Royal Commission on Labour in India: Report(1929)||
We do not think that any satisfactory solution can be found which depends on the prescription of standards of temperature and their general enforcement irrespective of the circumstances of particular factories. There are factories where a substantial reduction is possible at a profit to the owner; there are others where the cost of even a trifling reduction might be ruinous. It seems legitimate and reasonable that in most cases regard should be had, not merely to the height of the temperature or of the cooling power (which is the better measure, as it takes account of air movement), but also to both the cost of the measures which can be adopted to improve conditions and the extent of the improvement likely to result from these measures. The aim should be to ensure that, when cooling power is deficient, reasonable measures of improvement shall not be neglected. We think that this can be secured by the following means. Where a Chief Inspector is of opinion that (1) the cooling power in a factory is so deficient as to cause serious discomfort or danger to the health of operatives, and (2) it can be appreciably increased by methods which do not involve an amount of expense which is unreasonable in the circumstances, he should be able to serve on the owner an order requiring the adoption of specified measures within a given time. Against such an order we would provide for an appeal to a tribunal of three appointed by the local Government, the intention being that the Chairman of the tribunal should be an impartial official and the other members representative of employers and employed with a knowledge of the industry. We think it is most unlikely that an experienced inspector would make any unreasonable demand. But an adequate safeguard should be found in the presence of a tribunal which would be able to decide if the order was reasonable, having regard to all the circumstances of the case.