NOTE 73 ness allowance4 from April 1, 1974 to wage and salary, earners would be limited to 50 per cent and the balance will be credited to their Provident Fund for a period of two years. Also increases in wages and salaries on account of wage revisions would be similarly impounded for a period of one year in a special account. The additional wages and salaries to be thus compulsorily deposited will include increases by way of bonus etc., but not regular increments. This ordinance is reminiscent of the year 194-8 when in a similar situation of growing Government "alarm" at price inflation, the ruling party had resorted to a similar policy measure, issuing a statement in October on "Measures to Combat Inflation/9 that a Labour Apellate Tribunal would be established "to ensure that uniform principles(of wage settlement) will be adopted under the overall control of the Central Government." This in practice meant a virtual freeze on wages since the Government wanted to restrict any upward movement of the wages which would upset the "stability" of industry. This has been the underlying strategy of Government wage policy since then and was formalised in the First Five Year Plan document. When the criteria for a wage policy were outlined int he First Five Year Plan it was clearly stated that wage increases should be as low as possible and should be granted mainly to remove anomalies in the existing wage structure. This it was claimed was necessary to maximise the surplus available for capital accumulation and hence for expansion of employment. The accent of policy must be on keeping the increase in money incomes as low as possible. A programme of full employment at rising real wages can get into swing only as capital formation in the country goes up.5 Succeeding plans added little to this, but this relative lack of articulation on wage policy should not be taken as indicative of the absence of one, which impression it has been attempted to create. "How ambiguous Indian official statements can be on policy where the issue is a politically sensitive one is well known." It is interesting to note that many of the criteria to be followed in the future were formalised in the 1951 judgement for settlement of labour matters of the Lab3ur Apellate Tribunal on the dispute between Buckingham andCarnatic Mills audits workers.® The main features of this judgement were that the upper limit of wages is set not by the capacity of an individual establishment to pay but by the capacity of the industry-cum-region to pay such a wage. This provision introduced a lot of arbitrariness in the laying down of a minimum wage 7. Although a great deal of organised struggle of the workers has been for a"need based minimum wage," most of the wage fixations have in fact been restricted by considerations of the capacity of the industry to pay. Furthermore the 1951 judgement did not provide for complete compensation for rises in the cost of living and compensation was set at a flat rate. These basic principles were then