RESERVATION IN PRIVATE SECTOR

RESERVATION IN PRIVATE SECTOR, RATIONALE, FEASIBILITY AND IMPLICATIONS.

INTRODUCTION: After the turmoil and student agitation witnessed in Mandal years the issue of reservation like phoenix has risen again from its ashes, in its new avatar of reservation for SC/ST and other weaker sections in the private sector. The common minimum programme of the incumbent united progressive alliance (UPA) government lays special emphasis on it.

BACKGROUND and RATIONALE: The issue of reservation in general, is deeply related with the aim of ensuring social justice, which is enshrined as an objective in the preamble to the Indian Constitution. The principle of social or distributive justice derives its legitimacy from the basic human right of equality of opportunity. But the problem is that there are inbuilt discriminations and biases in the society, with certain sections of population (for example, blacks in US and dalits in India) being historically marginalized and discriminated. Hence to ensure true equality of opportunity, one has to ensure equality of outcome as well. Providing quotas or reservation for jobs is one prominent way of ensuring this equality of outcome. The Indian Constitution under Articles 14,15 and 16 (they pertain to fundamental rights) puts the onus on the legislature and executive to frame laws and to take suitable administrative measures respectively. The aim is to ensure that social and economic interests of weaker sections are taken care of. One of such measures is reservation or protective discrimination.

Initially the reservation was meant only for SC/ST and for a limited period. But gradually the time period was subsequently extended time and again. Besides, other backward castes [OBCs] were also brought into the ambit of reservation. Consequently percentage of reservation in government professional institutes and public sector went on increasing. The culmination of this process occurred in 1989. The then Union Government headed by V.P Singh decided to implement the recommendations of Mandal commission. In some states like Tamil Nadu the cumulative reservation went as high as 75%. This led to a nationwide unrest, strikes and violent protests by student community and a spate of litigation. All these cases were combined by Supreme Court under one case (INDRA SAWHNEY Vs UNION OF INDIA, 1993).

In the final judgment of this infamous case the apex court held that under no circumstances total reservation for government jobs, both at the Centre and states shall exceed 50%. This will lead to serious compromise in merit of deserving candidates.

So, as of now, their exists a status quo of maximum 50% reservation, with 27% for OBC 15% for SC and 7 % for ST. Since then, there has been new demands, like reservation for economically backward but otherwise upper castes in Rajasthan. But the proverbial storm in the teacup has been caused by the emphasis placed on reservation in private sector by the common minimum programme of the incumbent UPA government. Besides cabinet ministers like Ram Vilas Paswan has taken a strong stance publicly in its favour. Marxists like D. Raja also whole-heartedly support the principle. Dalit activists and intellectuals like Kancha Illiah and Gail Omdvedt first voiced the issue at the forum of Bhopal declaration in 2002.

FEASIBILITY and IMPLICATIONS. Although, the main opposition party, BJP has not revealed its cards on the issue, but the political compulsions in front of it won't allow it to take a radical anti reservation stance. With political consensus, not that difficult to achieve, a simple act of parliament can legally enforce it. A formal constitutional amendment would not be required. Whether subsequent legal challenges and suits that are likely to follow will find a sympathetic ear in Supreme Court is a matter of speculation.

Before coming on to implications a bird's eye view of the major arguments in favour and opposition of reservation in general and reservation in private sector in particular is essential.

Arguments in favour:
1. Reservation is a potent instrument to rectify the historic discrimination and prejudice that has been meted out to weaker sections since ages.
2. It is in consonance with the principle of social justice, which is a vital constitutional aim.
3. Centuries of social and economic deprivation cause cognitive and intellectual decline as well. So, they have to face an inbuilt cognitive handicap, besides motivational problems, if they have to compete in an open merit based competition.
4. Society in general, and upper castes in particular, have a moral obligation to compensate weaker sections because they have progressed by exploiting marginalized sections.
5. There is no other practically viable alternative other than reservation.
6. A significant proportion of population (50%) is socially deprived.

Arguments against:
1. Gurcharan Das, former CEO, Procter & Gamble (India) strongly oppose it. He is of the view that it legitimizes demerit. Even N R Narayana Murthy (chief mentor, Infosys) also agrees with him and holds that, "India is the only nation where people vie to label them backwards and not forwards".
2. Besides merit, efficiency will be the greatest casualty. The effect is more pronounced in private sector, who's USP (unique selling proposition) is efficiency. Further it neither have the resources nor social objectives of PSUs(public sector undertaking) Even now there is a dearth of competent, efficient personnel.
3. In the ensuing LPG (liberalization, privatization and globalization) regime. How shall the Indian companies compete with their foreign counterparts with a major handicap? Further can MNCs be forced to follow the same path? Won't it violate WTO norms?
4. The past experience in government sector has shown that reservation is an inefficient means to achieve social justice. It merely ends up creating an elite pool of creamy layer, without reaching the truly deserving.
5. Even on theoretical grounds, the discrimination is a pathological concept. Whether the earlier edition of negative or the new edition of positive. It creates a dependent personality. Further the aim is not to integrate but still discriminate although positively.

Lastly, it should be borne in mind that such attempts may accentuate an already divided society. Further doesn't such efforts go against the spirit of free trade and Laissez Faire, to which India has committed itself, under WTO obligations?

Won't it lead to a flight of foreign capital because MNCs when pressed to enforce reservation may decide to look for alternative destinations.
All these are significant questions that merit serious debate before a final decision is reached.

It should be clearly borne in mind that social justice is definitely a cherished goal, but reservation should be seen as a means towards the end of achieving social justice. It shouldn't become an end in itself!

Related Posts by Categories

Widget by Blogger Templates