where they had settled.
• Gandhi expressed the concern that the Jewish claim for a national home could be seen as providing a justifiable reason for the expulsion of Jews, as witnessed in Germany.

Impact of Mahatma Gandhi’s Views on Indian Foreign Policy

• Shaping India's Foreign Policy through Gandhi's Influence on Nehru: Mahatma Gandhi's perspectives and his staunch anti-imperialism significantly influenced Jawaharlal Nehru, India's inaugural Prime Minister, shaping the nation's foreign policy for decades.
• Nehru, in many ways, inherited and embraced this perspective from Gandhi.
• Rejection of the Two-Nation Solution and Support for the Palestinian Cause: India's political stance toward Israel took firm shape shortly after gaining independence in 1947.
• Both Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi advocated for the Palestinian cause and firmly rejected the concept of two nations based on religious criteria.
• While expressing sympathy for the Jews, they believed that a state founded on religious exclusivity lacked moral and political sustainability, aligning with their opposition to the partition of India.
• India's Anti-Israel Votes at the UN: India's position on Palestine reflected not only its alignment with the Arab world but also resonated with the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations.
• During the UN vote on the partition of Palestine, India, along with Arab countries, cast its vote against the proposal.
• Similarly, when Israel sought admission to the UN, India once again voted against the move.
• Recognition of Israel as a Nation with Limited Diplomatic Relations: India officially acknowledged Israel's status as a nation on September 17, 1950, following similar recognitions by two Muslim-majority countries, Turkey and Iran.
• In 1953, Israel gained permission to establish a consulate in Mumbai, yet it was not granted diplomatic representation in New Delhi.
• Engagement with Palestinian Leadership under Yasser Arafat: During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) emerged as the representative body for the people of Palestine under the leadership of Yasser Arafat.
• India fostered connections with the primary political faction within the PLO, Al Fatah.
• Recognition of PLO as the Legitimate Representative of the Palestinian People: On January 10, 1975, India took a significant step by officially recognizing the PLO as the exclusive and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
• Furthermore, India permitted the PLO to establish an independent office in New Delhi.
• While India was among the last non-Muslim states to recognize Israel, it achieved the distinction of becoming the first non-Arab state to acknowledge the legitimacy of the PLO.

Conclusion

Mahatma Gandhi maintained his perspectives on the Palestine-Israel issue throughout his life, emphasizing his disapproval of the unjust treatment of Jews. Simultaneously, he consistently reaffirmed his longstanding opposition to the creation of a separate nation for the Jewish community.

For numerous decades, Gandhi's viewpoints significantly influenced Indian foreign policy. However, in more recent times, India has undergone a shift in approach, decoupling its relations with Israel and Palestine. Establishing robust ties with Israel marks a departure from the historical hyphenation of India-Israel-Palestine relations, reflecting a changing dynamic in India's diplomatic engagements.

Why is it in the News?

Residents in many villages of Maharashtra’s Dharashiv district on November 1 launched a ‘jail bharo’ (court arrest) protest in support of the Maratha quota agitation.

News Summary:

• The Maratha quota agitation intensified in Maharashtra after activist Manoj Jarange started an indefinite hunger strike to press the quota demand.
• The demand for OBC reservation emerged with the Supreme Court's May 2021 ruling that invalidated the Maratha quota established by the state's Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC) Act, 2018.
• The Marathas want to be recognized as Kunbis, which would entitle them to benefits under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) quota.
• The State Govt. on asked officials to issue fresh Kunbi caste certificates to eligible Maratha community members from Marathwada, paving the way for them to avail reservation benefits under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category.
• However, Mr. Jarange opposed the move saying the entire Maratha community should be given reservation.

Historical Background of the Maratha Community:

• The Marathas, historically identified as a “warrior” caste, comprise mainly peasant and landowning groups and makeup 33 per cent of the population in Maharashtra.
• The Maratha Kshatriyas have surnames like Deshmukh, Bhonsle, More, Shirke and Jadhav while most others belong to Kunbi, a predominantly agrarian sub-caste.
• The Kshatriya-Kunbi difference existed till the days of the Maratha empire.
• Now, most Marathas are engaged in farming activities.

Difference between Marathas and Marathis:

• While all Marathas are Marathis, not all Marathis are Marathas. Maratha signifies a group of castes, while Marathi is the language spoken by several communities in Maharashtra and some neighbouring areas of other states.
• A maximal circle of 96 clans is said to include all true Maratha, but the lists of these 96 clans are highly varied and disputed.

What is the issue of Maratha Reservation?

• The Marathas have been the politically dominant community in Maharashtra — since the formation of the state in 1960 as 12 of its 20 Chief Ministers have been Marathas.
• However, with a divide in holdings and problems in the farming sector, there has been a decline in the prosperity of middle and lower-middle-class Marathas.
• The demand for the Maratha reservation has been going on for decades now.
• The demand for quota for Marathas began in 1981 when Mathadi Labour Union leader Annasaheb Patil staged a morcha in Mumbai in support of the proposal.
• The Maratha Mahasangh and the Maratha Seva Sangh organized a strong movement for the Maratha reservation in government jobs and educational institutions in 1997.
• The issue was brought up again in 2000.

Timeline of Maratha Reservation Issue:

• June 2017: An 11-member commission led by retired Justice M. G. Gaikwad was formed.
• The commission recommended providing Maratha reservation rights under the category of Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC).
• November 2018: Maharashtra legislature passed a bill proposing a 16% reservation in education and government jobs for the Maratha community, declared as a socially and educationally backward class by the government.
• June 2019: The Bombay High Court upholds the constitutional validity of the Maratha quota under the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018.
• It reduces the quota from 16% to 12% in education and 13% in government jobs, following the recommendations of the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission.
• May 2021: The Supreme Court invalidated the Maratha reservation in 2021, citing the 1992 cap of 50% on all reservations. (Indira Sawhney judgment 1992)
• The total reservation ceiling was raised to 64% and 65%, respectively, by the Maratha reservations of 12% and 13% in employment and education, respectively.

Indira Sawhney judgment 1992

• In the Indira Sawhney judgment (1992), the Supreme Court made it clear that 50% reservations should generally be the rule, and the limit could only be relaxed in specific exceptional situations, typically in remote areas, to include them in mainstream opportunities.
• The Supreme Court stated that there were no such "exceptional circumstances" or "extraordinary situations" in Maharashtra to exceed the 50% reservation limit.
• Additionally, the court ruled that the state government couldn't grant socially and economically backward status to a community.
• Only the president has the authority to make changes to the central list of socially and backward classes; states can only provide suggestions.
• While the Bench unanimously upheld the constitutional validity of the 102nd Constitution Amendment, there was a difference of opinion on whether it affected the states' power to identify Socially and Economically Backward Classes (SEBCs).
• The Supreme Court emphasized that a separate reservation for the Maratha community goes against Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (due process of law).
• November 2022: After the SC struck down the Maratha reservation and upheld the 10 per cent quota for the Economically Weaker Sections, the Maharashtra government said that until the issue of the Maratha reservation is resolved, economically weaker members of the community can benefit from the EWS quota.
• April 2023: The state government declared that it will file a curative petition and establish a new panel to conduct a thorough assessment of the community's "backwardness" following the SC's denial of its review plea.

Maharashtra Government's Stance:

• The Maharashtra government has approved the issuance of Kunbi caste certificates to Marathas from Marathwada, based on historical documents from the Nizam era that recognize them as Kunbis.
• The main goal is to grant Marathas Kunbi caste certificates, which would classify them as Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and grant them access to the benefits reserved for OBCs.
• To ensure a standardized process, the government has formed a committee consisting of five members, led by former Justice Sandeep Shinde.
• This committee will create the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for issuing Kunbi caste certificates.

Who are Kunbis?

• Kunbis, a community traditionally involved in farming, are categorized as Other Backward Classes (OBC) in Maharashtra.
• During the period when Marathwada was part of the Hyderabad province, the community in that area was recognized as Kunbis, known for their farming activities.
• However, when Marathwada became part of Maharashtra, this community was categorized as Marathas.
• In 1967, Punjab Rao Deshmukh requested OBC status for Marathas in the Vidarbha region, and in 2004, the Maharashtra government issued a Government Resolution (GR) granting Kunbi status to Marathas from that area.

What is the reaction from OBC Organizations?

• Opposition to Maratha Demand: OBC organizations strongly disagree with the Maratha request for OBC reservations, fearing it might affect their existing quota.
• Reservation Concerns: OBC leaders argue that the Maratha reservation should not reduce or compromise the existing OBC reservation.
• They highlight that OBCs in Maharashtra already have a 19% reservation, which is higher than the national average of 27%.

Conclusion

In the current social and political situation, it is becoming increasingly clear that a potential conflict between the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and the Marathas will emerge big if the problem is not addressed and managed amicably. To ensure social harmony and avoid potential conflicts, stakeholders and policymakers must engage in constructive dialogue and find fair solutions to the OBC and Maratha reservation issue.

Why is it in the News?

The resurgence of the Cauvery water-sharing conflict between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, despite the Supreme Court's 2018 ruling on the longstanding dispute, is primarily due to inadequate rainfall in Karnataka's Cauvery river catchment area.

A Historical Overview of the Cauvery Water Dispute

• Origin of the Dispute Before Independence: The origins of the Cauvery water dispute trace back to 1892 during the British colonial era, involving the Madras Presidency and the Princely state of Mysore.
• In 1924, an agreement was reached between Mysore and Madras, with a validity period of 50 years.
• Post-Independence Dispute: The agreement signed between the Madras Presidency and the Princely state of Mysore concluded in 1974.
• Starting in 1974, Karnataka began diverting water into its four newly constructed reservoirs without obtaining consent from Tamil Nadu, leading to a post-independence dispute.

Supreme Court's Ruling on the Cauvery Water Dispute:

• Clear Allocation of Water Quantities to TN and Karnataka: In 2018, the Supreme Court made a definitive decision to allocate an additional 14.75 TMC (Thousand Million Cubic Feet) of water to Karnataka while reducing Tamil Nadu's share by the same amount.
• Karnataka's additional allocation was primarily designated for addressing the drinking water needs in southern Karnataka.
• As per this ruling, out of the total annual Cauvery water share of 740 TMC, Tamil Nadu was granted 404.25 TMC, Karnataka received 284.75 TMC, and Kerala obtained 30 TMC.
• Furthermore, the court allocated 7 TMCs to Puducherry and reserved 14 TMCs for environmental conservation and preventing waste into the sea.
• Establishment of CWMA (Cauvery Water Management Authority): The Supreme Court also mandated the establishment of the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) along with the Cauvery Water Regulatory Committee (CWRC) to resolve inter-state disputes according to the court's directives.
• The CWMA operates as a primarily non-political body operating under the supervision of the Union Water Resources Ministry.
• It serves as the central agency responsible for regulating disputes between the two states.

Reasons for the Ongoing Dispute:

• Political parties in both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu argue that the 2018 Supreme Court order delineated water-sharing guidelines solely for typical monsoon years, not accounting for scenarios of water scarcity.
• The present monsoon season is unfolding as deficient, with rainfall measuring more than 30 percent below the usual levels.
• In particular, the months of August and September, within the four-month monsoon period that commenced in June, have experienced the lowest rainfall in Karnataka in 123 years.

How the Current Crisis Has Unfolded?

• Karnataka's Reduced Water Release: Per the 2018 Supreme Court verdict, Karnataka is obligated to release 123.14 TMC (Thousand Million Cubic Feet) of water to Tamil Nadu between June and September during a normal monsoon year.
• For August and September in a typical monsoon season, Karnataka should release a combined total of 82.71 TMC.
• However, this year, Karnataka had only released 40 TMC of water by September 23, citing an ongoing distress situation in the state.
• Tamil Nadu's Engagement with CWMA: In August, Tamil Nadu turned to the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) to ensure regular water supplies.
• The Cauvery Water Regulatory Committee (CWRC), functioning under the CWMA, noted that rainfall in the Cauvery basin in Karnataka was 26 percent below normal by early August.
• The committee also observed that Karnataka had only released 30.252 TMC of water from June 1 to August 28, far less than the usual 80.451 TMC in a typical year.
• CWMA's Decision: In accordance with the committee's advice, the CWMA initially ordered the release of approximately 13 TMC of water for 15 days at a rate of 12,000 cubic feet per second (cusecs) per day, despite Tamil Nadu's request for 25,000 cusecs per day.
• Subsequently, after reviewing the monsoon situation once more, the CWRC and CWMA decreased Karnataka's water release to 5,000 cusecs per day, while Tamil Nadu sought 12,000 cusecs.
• Supreme Court's Verdict on CWMA's Decision: Both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka appealed to the Supreme Court to contest the CWMA's orders.
• However, the Supreme Court upheld the release of 5,000 cusecs of water until September 26.
• The Karnataka government has stated its intention to adhere to the Supreme Court's order until September 26 and then reassess the situation.

Karnataka's Arguments:

• Reliance on Southwest Monsoon: Karnataka contends that Tamil Nadu predominantly receives its significant rainfall during the retreating northeast monsoon period, typically occurring between October and November.
• In contrast, Karnataka heavily depends on rainfall during the southwest monsoon months from June to September.
• Protesters argue that water is being directed to Tamil Nadu as the southwest monsoon season nears its end, resulting in critically low storage levels in the Cauvery basin reservoirs in Karnataka.
• The Cauvery River serves as the primary source of drinking water for Bengaluru and for irrigation purposes in the Mandya region of the state.
• Mekedatu Check Dam Project Implementation: The Karnataka government is advocating for the execution of the Mekedatu Check Dam project on the Cauvery River.
• This project is designed to serve as a reservoir for Bengaluru's drinking water needs and to release surplus water to Tamil Nadu during crisis situations, such as the current one.

The Storage Status of Cauvery Basin Reservoirs in Karnataka:

• As of September 23, the four reservoirs located in the Cauvery basin – Krishna Raja Sagar, Kabini, Hemavathy, and Harangi – were at 50% of their storage capacity.
• Collectively, these reservoirs held 51.1 TMC (Thousand Million Cubic Feet) of water, compared to their total capacity of 104.5 TMC.
• According to the Karnataka government, the state's water requirements are estimated at 112 TMC (79 TMC for crop irrigation and 33 TMC for supplying Bengaluru's drinking water needs) until June 2024.
• Given that the southwest monsoon season in Karnataka is concluding, the Karnataka government asserts that the remaining water in the Cauvery basin reservoirs must be preserved for essential drinking water and agricultural irrigation purposes.

Is the Current Situation Unique?

• The current Cauvery water crisis bears similarities to previous crises that occurred in 1991, 2002, 2012, and 2016.
• What sets this crisis apart is that it has arisen after the Supreme Court's final resolution of the dispute in 2018.
• Furthermore, historical protests related to the Cauvery issue have sometimes escalated into violence, often driven by mainstream political parties attempting to gain favor with voters by adopting chauvinistic stances.
• In recent years, however, Karnataka's politicians have adopted a more conciliatory approach.
• Notably, in the Mandya region, farmers have shifted towards cultivating less water-intensive crops, and younger generations are increasingly moving away from agriculture.
• As a result, the Cauvery issue is no longer as emotionally charged as it was three decades ago.

In Conclusion

• The Cauvery River, often referred to as the 'Dakshina Ganga,' has long been recognized as the economic lifeline of the states it traverses, with its most significant impact being felt in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
• Although the contest over Cauvery's waters can be traced back to the 11th century AD, contemporary Tamil Nadu and Karnataka have grappled with disagreements regarding the sharing of Cauvery's waters.
• It is imperative for the states to shift away from a regional-centric approach and embrace cooperation and coordination as genuine solutions, transcending conflicts for the benefit of all.

Mains Question:

• How has the Cauvery River played a pivotal role in the economic development of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, and what are the contemporary challenges and potential cooperative solutions in managing its water resources? (15M)