Law vs. workers

The workers with their complicated lives are not influenced in any manner by the bureaucratic debates on the trade unions. As well as by already existing, legal enactments. There is a sort of tradition in our country: first a new law is passed, and in a year or two when the people has had enough of its imperfect articles, changes and amendments appear.

The law "On Labour in RoK", which actually could very well reflect the issues of security and protection, did not escape such destiny as well. The accidents at work are multiplying in the country and, alas, are becoming an ordinary affair. Nobody is alarmed by the fact that only in Almaty in the last year more than 300 industrial accidents occurred due to the insufficient provision of safety by the employer. And how many bruises remain uncounted - because our worker is ready to bear and forbear, just to keep his job. And he never thinks about the laws in such a situation.

However, right after the law had been passed all lawyers and rights defenders univocally called it subjective and unreasoned. In their view, the main fault of the document, no matter how paradoxical it is, is contained in its main concept. The employer has a full support of the State, the worker is reduced to a silent creature deprived of civil rights. The norms of the law make it possible to assert that the parties in the labour relations - the worker and the employer - are initially unequal. For instance, the item 1 of the article 75 of the law says: "The norms of labour (norms of productiveness, time of service) are the measure of the labour expenditure and are established for the workers in accordance with the current level of technique, technology, work organisation". Everything seems right. But a reasonable question arises: who exactly will define the said level and eventually these precious norms? Well the "boss" will, and he'll make them work, the law responds. As per item 2 of the same article, "introduction, replacement or revision of the labour norms are done by the employer". That is he has an exclusive right on such life important things, as the length of the working day, work load. It appears that the employer has a right to make you work seven days a week, twelve hours a day, without lunch break or even going to toilet? Yes. You don't like it - good bye. THe wishing ones are easily found, that would be much less sensitive and would agree to anything. The unemployment takes on a threatening shape. According to the International Labour Organisation, the number of unemployed in Kazakhstan makes 20 per cent of the able-bodies citizens, so your job will not be vacant for long. There are no irreplaceable ones - the employers is especially liked by the employers and they use it a lot. You want to go to court? Please do. Just keep ready your wallet, hecalitres of valerian drops and a lash with which you are going to break an axe (or a tough forehead to demolish walls). The law - is on the side of your offender. As per item 7, article 26 of the law "On Labour…" you could be fired, as "a worker refusing to continue work due to the changing conditions of labour". Which is changed by you know who.

The judges noted: there are no more workers lawsuits against the abusive exploiters. Only the most desperate start fighting for justice, risking to lose their health completely. Because the State recalled itself from resolving the problems of its own workers and peasants, it's become impossible for them to take any action against the employer. He acts as per the law, giving him unprecedented authorities. There is not a word about his duty to observe the State requirements or standards. Thus, all our production becomes always more dangerous for human health and life.

Lobbying the draft law, Gulzhan Karagussova, Minister of Labour and Social Protection, observed that in the last year the national employers paid 21 million tenge of fines. But the point is that it is much more profitable for them to pay a tiny fine - as compared to the profit - then to take care about safety, provide normal conditions of labour. Why wasting money, if the people are ready to work even this way. There are inspections on labour protection, but there are very few people working there, that's why the enterprises are reviewed approximately once in a year. If an inspector discovers atrocious violations of the safety rules, s/he will draw up a report. And that's it. Firstly, "the production chief" will speak incessantly, swearing with his Mom, that in amonth s/he'll rectify everything, knowing very well: he's got a big time reserve, and then… Secondly, the inspection cannot impose fines, just sending papers into higher ranking authorities. And it's unknown how the latter would manage "to obtain" fines. By the way, a labour protection inspector does not have a right to enter the territory of the inspected enterprise after 18 PM, when the harshest exploitation starts. The law provides the employer with the right to establish unlimited overtime during a week, a month, a year. True, on the worker's consent. But in exceptional cases even this consent is not needed (article 51 of the law "On Labour"). Who defines being "exceptional" is clear without any comments. Will there be any discontent against irregular working hours? Hardly likely.

Sometimes it seems that for our State the able-bodied citizens - are a sheer burden. If the society consisted of fluffy white collars, quiet senior people and silly youth - how wonderful it would be! And instead: set the industrial production going, restore plants and factories, all sorts of equipment, buy technologies for God knows what money, fight unemployment. Sheer headache, upsetting nice reports on successful reforms. A man who wants to work in our country is considered a sort of parvenu. And at the same time guilty of everything. The Motherland lives through strategic catclisms and he wants some salary! The State does everything possible to impant this compax of guilt into us and make it a national feature. It even issues appropriate laws.

Today there are no trade union committees or local TU committes, where one could come informing on a foreman or a director: "the working class is being offended! Young specialists are oppressed!" Today the working class is shut up, overjoyed, when they pay at least something, although ten times less than to Turks. Specialists? Some are gone and carried away their brains, other ones are "shuttling" (going back and forth on "shuttle trips" to buy commodities to sell them locally, earning pennies) in the same Turkeys. Today the labour relations are extremely simple: a worker - an employer, meanwhile, the latter is a Zar, the Lord and an arbiter of destinies. If s/he so wishes - you are fired without any explanations or dismissal pay, if s/he so wishes - the whole department or brigade is dismissed, and then you could go organising naive pickets with your demands on billboards. The Employer will stay safe - his arms are competely untied by the law. And the new draft law does not change this situation.

Deputies see the problem resolution in a revival of trade unions as mediators between the employer and the worker, but the role of these someday powerful organisations is diminished and the existing ones are completely controlled by the State. In Soviet times there was a slogan: "Your labour is your honour!" The words that are not so bad, by the way. They have gone together with honorary boards. What remains with respect to labour? Neither worthy salary, nor honour. Only draft laws, endless and lifeless.