REJECTION OF.......RETRENCHMENT 315
in mind the facts I have disclosed, he would himself voluntarily withdraw the statement that he made that the Labour Member was fiddling. I certainly was not.
Then let me come to the other side of the question. It is true that under the Defence of India Act, the Government does possess the power to appoint an arbitrator under rule 81 of the Defence of India Act. But I think it is only fair to mention that although this is an emergency legislation, we are not altogether precluded from observing such canons of judicial consideration from exercising the powers that we possess under rule 81, that is, arbitration. For the purposes of arbitration we must have a dispute in existence. As I have said, at the present moment there is no dispute ; the matter is under consideration. Secondly, before any adjudication is made, we must be satisfied that the dispute relates to terms and conditions of employment—for instance, that the dispute relates to hours of work, to wages, and to points of that kind. What is the point that is at dispute between the Railway Department and the Indian Railwaymen’s Federation ? I am sorry to say that the Railwaymen’s Federation has certainly not conducted its case in the way in which it ought to have conducted it. They have certainly have gone and done a great deal of harm to themselves. The point, I would like to make in this connection is this—what is the point on which the Railwaymen’s Federation is stressing all through ? Is it a point that relates to hours of labour ? Is it a point that relates to wages ? I say definitely that the points of dispute do not relate to either of these two points. It is quite true that the Railwaymen’s Federation has passed a number of resolutions many of which refer to hours of work and to conditions of labour. But we have got to make a distinction between what are called fundamental points of dispute and points which are merely tagged on. If one were to examine the resolution that has been passed by the Railwaymen’s Federation, we find that the gravamen of their complaint is that the railways shall not reduce a single workman. Questions relating to hours of labour and questions relating to wages are just tagged on—they are not the points of difference. In order to substantiate what I am saying, the fundamental point of dispute between the railways and the Indian Federation of Railwaymen is the question of retrenchment, the question is as to how many persons will be