Important Trade Unions at the time of Pre-Independence of India

Swadeshi Movement (1905):

At the Calcutta Town Hall in Bengal, the Swadeshi Movement, today well known as the “Make in India” campaign, was formally launched on August 7, 1905. The Swadeshi movement was accompanied by the boycott movement. Utilizing products created in India and destroying items produced in Britain were among the movements. After the British administration planned to divide Bengal, Bal Gangadhar Tilak supported the Swadeshi and Boycott movements. The Boycott movement in the nation had its start as a result of the protest movement known as the Swadeshi movement. People began anti-partition and anti-colonial movements in 1909 after the movement had swept across the nation.

Textile Labor Association (1918):

The Ahmedabad Textile Labour Association (TLA), founded by Gandhiji in 1918, had 14,000 members at the time and was conceivably the biggest trade organisation in the nation. Gandhiji’s experiment, which was based on the principles of trusteeship (the capitalist serving as the trustee of the workers’ interests) and arbitration, had been casually and all too frequently disregarded as being anti-worker interests and class collaborative. Gandhiji’s idea of trusteeship not only resulted in one of the largest wage rises during a strike in 1918, but it also held the possibility of dramatic change, which is frequently disregarded. Gandhiji’s labor philosophy, which placed a strong emphasis on trusteeship and arbitration, reflected the demands of the anti-imperialist struggle since it could not afford a full-fledged class conflict between the many groups that made up the developing country.

All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) (1920):

The most important development was the founding of the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) in 1920. One of the main proponents of the AITUC’s founding, which had Lala Lajpat Rai as its first president and Diwan Chaman Lall, who would later play a significant role in the Indian labor movement, as its general secretary, was Lokmanya Tilak, who had grown close to Bombay labor.  According to the AITUC manifest, workers were urged to participate in nationalist politics in addition to organizing themselves. Lajpat Rai was one of the first intellectuals in India to link capitalism and imperialism while highlighting the necessity of the working class in overcoming both. The changes in the political environment were beautifully handled by the workings. 250,000 people were members of 125 unions in 1920; the majority of them were founded between 1919 and 1920. It was also important for employees to participate in important national political events. Gandhi’s nonviolent, trusteeship, and class-collaborative philosophies had a significant impact on AITUC.

Conclusion:

The colonial government’s adoption of capitalism led to the emergence of the contemporary working class struggle in India. Colonial India saw the emergence of plantations, railroads, cotton and jute mills, coal mining, and a number of other enterprises. At first, the majority of the money was British, although other industries, such cotton textile, and iron and steel, were controlled by Indians. Millions of staff were hired to manage these businesses. Poor living and working circumstances in the early decades sparked demonstrations that eventually sparked worker movements. These early rallies and protests found organised form through the labor unions that eventually developed. The working class’s conditions improved as a result of their organised struggles. While it would be incorrect to claim that the working moment has disappeared, its political impact has significantly diminished. Because of India’s strict labor laws and overbearing regulations, which are ostensibly in place to safeguard the working class, only a small number of jobs are being created in the high-paying, organised sector. Organizing today’s unorganized workforce is necessary for their development, but because the government has fully transitioned to capitalism in recent months, doing so is challenging.

The second half of the nineteenth century saw the emergence of modern industry and the modern Indian working class as a result of the expansion of the railroad, coal, cotton, and jute industries. However, throughout time, the Indian working class experienced the same forms of exploitation that the European working class experienced during industrialization. The exploitation includes poor salaries, lengthy working hours, unsafe and filthy working conditions, child labor, and a lack of basic amenities. The existence of colonialism in India, along with the imperialist political system and economic exploitation of both foreign and domestic capitalist classes, gave the working class movement in India a distinctive hue. Therefore, the movement of the working masses in India evolved into a political struggle for national emancipation. Early nationalists fought for the rights of workers employed by European companies, but not by Indian companies, because they didn’t want to alienate Indians by insulting their capitalists.

Between 1870 and 1880, legislative efforts were made to attempt to improve the working conditions of the workforce. There was no coordinated effort to improve the working conditions of the labor until the Swadeshi boom of 1903–08. The workers’ movement, the Home Rule Movement, and the Non-Cooperation Movement all saw a resurgence between 1915 and 1922. The initial initiatives to better the economic circumstances of the workforce were altruistic in origin, localized, sporadic, and focused on particular local issues. Although the conditions of the plantation and mine workers were horrendously exploited, early social reformers, journalists, and public activists did not pay much attention to them. Despite their isolation, the plantation workers organised their own rallies against the owners and managers’ exploitation and abuse. More people became aware of the workers in the cotton and jute industries. Early social workers and philanthropists were also active, helping to improve organisational performance as well as public support and better reporting.