about archives

Vvgnli

Ailh

Publications

Research Projects

Research Partners

Archival Sources

Acknowledgements

Events

Contact Us

Home Web Survey Search  Collection Map    

Wage Structure and Labour:

Assam Valley Tea Plantations, 1900-1947

(Rana Partap Behal)

(Rana Pratap Behal is with Deshbandhu College, Delhi University, Delhi. The author is grateful to Prabhu Mohapatra and Babu P. Remesh for their valuable suggestions, which helped in revising an earlier draft of this paper.)

Preface

In July 1998, a new research programme, Integrated Labour History Research Programme (ILHRP), was initiated at the V.V.Giri National Labour Institute, in collaboration with the Association of Indian Labour Historians (AILH). The programme envisaged the establishment of an apex repository of labour history documents, an Archive of Indian Labour History, with special emphasis on digital storage and retrieval. Alongside this, it was felt that there is need to encourage substantive research on the neglected areas of labour history. A specialised programme, Writing Labour History was designed in 1999 to encourage historical research on labour. A first step in this direction was the commissioning of a series of thematic essays by renowned scholars in the field, covering a wide range of issues. The essays were discussed and presented at two workshops held in January 1999 and January 2000. Dr. Rana Behal’s essay, `Wage Structure and Labour: Assam Valley Tea Plantations, 1900-1947’, belongs to this series. 

Plantation Industry in India is an enduring legacy of the colonial period, which was initiated in the early 19th century, with the establishment of indigo plantations. Gradually several new commodities came to form the staple of Indian exports in the 19th century. Tea plantations were established in Assam in 1834 and rapidly grew in size and value to become the major exporting Industry of India. At its height, not less than a million workers were employed in the Tea plantations of Assam, Darjeeling,Bengal Dooars and in the Western Ghats of South India. The labour force to these remote regions were imported over a long distance and were employed under stipulated contractual provisions regulating wages and working conditions under a severe work regime. The history of labour relations developed under the force of the incessant drive to increase production under global economic pressures is a fascinating part of Indian labour history. Many scholars argue that the Plantation employment conditions provided a model for development of the broader industrial relations regime in the colonial period.

By its sheer size and spread plantations have deeply imprinted themselves on the labour landscape of India and the patterns developed in the colonial period continue to influence the structure of labour relations long after Independence even with major changes in the pattern of ownership and various welfare measures of the Government of India.  A key feature of the Plantation industry was the strict control over the wage component as it formed a large part of the cost of production. This was necessitated largely by the fluctuations in the international demand and consequent price instability. These relations had direct effect on the living condition of the largely immigrant labour force.

Rana Behal’s study takes up the case of the Assam tea plantations and specially the relation of the wage structure of the industry with various indices of workers’ living standards. This is a little understood area of labour history of the plantation and the author makes a valuable contribution to this area. The structuring of the wage relations and constant struggle of the workers to defend their living standards form the core of this study.  There is perhaps an important lesson to be derived from this study specially for the present times when the tea industry under the pressure of increasing globalisation is leading towards closure of gardens and, consequently, job loss to a large number of workers.

I hope that scholars and practitioners working in the area of labour history in general and plantation labour in particular would find this essay useful.

Uday Kumar Varma

Director

  I

Tea plantations have been the major employer of wage labour in Assam Valley for nearly one and a half century. Majority of its labour force was by nature immigrant recruited from various parts of British India. Its spectacular expansion during the nineteenth century was followed by a steady growth in the twentieth century.  In 1947 the three major tea producing districts of Assam Valley (or Brahmputra Valley) viz., Lakhimpur, Sibsagar end Darrang: had a labour population of nearly three quarters of a million.  This represented an increase of nearly 116 per cent from the figures of 1900. The total daily working strength of labour force (both permanent and temporary) in the above districts increased from 289,920 in 1900 to 394,799 in 1947.1

In this paper I shall analyse the nature of wage structure in the Assam Valley tea plantations during 1900 and 1947.  Most of the wage data used here relate to the three districts of Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang.  Methodologically the analysis shall proceed in the following manner. Section I critically surveys the official methods of collection and compilation of wage data in order to highlight its severe limitations and the constraints encountered while analysing the wage trends, etc.  In section II I have attempted a critical examination of the employers' claims of fair wage and comfortable living conditions of labour in the tea plantations.  In this context the nature of the mode of payment, differentiation in wages and wage incentives have been examined.  I also discuss the implications of 'concessions' like land grants to labourers for private cultivation, subsidised rations and 'bonus'. In section III I have tried, within the limits set by the data, to construct a price index in order to get an idea of the trends in nominal and real wages.  Finally in section IV I discuss the conditions of living of the plantation labourers.

In this section we shall critically survey the source material and the quantitative data on wages in the Assam Valley tea gardens. The most important source of information is the annual reports on the emigrant labour published by the Government of Assam till 1933.  From 1934 onwards these reports were published by the office of the Controller of Emigrant Labour which had been constituted under the Tea District Emigrant Labour Act XXII of 1932. These reports contained, apart from other information regarding the emigrant labour in the province, the figures of average monthly earnings of different categories of labour in various tea districts for each year. For example, there are separate figures of average monthly earnings of men and women under the category of Act labour.2 In the second category came the average monthly earnings of Non-Act labour with separate figures for men, women and children in each district.3  With the repeal of Act XIII of 1859 in 1925 and Act VI of 1901 in 1932 the above two categories disappeared. From 1934 onward, when the newly passed Tea District Emigrant Labour Act (XXII of 1932) came into effect, the wage figures were published under two different categories viz., settled labour and faltu or basti labour.4 Under both these categories average monthly wage figures of men, women and children were published separately for each district every year.

First I shall discuss the methods of collection and compilation of wage statistics of the Act and Non-Act categories. This statistical information had been originally compiled by the district officials out of the wage returns submitted by the planters to the government. The district officials worked out average monthly earnings of each category of labour for each district from these returns to be published in the annual reports. At this point there is an important question to be asked: to what extent do these figures represent the actual earnings of the labour force in the tea gardens?  Apparently the rules of labour law had been strictly followed. But a closer scrutiny of the methods of collection and compilation of the wage statistics shows major flaws making their accuracy highly suspect.

In the first place, the district officials compiled the averages out of the statistical information submitted by the planters without any system of ascertaining their accuracy even when it was well known that the latter often did not provide correct information.5 Thought it was a violation of the provisions of labour laws the government never reprimanded the planters for concealing the actual earnings of labour and for providing inflated figures. Nor was any attempt made to establish any government agency, which could collect this information independently or regularly check the accuracy of the returns submitted by planters.  Similar situation existed with regard to the data on vital statistics concerning the tea garden labour in the province. The planters submitted statistical on labour mortality in their respective estates.  This information was often not correct (as we shall show later) but, as the Controller of Emigrant Labour admitted, there was no government agency for the registra­tion of births and deaths in tea gardens.6

Besides, the planters submitted the returns in an arbitrary manner.  For example, until 1905-06 the wage returns were submitted only for the last six months of the year.  Therefore, the yearly average of the monthly earnings were calculated on the basis of last six months' returns and not on the basis of twelve months' earnings.7  This was especially misleading because the last six months of the year included the peak season of work during which the earnings of labour were higher compared to the slack period. After 1905-06 this practice was discarded. Now the yearly averages of monthly earnings were worked out on the basis of figures for two months only i.e., March and September. This practice was followed both in case of Act and Non-Act labour.  The argument in defense of such a practice was that March and September represented the slack and peak periods respectively.  This again was an arbitrary method. While it is true that these two months fall in the slack and peak period, it does not necessarily follow that the earnings of the labour during these two months were also the lowest and highest in the year.  Moreover, no record of the original wage returns was maintained. The district officials were instructed to destroy all the original returns of the wages immediately after the compilation of yearly average had been completed.8 Thus any possibility of a cross examination of officially published time series was also destroyed.

There is another problem with regard to the accuracy of the above wage statistics.  The planters' supporters and some other official reports claimed that the labourers supplemented their cash earnings through ticca work and other forms of concessions which they were required to give under the labour laws.9 This implies that the wage figures published in Assam Government's annual reports did not represent the actual earnings but only the cash earnings excluding the supplementary income.  On the contrary, however, all the annual reports on emigrant labour in Assam, invariably pointed out that the wage figures represented "average monthly cash wages including ticca, subsistence allowances, value of diet or rations provided in lieu of wages or subsistence allowances" in the case of both Act and non-Act labour.10   Thus it appears that these average monthly wage figures represented more than the cash earnings i.e., it included the value of most 'concessions' the planters were supposed to have provided the labour force as well as the part-time or overtime earnings in the form of ticca work.

The fourth difficulty in determining the accuracy of wage statistics arises from the two different sets of figures published under the heading of 'monthly average earnings' in the Assam labour reports. Both sets of figures are published under further sub-headings: (a) calculated on the basis of total number of labourers on the gardens books; (b) calculated on the basis of daily working strength.11 The figures in set (a) were calculated by dividing the total wage payment with the total number of labour on the books during the above two months.  And in the case of set (b) the figures were calculated by dividing the total wage payment with the daily working strength of the labour force during the same two months in each year.  The figures in set (a) are lower compared to the figures in set (b).  But the reports did not make it clear as to which set presented the actual earnings of the labour force. And from 1925-26 onwards the reports only published the figures given in set (b). Given the fact that plantations experienced a very high rate of absenteeism (nearly 25 per cent) the figures in set (b) could not be taken as representing actual earnings.12 These figures simply represented what a labour would earn if he or she had worked on every single day of the month.  

In 1933 serious objection was raised against this erroneous practice by Mr Lee, the newly appointed Controller of Emigrant Labour. In his confidential report to the Government of India he pointed out that the wage statistics published in the annual reports of Government of Assam were 'misleading'.  In his opinion only the wage figures earlier published under set (a) represented the actual earnings of labour  which were less compared to the set (b).13 In his reply Mr Clow, a senior official in the Department of Industry and Labour, Government of India agreed with the Controller of Emigrant Labour that "the present method of calculating the average monthly cash earnings is open to serious objection as the figures do not represent what they purport to represent and are definitely misleading”. But the government was not in favour of publishing the substitute figures of average monthly earnings calculated on the basis of total number of labour on the garden books.  The reason given for this was that it will show a big drop in the figures of average earnings which "might be misinterpreted by the public”.14  Instead it was suggested that the present figures in set (b) should be substituted by the average amount earned by a labourer in a day's work.  This could be obtained by dividing the total wage payment by the number of working days. "This will not lend itself to misleading comparisons, and it would give a figure representing something real, whereas the present figures represent something that borders on the imaginary."15  However, the Emigrant Labour reports published three sets of figures, which included the former two sets of figures as well as the figures representing average daily earnings of all categories of labour. Unfortunately most other sources which published the figures of average monthly earnings of tea labour simply reproduced the figures from Assam Labour Reports. For example, the annual reports on production of tea (1900-1929) and the Indian Tea Statistics (1930-1946) reproduced the provincial averages of monthly earnings which were originally published in the Assam Labour Reports respectively. Similarly, Rege's report in 1946 also reproduced the wage figures published in the latter sources. The same practice was repeated in the Indian Labour Year Books.

Deshpande's report (1948), however, adopted a completely different method of calculating (based on data collected through sample survey) weakly average earnings and expenses of tea garden labour families in Assam. In Assam Valley 560 family budgets of labour out of twenty gardens were selected for tabulation.16  The average size of the family was determined at 4.15 persons including earning and non-earning members (men, women and children). Out of these the number of earning persons was 2.44 and 1.71 were dependends.17 While calculating the weekly family income of tea garden labour Deshpande included wages, ticca earnings, dearness allowance, bonus, money value of  concessions and income from other sources like land, etc.18 Using this method the Enquiry Committee calculated the weekly income earned by 2.44 persons (of an average family of 4.15 persons) as Rs.10.82.19 As compared to this the nominal wages of two adult (man and woman) and a child works out to be Rs. 8.42 per week (the averages of three districts combined) for 1947.  This figure also includes the value of concessions and ticca earnings.20 Thus Deshpande's estimated figure is 22 per cent higher compared to the figure worked out from the official time series. Two factors are responsible for this.  First the money value of concessions and, second, dearness allowance. The assumption behind the first seems to be that all labourers received full concessions. This is not entirely correct as we shall show later. It was clear from the inspection reports of the district officials that 'sickness allowance', 'subsistence rations' and 'bonus' did not always functioned as concessions.  Secondly, the dearness allowance was officially introduced only in February, 1947.21  However from the past experience of antipathy of planters towards provisions regarding labour welfare in the law it would be too optimistic to expect them to have implemented the dearness allowance clause immediately. The fact that the official annual report of the Controller of Emigrant Labour did not include this in its published wage figures for 1947 strengthens our argument. Moreover, the dearness allowance and the money value of concessions constituted nearly 41 per cent of the total weekly earnings of a labour family in Deshpande's calculations.22   Deshpande accepted that 41 per cent of the total wages were actually earned in kind by a labour family.  This appears to be a very high figure in the light of the evidence (shown below in section II) available in the inspection reports of the district officials which render such claims of concessions highly suspect.

There is only one set of separate wage figures available outside the above source which in our view fairly represents the average monthly earnings of the labour force. This set of figures are available only for the year 1900 and 1901 and were reported in the unpublished inspection reports conducted by the district officials in some of the tea districts in Assam Valley.  These figures were collected and compiled out of the original books maintained in the planters' offices in the tea estates by the inspecting officials. Unfortunately, we have not come across any other such report for the rest of the period of our study.

These figures show that wages earned by the labour in the inspected tea estates were much lower compared to those published in Assam Labour Reports of 1900 and 1901. For example the yearly average monthly earnings (based on figures for 12 months during 1900) of labour in Latabari Tea Estate of Sibsagar district were Rs. 3.48 and Rs. 2.74 for men and women respectively.23 Compared to this the wage figures published in the official time series for the corresponding year were much higher, i.e. Rs. 5.38,  Rs. 5.30 and Rs.4.89 per men, Rs. 4.07, Rs.4.06 and Rs.3.92 for women in Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.24  Similarly the yearly average of monthly earnings (based on the figures of January and June, 1901) of non-Act labourers in Sadhrugope, Shakemato and Aberdeen tea estates (Darrang) were Rs.3.54, Rs.1.96 and Rs.1.30 for men, women and children respectively.25  Comparatively the figures of monthly earnings for the yearly average of the corresponding year in the official time series were higher, i.e. Rs. 5.27, Rs. 5.31 and Rs.5.06 for Men, Rs. 3.57, Rs.3.78 and Rs.3.56 for women and Rs.2.23, Rs. 2.46 and Rs. 2.44 for children in Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.26

Following the above arguments about the limitation of wage data published in the Assam Government reports on emigrant labour and on the basis of its comparison with the figures given in the inspection reports for the corresponding years (1900-1901) we put forward our main proposition: that the data published in both set (a) and (b) in Assam Labour Reports represented inflated figures of average monthly earnings for each year.  Our contention is based on the following arguments:

Under the prevailing laws for the emigrant labour in Assam the planters were required to pay a minimum fixed rate of wage to their labour force. But in the pre-1900 period the wages paid to the labour were generally below the statutory minimum rates of Rs, 5.00 and Rs.400 for men and women respectively.27 The respective Chief Commissioners, however, chose to ignore this obvious breach of the labour law. When Henry Cotton suggested a raise in the wages of tea labour, his major argument in support of his recommendation were the above facts: "The accuracy of the statements of figures given in the Provincial Immigration Annual Reports, obtained from the employers' accounts, is perhaps open to question, and there is reason to believe that the average returned in recent years are in excess of the wages actually paid”.28

The bitter public controversy which took place between Cotton and the planters over the question of wages during his tenure as the Chief Commissioner of Assam made the planters somewhat cautious.29  Hence the necessity to publish inflated wage figures which would conform with the statutory minimum rates instead of actually paying stipulated wages. This was successfully achieved by adopting arbitrary methods of collection and compilation of wage returns.  This could not have been done without the sanction and active support of the colonial bureaucracy.

II

The general impression of the material conditions of labour in the Assam tea plantations projected by the planters and the colonial state was one of 'comfort' and 'well-being'. This impression was reinforced by claims that labour was paid well enough not only to live in 'comfort' but also even to save.  For example, the Assam Labour Enquiry Committee in 1906 wrote: "on the whole the wages paid to the labourers are sufficient to keep them in comfort, and even to enable them with the practice of a little thrift to save money". 30   The picture painted of the permanently settled labour was even rosier. It was claimed that the object of such emigrants was not, as a rule, to save money but rather to lead a 'pleasant' life. The emigrants of aboriginal stock were specifically mentioned as belonging to this category. "He works enough to provide himself with food and clothing and a few luxuries, and if he has any surplus cash, he spends a good deal of it in drinking, gambling, and cockfighting. The standard of living of the ordinary coolie is certainly much in advance of what it would be in his own country... In addition to the ordinary supplies, fowls, ducks, and fish are largely bought, and there is a general air of prosperity about the holiday making crowd, which is convincing poof that the coolie is fairly well off in his new home".31 It was further pointed out that the cash wage did not represent the total earnings of the labour, since it was supplemented by grants of cultivable land, either free or for nominal payments, as well as by the provision of cheap subsidised rice during certain periods.32  Mr. Buckingham, a representative of planters in the Central Legislative Council, had provided a longer list of such supplementary sources of income by including in this category medical comforts, sickness allowances, free diet for sick 'coolies', free housing, firewood, etc.33

Another factor supposedly contributing to the 'prosperity' and 'luxurious' living of tea garden labour was said to be the much higher "family-wage" as compared to the individual earnings. It was asserted for purposes of comparison, that plantations, by employing men, women and children afforded the labouring family a much higher 'family-wage' than in other major industries in the organised sector.34   In the plantations, therefore, there were "comparatively few non-working dependents in a working class family. The effect of this on the standard of living is important, for, even with low individual earnings, the total family income is sufficiently high to prevent the worker from feeling the pinch of poverty." 35

In addition to the "concessions" and "family-wage", ticca (over-time) earnings were considered to be yet another source of income, it was said, because the standard daily wage, hariza, was fixed with regard to the daily task, nirikh, which it was claimed could be completed in four to five hours.36 After the completion of this daily task the labour had the 'liberty' to undertake ticca work. 37

In order to examine the validity of these claims it is essential to analyse the different features of the wage structure in the Assam Valley tea plantations. Foremost amongst these was the fact that the foundations of the wage structure lay in the indenture system.38   Under this system labour was bound to the gardens for a period of 5 years on the basis of a fixed rate of payment.  The wage-rate was fixed by the employers and thrust upon the labour. Even more crucial was the fact that planters, in the period when the industry grew rapidly and became highly organised, also managed to build a mechanism for controlling labour mobility within the tea districts.  The Indian Tea Association successfully enforced what came to be known as the "wage agreement" (an agreement between the employers themselves) which functioned as an effective constraint on labour mobility. Under the provisions of the "wage agreement" every employer agreed not to pay labour wages higher than those paid by his neighbours.39 In other words the "wage agreement" imposed uniformity in wages and drastically weakened the power of labour to secure better wages or working conditions.40 At the same time, the planters through their use extra-legal authority, successfully checked the emergence of any labour organization.41 This put labour in a truly helpless position vis-a-vis the employers in the tea gardens. Even the Royal Commission, though not objecting to the "wage agreement", pointed out that "workers suffer owing to the absence of any organisation on their side to counteract the powerful combination of their employers."42

Another important feature was that the wage payments were made under two distinct systems, i.e., (1) the hariza and ticca system, and (2) the unit system. The wages of tea garden labour were generally piece-work earnings depending upon the quantity and quality of the work turned out. Whether expressed in terms of a daily or a monthly wage, they were contingent upon the execution of a standard daily task or nirikh, the payment for which was known as hazira.  The labourer who completed the full nirikh on each working day of the month was entitled to receive the monthly wage.43 Only after completing the daily task was a labourer entitled to earn ticca earnings. The Assam Enquiry Committee of 1921-22 expressed its doubts in this regard: "There are obvious limitations to the possibilities of ticca earnings. The rule of the maximum efficiency at the minimum cost holds good in tea gardens as in other industries."44 In 1946 Rege reported that" ticca earnings constitute a very small proportion of the total cash earnings of workers. It was found that such earnings were more in Indian-owned gardens, which are generally short of labour and therefore offer more ticca to their labourers."45 The unit system, a modified version of hazira and ticca system, was a later innovation. Under this system the payment was made for each unit of work done which, in the case of hoeing and pruning, was based on the one-anna unit and, in the case of plucking, on the one-pice unit.46

One major flaw in both these modes of wage payments was the fact that while the daily task was linked with the fixed minimum statutory wage, the volume of work per unit or per nirikh was decided by the employers. This was conceded by Sir Charles Rivaz (a member of the Select Committee constituted by Viceroy Curzon to go into the question of wages of tea garden labourers in Assam) when he pointed out that the "system of minimum wage-rate was contingent upon the condition of a daily task, the regulation of which is practically in the hands of the employer."47 The total inability of labour to bargain because of their lack of any organisation was compounded by the complete absence of even a nominal legislative check on the regulation of the daily task. This gave the employers a free hand to use the hazira and unit system for exacting maximum work for a fixed minimum wage. We know, for instance, that through the arbitrary use of their extraordinary powers, the managers in the tea estates generally assigned so heavy a task that the labourers often took more than one day to finish it.  This was revealed in December 1900 by an inspection committee which reported on a Sibsagar tea garden, "From the nature of the work... coolies, especially women, would have to work very hard to earn a full haziri and a glance at the haziri books will show that it seems almost impossible for a great number of men and women to be able to earn anything like a full day's pay. The number of fractional haziris far exceed the full one.”48

Moreover, the balance was further weighted in favour of the planters by the fact that it was left to managers to determine whether the labourers had done the full day's work.  The civil surgeon of Sibsagar district observed from the garden books in 1899: "it may be noticed that a system of quarter haziris seems to have been started. This means that because the manager decides that only a quarter has been done, only a quarter of a full day's salary is to be paid.  Similarly, regarding a particular month, he reported, "fractional haziris preponderate in this month and not a single full wage has been earned by men and only one by a woman."  There were few labourers in 1899 who earned their full haziri.49 Sir Charles Rivaz, after examining some of the garden books remarked, "the practice of strictly enforcing the daily task and of keeping down the labour bill by method of fractional haziri, that is, of paying half or three quarters wages for short tasks, has grown of late years”.50    Clearly, daily task fixed by the managers was excessive and it was one of the major complaints of labourers in a large number of strikes which took place in the Assam Valley gardens during the late 1930s.51

The wage data published in the annual official reports, do not reflect any significant wage differentiation. This was perhaps a consequence of the "wage agreement" and "labour rules."  The Royal Commission termed its effects as "standardisation."  "Each planter fixes his own piece rates, but in so doing, regard is paid to the agreement arrived at by the Committee in order that the wages of his employees may not be appreciably higher than the agreed level."52 Another factor responsible for this was the statutory minimum fixed wage rates under the indenture system. Finally, the labour intensive tea plantation industry utilising limited technology did not generate a wide range of specialisation that would require various levels of skilled work which in turn would have affected the structure of wages.

Nevertheless within this "standardised" or "uniform" framework there were variations, though very limited, in wage rates between Act and Non-Act labour, and between men, women and children. In the case of the Act and Non-Act labour the officially published statistics show higher figures for the latter.  The official explanation for this are the following: (i) that the non-Act labour was free labour, i.e., they were earlier working as Act labour and, after the expiry of their contract, they re-employed themselves as non-Act labour; (ii) since these labourers were experienced and acclimatised to the conditions on the plantations, they were employed in better paid jobs; 53 and (iii) being "free labourers", the non-Act workers contracted themselves under Act XIII of 1859, because they received 'bonuses' amounting to Rs. 12 in the case of men and Rs.10 for women for each year of engagement.54

The difficulty in accepting such explanations rests on the following arguments: while the majority of non-Act labour had been contracted under Act XIII of 1859, one has to keep in mind the fact that no provisions, even nominal, were made for any kind of labour welfare or protection in this Act.  On the contrary, labour was bonded to the gardens for long periods and controlled by penal laws just as Act labour was.  Moreover, the better paid jobs were available only in the tea factories where slightly higher levels of skill were required. According to one authoritative estimate of the total labour force in a standard size tea garden only 10 per cent was employed in the tea factory.55 Obviously the bulk of the non-Act labour could not have been employed in such better paid jobs.  Here it is worth mentioning again that the non-Act labour was increasing very fast and after 1918-19 there was virtually no Act labour in Assam Valley tea plantations.  It is important to note that in terms of actual performance of work on the field there was no difference between Act and non-Act labour. The decline in the employment of Act labourers was due to the fact that Act VI of 1901 (under which most Act labourers were contracted) was no longer as useful to the employer because by 1908 its penal provisions were abolished.56

And finally, as far as the question of 'bonus' was concerned it seems that the term was loosely used in official literature. The concept of profit bonus as we understand today (labour sharing certain portion of the profits) did not exist in the tea industry till the end of the period understudy.  While answering a query from Sir Nicholas Beatson Bell, the Governor of Assam, in February, 1921 the representatives of the tea industry admitted that their labour force did not receive a bonus on profits.57   The Royal Commission also acknowledged that no such system was in force in the Assam tea industry.58

The variation between the wages of men, women and children was totally arbitrary and discriminatory. Women and children were paid less than men.  Reasons for this were never given.  The hours of work for women and children were the same as those of men.  Women, moreover, performed most types of work done by men like hoeing, pruning etc. In fact the women labour even specialised in plucking and their number was fairly large.  In peak season, it was estimated, nearly 60 per cent of the labour force consisted of women who were engaged in plucking the leaves.59   Besides, there were no complaints either in the official reports or in official histories and ITA reports of women performing less work compared to men.  Moreover the technique of production in the tea plantations did not undergo any radical changes and there was hardly any differentiation of skills which could explain the variation.  Since male and female labour worked on similar types of jobs of low skills and for the same number of hours it would appear that productivity per unit of male and female labour did not differ significantly.  Therefore, it seems that the variation between male and female wages was created purely on the basis of conventional values of sexual discri­mination.  As for the effects of this discriminatory policy, the low rate of wages for women and children served to depress the overall average rate of wages. The lowering of wage rates through such discrimination was certainly of very significant magnitude considering the fact that the employment of women and children combined, was proportionately higher than that of men.60

Grants of land made by managers, for private cultiva­tion by labour, was considered to be an important 'concession' which supplemented their earnings.61 Most of the labour reports remarked that gardens with plenty of cultivable land were 'popular' with labour. The Royal Commission remarked, "The garden worker is essentially an agriculturist and his desire for the possession of a holding which he can cultivate with the help of the members of his family is great."62 However, the labourers who were granted such lands, had to pay rent to the gardens. And, while it is true that such lands were granted by the planters to their labour force for their private cultivation, the motives claimed are suspect.  Besides, whether cultivation of such lands significantly contributed towards the extra earnings of labour has to be critically examined.

First of all, most of such grants were conditional; the labour had no occupancy right over such land and he could hold it only so long as he performed labour in the tea garden.63  The land could be taken back on "disciplinary" grounds.64 Secondly, while not every labour received land for private cultivation, the size of holdings given, was usually very small.  A study of the number of adult labour (settled) and total area held by them as tenants of the tea estates in Table 1 shows that in Lakhimpur the average land granted per worker was less than 1/3 of an acre.  In Sibsagar it fluctuated between less than 1/4 of an acre to less than 1/3 of an acre, and in Darrang between less than 1/2 of an acre to less than 1/4 of an acre.

From the limited evidence available, we have tried to work out the approximate money value of the total produce from such holdings.  The Enquiry Committee of 1921-22 estimated that between 15 to 20 maunds of paddy per acre may be taken as a fair amount of the crop in a normal year.65 For our purposes, we shall take both the highest and the lowest figure. The market price of unhusked rice for the year 1921-22 was on an average quoted at Rs.2.69 per maund.66 The total value of crop per acre for one year then works out to Rs, 53.80 (for 20 maunds) and Rs.45.35 (for 15 maunds). In that year it was reported that the labourers as tenants of the tea estates held 35, 358 acres of land in Lakhimpur, 18,012 acres in Sibsagar and 9,103 acres in Darrang.67 Compared to this there were 120, 802,  118, 155 and 69, 895 adult labourers in Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively in the same year.68 The average holding therefore, came to be less than one-third of an acre in Lakhimpur, little less than one-seventh of an acre in Sibsagar and about one-eighth of an acre in Darrang.

Table-1

Total Number of Adult Labourers (on the garden books) 

in the Tea Gardens and Total Amount of Land.  

Source:  Annual Reports on the Working of the Tea District Emigrant Labour Act (XXII of 1932) for respective years.

Note: Granted (for private cultivation) by the Planters to the Labourers in Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang. 1934-1944  

The combined average for three districts works out to be approximately one-fifth of an acre per labour in 1921-22. After deducting the yearly rent (at the rate of Rs. 1.58 per acre) the approximate money value of paddy comes to Rs.10.44 (for the highest figure) and; 7.80 (for the lowest figure) per labour during the corresponding year.69   Calculated in yearly averages, it represented about 12.7 per cent (for highest figures) and 9.46 per cent (for the lowest figures) of the yearly income of an adult labour earned in 1921-22 (this average represents all three districts).

However, these figures cannot be accepted at their face value as representing real extra income for the following reasons.  Firstly, the labour received no wages while engaged in their own cultivation because the concept of leave with pay (even on Sunday) did not exist in the gardens.70 Therefore; the wage foregone ought to be deducted. Secondly, the deduction of the cost of seeds still further lower the figure.  The Enquiry Committee of 1920-22 did not accept the argument that the cash value of crops so raised should be considered as a "concession."71

However, though private cultivation did not contribute significantly towards the total earnings of the labour force, they became increasingly dependent on such lands because of very meagre cash earnings.  It was more so during the period of rising prices of foodstuffs when the private cultivators obviously functioned as a cushion. This fact, more than anything else, perhaps explains the 'popularity' of gardens with plenty of cultivable land among labour.72

The role of other 'concessions' like sick diet and subsidised rations etc. in supplementing earnings need critical examination. There is some evidence to show that very often-sick diet and subsidised rations did not function as concessions but as a tool of indebtedness of the labour. For example, after inspecting a couple of gardens in September 1901, the Deputy Commissioner of Darrang, Captain Cole came to the conclusion that "Although the labour force appeared on the whole well nourished, it is clear that a very large proportion of them are unable to earn a living wage, and that they would inevitably starve if the management did not provide sufficient rations and enter the cost of the same as an advance against the coolie.”73 A number of similar cases from other districts were reported by the district officials where the subsidised rations given to the labourers were entered as outstanding advances against them.74

The cases of sick diet were no different. Capt. Leventon, the Civil Surgeon at Sibsagar District, reported his finding after inspecting Latabari Tea Estate to his superiors, "...in the haziri books may be found numerous cases where people who have been sick for a good part of the month, or even the full month, have the cost of the rice they drew charged against them... I have traced a good number of cases who have "S" (sick) marked a few or many times in the month, and find they owe much more at the end of the month then at the beginning, that is, if they get rice they are charged for it.  The cases of those who did not work on account of sickness and who did not get deeper into debt are very few”.75 Mr. J.C. Arbuthnott, the deputy Commissioner of Sibsagar, reported that wages in this garden were 'scandalously' low: "Comfort is hardly compatible with a starvation wage, and the condition of the labourers, which is practically that of slaves, can hardly be satisfying, except to the owners, who naturally in their own interest supply them with food while gradually increasing the debt against them, in order that the period of bondage may be interminable."76 Complaining against the Nagora Tea Estate in Sibsagar district, the Commissioner of Assan Valley wrote that "...provision S.112 of the Assam Labour and Emigration Act, that requires that subsistence allowance as sick diet shall be given to sick labourers, have been ignored by the management and that sums have been illegally debted against the coolies on this account, as well as on account of rewards paid for the arrest of labourers."77

The planters and their apologists often complained that labour in the tea gardens did not respond favourably to higher wages.  These complaints were lodged in defense of their opposition to any demand or suggestion for wage increases.  Buckingham, the representative of tea interests in the Legislative Council opposed the proposed increase in wages on the following grounds: "An increased rate of payment leads to a lesser task instead of an augumented task, the coolies taking out the balance, so to speak, in the only form of luxury which appeals to an Asiatic viz., the luxury of sitting still and doing nothing."78

There is enough evidence within the official literature on the subject which would refute the above allegation. During the inspection of Latabari Tea Estate in Sibsagar District, the Civil Surgeon, Capt. Asher Levention had found that the majority of labourers did not earn a full month's haziri (day's earnings) wage. A large number of labourers had oustanding 'advances' against their names. The manager of the estate attributed this to the 'laziness' of the labourers because they were getting enough food to live and were therefore satisfied.  Unimpressed by this explanation the inspecting official remarked: "I do not think the class of coolies on the garden a lazy type... it is impossible to believe that the whole labour force is so lazy that only a few were willing to work a full month's haziri".79 A large number of witnesses interviewed by the Assam Labour Enquiry Committee in the recruiting districts on this question were convinced that the wages and general living conditions in tea gardens were not particularly more attractive than those prevailing in mines or other industries which competed for labour recruitment in those areas.  Many of them in fact were of the opinion that both wages and working conditions were much worse than in the collieries and other industries. And therefore unwillingness on the part of many people in the recruiting districts to take up employment in Assam tea gardens.80

The Royal Commission also did not agree with the allegation that workers did not respond to an increase in wages and that, instead of raising his standard of living, he was content to do less work if he could earn enough for his bare subsistence.81 The employers in the Tea Plantations put forward a theory of what would be called today 'backward bending supply curve of labour' for the single reason that it was not wage incentive which they used to maintain (or increase) productivity of labour, but compulsions and restraints of various kinds, including physical coercion.82  This is a factor to be borne in mind in considering the wage question in the Indian tea industry.

III

In this section we shall analyse the trends of wages of different categories of labor in the three districts of Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang. We have taken the wage figure for the district headquarters in the case of Sibsagar and Darrang as fairly representative of the entire district. However, in the case of Lakhimpur we have preferred the figures for North Lakhimpur to those of Lakhimpur Sadr.  The main reason for our preference is not because the figures in the former case are lower compared to the latter but because Lakhimpur Sadr statistics fluctuate from one extreme to the other for certain years without any explanation for the unusual amplitude of fluctuation. Since the wage figures of most other districts during the corres­ponding period do not show such tendencies the extremely high wage figures for Lakhimpur Sadr might not necessarily mean so much rise in earnings of labour. Thus in the absence of any explanation for such a sharp increase in wage figures for Lakhimpur Sadar and the lack of any other set of wage data we have preferred the figures for North Lakhimpur, which, as we shall see, represented a consistent trend. Secondly, while maintaining that official time series on wages was inflated. for the purposes of studying trends and in the light of our earlier criticism of wage data and source material, we shall accept the figures calculated on the basis of total number of labourers (set a) on the book (officially published) as the nominal earnings. At the same time, we shall also use the figures calculated on the basis of daily working strength (set b) as an index of 'potential' earnings provided the labourers had worked every single day of the month.  This could be termed as wage rate. Before we start the analysis of wage data for studying trends a word of explanation for the periodisation is warranted here.  Broadly speaking we shall study the trends decade wise which is admittedly an arbitrary division. However, within this periodisation specific emphasis is given to certain junctures, viz., the World War I and II. We have to note that the price data are not available in the form of a single time series for the period as a whole under study.  Instead different sources provide price data for varying periods and sometimes the covered also varied.

Nominal Wages of Act Labour

Table 2 shows the yearly averages of monthly wages of men and women Act labourers in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang.  Before we analyse the data in Table 2, we would like to point to the minimum rate of wages fixed by the Act VI of 1901, which was to be Rs.5.00 and Rs.400 in the first year, Rs. 5.50 and Rs.4.50 during the second and third years, and Rs.600 and Rs. 500 in the fourth year of contract for a man and a woman respectively.83 This means that the average monthly wages of Act labour during the contractual period work out to be a minimum Rs.5.50 for a man and Rs.4.50 for a woman.  A comparison of the minimum fixed wage figure within the figures in Table 2 shows that the average earnings of both men and women labour were lower than the average prescribed minimum in most cases. For example, during the 19 years from 1900 to 1918-19 the wages of men labour remained below that level for 12, 11 and 13 years in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively. Only in Darrang women's wages was considerably higher in most years.

 Table-2

Yearly Average of Nominal Monthly Wages of Act Labourers including Allowances paid under Sections (128(1) and 130(1), value of diet in lieu of such allowances and rations provided under section 134(A). and also including ticca earning and 'bonus', (Calculated on the basis of number of labourers in the garden books) in the districts of North  (Lakhimpur. Sibsagar and  Darrang.)  

Source:  Assam Labour Reports for respective years.

 Note : (i) Figures for the years 1909-10 are worked out of two preceding and succeding years for all districts..

 (ii) Figures of women's wages in Darrang district for the year 1918-19 worked out of two   preceding and two succeeding years.

In all the three districts the wage trends in the long run (with the exception of women's wages in Darrang) remained stagnant during 1900-1918-19.  Insignificant increases were experienced during a few years. Women's wages showed upward tendencies only in Darrang the increases being little less than double during 1900-1918-19.  But the overall increase was very insignificant in all the three districts. For example the increase in men's wages was 5 per cent, 0 per cent and 9 per cent and women's wages was 18 per cent, 13 per cent and 43 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively between 1900-1904-05 and 1914-15-1918-19 (see Table 2).84 This represented an annual average rate of increase for men 0.26 per cent, 0 per cent and 0.47 per cent for women 0.94 per cent, 0.68 per cent and 2.26 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.

Wage Rate of Act Labour

We shall now examine the wage figures (set b) calculated on the basis of daily working strength (see Appendix Table 1). The figures of wage rate are higher compared to the nominal wage. However, what is important is that the long term trends are strikingly similar in both. The wage rate (both for men and women) remained stagnant in all three districts. In fact, in Sibsagar there seems to be express tendencies of decline in the early years while women's wages in Darrang showed upward trends in later years. The overall increase in wage rate between 1905-06 - 1910-11 and 1914-15 - 1918-19 for men was 0 per cent, 8 per cent and 3 per cent and for women 12 per cent, 18 per cent and 27 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang.85  The average annual increase in wage rate then works out to be for men 0 per cent, 0.61 per cent and 0.23 per cent and for women 0.92 per cent, 1.38 per cent and 2.07 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively (Appendix Table I).

One striking feature common to both set of figures was the fact that compared to men the percentage of increase was higher in the case of women's nominal wages as well as the wage rate. On the other hand, the actual wage figures for women in both cases were lower compared to men. Thus, because of the lower wages paid to women compared to men the total wage bill was further reduced which benefited the employer.

Nominal Wages of Non-Act Labour

We shall now examine the wage data (official time series) of the Non-Act labour. They were increasingly replacing the Act labourand the process was completed by 1918-19. One of the features of these data is that the figures of wages of Non-Act labour are slightly higher compared to those of Act labour, the possible explanation could be the growing difficulty in recruiting labour under Act VI of 1901 as its notoriety came to be widely known in recruiting districts. Therefore, the need to offer slightly higher wages under a different contract.  Secondly, to lure the labour under Act XIII of 1859, cash advances were offered supposedly, as 'bonus'.  The ignorance and illiteracy of labour were cleverly exploited in this case. It seems the labour was given cash advances as 'bonus' but on the contract document (written in English) it was mentioned as advanced money to be deducted later on.  The Enquiry Committee of 1921-22 reproduced some versions of these contract documents according to which the labourers contracted themselves under Act XIII of 1859. It would be worth quoting one such version in which a labourer was to bind himself or herself to a particular garden by declaring the following : "The amount of any advance made to me, by the manager in cash or otherwise and the price of rice, or any other food I may receive from the garden godown shall be deducted from my monthly wages and I shall only be entitled to receive the balance of my wages after such deductions have been made."86 In none of these documents was there any mention of the so-called bonus payment. Thus, it appears that the average amount of these advances might have been added into the average cash wage of non-Act labour which obviously inflated the figures of their actual earnings.

Unlike the Act labourthere were no rules of fixed minimum wage in the case of non-Act labour. Nor were the employers bound to provide 'concessions'.  Nevertheless, the latter were also contracted on a long term basis and controlled by usually repressive penal laws.  Besides, the official reports also include the value of most such 'concessions' (meant to be given to the Act labour) in the figures of cash wages of non-Act labour. Therefore, we take the average prescribed minimum wages for non-Act labour (Rs.5.50 for men and Rs.4.50 for women) as our base for the purpose of analysing the wage data of non-Act labour in the three districts. The minimum wage figures for child labour we may assume to be Rs.3.50.

In order to maintain the uniformity in the method of analysis we shall, as in the case of Act labour, begin with the data on nominal wages of non-Act labour, i.e. set a.  Table 3 shows the wage figures of non-Act labourers (calculated on the basis of number of labourers on the books) in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang between 1900 and 1925-26.87

Men's wages in all three districts between 1960 and the beginning of World War I remained stagnant with a tendency to decline. The increase during certain years in North Lakhimpur and Sibsagar was very marginal. Besides, the wages of men, women and children, did not conform to the average minimum wage figures during most of the years between 1900 and 1914 (except men's wages in Sibsagar). In fact, children's wages rarely conform to the average prescribed minimum during the early two decades. World War I and post-war period witnessed increase in the nominal wages of labour force. For example, between 1914-15 and 1925-26 the increase in man's wages was 57 per cent, 45 per cent and 42 per cent and in women's wages 35 per cent, 36 per cent and 37 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.  Children's wages increased significantly only in the post-war period.  In all the three districts the wage figures for all the three categories of labour were the highest in the third decade (Table 3).

Wage Rate of Non-Act Labour

We shall now examine the data on wage rate or 'potential' earnings (set b) of non-Act labour in the three districts. Appendix Table II shows the yearly averages of monthly wages of non-Act labour (calculated on the basis of daily working strength) in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang.88

Men's wage rate in all the three districts remained stagnant with a tendency to decline between 1905-06 and 1913-14.  Women's and children's wage rate, on the other hand, showed upward movement marked by minor downward fluctuations during the corresponding period in all the three districts. The War years experienced slight increase in the wage rate of labour force in the above three districts. Between 1905-06-1909-10 and 1916-17-1920-21 the increase in wage rate for men was 21 per cent, 13 per cent and 18 per cent, for women 40 per cent, 24 per cent and 36 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.89 Children's wage rates fluctuated sharply during the corresponding period and only from 1914-15 show marked signs of consistency in most cases. The increase in wage rates between 1921-22 and 1929-30 was for men 24 per cent, 17 per cent and 37 per cent, for women 34 per cent, 16 per cent and 25 per cent and for children 31 per cent, 28 per cent and 56 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.90 The wage rate for all the three categories of non-Act labour, however, declines sharply in following two years after 1929-30. The wage rate declined in the case of men by 16 per cent, 7 per cent and 15 per cent, for women by 24 per cent, 11 per cent and 15 per cent and children's by 20 per cent, 3 per cent and 6 per cent in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively.  One feature common to all was that the figures of wage rate reached the highest during the last years of third decade (see Appendix Table II).

Table-3

Yearly Average of Nominal Monthly Wages of Non-Act Labourers including the Value of Subsistence Allowances, Diet or Rations and also in­cluding ticca earnings (Based on Number of labourers on the Garden books) in North Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang Districts.

Source:  Assam Labour Reports for respective years.

Note: i) Figures for 1901 in Lakhimpur Sadr are worked out as the average of one preceding and one succeeding year.

 ii) Figures of wages for women in Darrang district for the year 1915-16 worked out of one preceding and one succeeding year.

After reaching the peak during the late 1920s the nominal wages as well as the wage rate registered a sharp decline in the 1930s.  Apart from the decrease in wages the labour force was also deprived of statutory "protection" with the final repeal of Act VI of 1901. The newly passed labour legislation (the Tea District Emigrant Labour Act XXII of 1932), which came into effect in October 1933, was mainly concerned with the process of labour recruitment and their journey up to the tea district. There were no provisions in the new labour law to deal with conditions of living or wages in the tea districts. Under the new legislation the labour force was categorised as 'settled' and faltu or basti labour.91   Besides, the "concessions" were no longer the statutory obligation for the planters. However, the annual reports on emigrant labour published by the Controller of Emigrant Labour, create confusion by their contradictory reporting.  In some years the reports mentioned that the value of "concessions" included in the figures of cash wages while in others it was pointed out that apart from the cash wages the labour supplemented its income out of various 'concessions' offered in the tea districts.  Despite the confusion it seems that the practice of giving 'subsidised' rations may have continued in many gardens in order to supplement the cash earnings which were certainly not adequate enough to provide a living wage for the labour.  Particularly during the period of extremely high prices of foodstuff it was very crucial.  In the case of ticca earnings Rege confirmed in 1946 that its value had been Included in the wage figures given in annual official reports.92

Between 1926-27 and 1932-33 the data on the nominal wages of tea garden labour for each district was not published in the Assam Labour Reports. However, we assume that the trend of nominal wage (calculated on the basis of total number of labour on the garden books) would have been proportionate to that of the wage rate (based on daily working strength). For the latter again we have figures only upto 1931-32.  These figures (Appendix Table Vl) show constant upward movement of wage rate upto 1929-30 (which we assume may have been true in the case of nominal wages) followed by a sharp decline in the early 1930s. We have data on nominal wages for the Assam Valley as a whole from 1930 onwards. We shall, however, use these figures only for 1930-34 period because from 1934 Onwards the annual reports of the Controller of Emigrant Labour published such data for each district separately.  Table 4 shows the nominal monthly wages (calculated on the basis of total number of labourers on garden books) in the Assam Valley between 1930-31 and 1934-35.

Table-4

Yearly Average of Nominal Monthly Wages of Labour (Calculated on the basis of Number of Labourers on the Garden Books)in Assam Valley, 1930-31 - 1934 - 35 93

The above table shows rapid decline in wages during the first half of 1930s.  Men's wages declined by 49 per cent, women's by 49 per cent and children's by 54 per cent in the Assam Valley between 1930-31 and 1934-35. Our analysis of the wage data for the period 1934-47 will move on the same lines as we have done in the case of Act and non-Act labour earlier, i.e., (i) official time series on nominal wages (calculated on the basis of total number of labour on the garden books) or set (a), and (ii) potential wage or wage rate (calculated on daily working strength or set (b)).94

Nominal Wage of Settled Labour

Table 5 shows the wage figures (calculated on the basis of total number of labour on the garden books) of settled labour in the three districts between 1934 and 1945. In the pre-World War II period men's and children's wages between 1934 and 1938 remained stagnant with a tendency to decline in tendency- to-decline in all three districts (in Sibsagar this trend continued well into the war years).  Women's wages remained stagnant in Sibsagar and Darrang though there was slight increase in Lakhimpur during the corresponding period.  The World War II experienced fluctuating tendencies which varied from district to district.  The overall increase in the nominal wages between 1934-35 and 1941-4595  for men was 14 per cent, 33 per cent and 24 per cent, for women it was 26 per cent, 22 per cent and 28 per cent and for children it was 27 per cent, 33 per cent and 41 per cent in Lakhimpur, Sibsagar and Darrang respectively (Table 5)96

Table-5

Yearly Average of Nominal Monthly Wages of Settled Labourers (Calculated on the basis of Number of Labourers on the Garden Books) on the tea Estates in Lakhimpur, Sibasagar and Darrang dist­ricts (Based on the Averages of two months - March and September for Each Year) including the Value of Ticca work, dist, rations and subsistance allowances, 1934-47