Royal Commission on Labour in India: Report(1929)||
Unfortunately many seasonal factories leave much to be desired as regards their structural adequacy. Often little attention is given to the matter by the owner in view of the fact that the structure is only in use for part of the year. Sometimes the buildings are deficient from the moment of erection, owing to efforts to cut down the initial cost of construction and the absence of any effective central control over building plans. We have dealt elsewhere with the necessary measures to obviate the latter difficulty in the case of all types of factory buildings, whether perennial or seasonal. The Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factories Act of 1925 was especially intended to meet this and other difficulties in these factories and, as far as we are aware, is being adequately enforced. But this Act, useful as it is, was passed only six years ago and all over the cotton-growing area are scattered ginneries built before that period, often in a very unsatisfactory way. The dangers to which such buildings are liable are accentuated in certain districts by the pooling system which sometimes involves using in rotation ginneries in particular areas, where their number exceeds the requirements of the industry. This may result in a factory remaining closed for several years and then being brought into sudden use • without any adequate overhauling. In consequence, a number of accidents have occurred in at least one province within the last few years including one in 1928, in which the roof of a ginnery, previously closed for some years, collapsed within a few hours of the machinery being restarted, killing five and injuring seven of the workers. We are of opinion that, with the necessary initial control of stability which we have recommended and the powers already conferred by section 18A of the Factories Act, the increased inspection of seasonal factories to which we refer subsequently should minimise this danger.