cover image: Legislative Assembly Debates. Tuesday  14th February  1933. Official Report

Premium

20.500.12592/5nd0xc

Legislative Assembly Debates. Tuesday 14th February 1933. Official Report

1933

It may be the case that the reduction of the periods in such cases in the manner proposed by the Commission would be to the advantage of workmen but that is question on which we feel that it is necessary to secure the views of both employers and workmen. [...] Then as regards the principle cf the deduction from the wages of workmen I hold a different view to the view expressed by the majority of the Members of the Royal Commission. [...] If losses are caused do we ask the Members of the Railway Board or the Member in charge of the Railways in the Goverment of India to pay for the losses sustained by the country? [...] I L am not therefore in favour of allowing the employers to make any deductions from the wages of workmen on account of the losses which are said to be sustained by the employers on account of the bad workmanship of the employees. [...] No explanation whatsoever for this extraordinary exclusion of these three Universities from the First Schedule is to be found either in the 'Note' on the various clauses to the Bill or in the covering letter of the Secretary to the Government (Department of Education Health and Lands) explaining the scope of the Bill.
government politics public policy
Pages
60
Published in
India
SARF Document ID
sarf.100003
Segment Pages Author Actions
Frontmatter
i-i unknown view
Legislative Assembly
609-667 unknown view