212 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Sir, taking the Bill clause by clause : Clause 2 of the Bill seeks to make certain amendments in the definition of the word “wages”. I do not wish to weary the House by repeating seriatim the defects which different parties to the Bill have suggested that they have found in the present definition of the word ‘wages’ as it stands. But I might mention some important ones. It has been said in a judicial decision given by the High Court of Bombay that the present definition of “wages” is so drafted that it is possible for a workman not only to claim wages which he has earned but also wages which might be called potential wages-wages which he might cam. That certainly was not the intention of the original measure. Another defect which has been suggested with regard to this definition is that it allows a workman employed on the outturn basis to claim wages irrespective of his outturn. It has been suggested that there is a confusion in the definition which does not quite distinguish the case of a workman employed on a time basis and a workman employed on outturn basis. It has also been suggested in certain quarters that some of the words which now occur in the definition are superfluous, that they need not be there and that their presence only causes confusion. I might refer to the words “includes any bonus or additional remuneration of the nature aforesaid which would be so payable”. It has been suggested to us that these words may not have any meaning other than the one which is already included in the previous part of this definition. It has also been suggested that while the definition of “wages” was adequate before the system of dearness allowance brought about by the war came into existence, the definition today is inadequate because it is open for an employer to argue that the dearness allowance is not part of wages.
Now, the definition that we have suggested in the amending Bill seeks to remove all these difficulties. It seems to make the definition simple. I ought to tell the House that I am myself not very confident that the draft, as it stands in the amending Bill, carries out the intention which lies behind this original Act. I do not regard the definition which we have proposed as sacrosanct and if the members of the Select Committee are able to suggest a better one I should certainly raise no objection to the further amendment of the definition as it now stands in the amending Bill.