M S M RAILWAY STRIKE 13
Employees' Union (Perambur branch) on 2 September 1932, said:
"During the last 7 years the railways had paid into the gener a revenues of the Government a sum of 35 crores and all that the Railway Men's Federation asked of the Railway Board to do was to spare three or four crores out of that amount to save the 40 thousand people now retrenched."3
Generally speaking, the socio-economic conditions of the workers in the railways were far from satisfactory.4 The burning issue in 1932 was retrenchment which set in motion a series of events. The importance of this issue can be realized by looking at the resolution adopted by the M S M Railway Employees' Union at its meeting held on 21 October 1932:
Whereas the M S M Railway Administration has refused to discuss with the Union the retrenchment question; whereas the Administration has in the opinion of the Union and the workers grossly exaggerated figures of surplus staff and estimates of short-time in spite of the Union's citing indisputable and uncontradicted facts and figures; whereas the Railway Administration has refused to reinstate the 93 workers who were compulsorily retrenched last year in Perambur shops contrary to the accepted policy of allowing a surplus to a maximum of 20 percent in each shop if corresponding short-time is agreed upon by the workers; whereas the men's readiness to bear the sacrifice of necessary short-time or leave by rotation to wipe out the policy of compulsory discharge under retrenchment has been used as an opportunity for inflating figures of surplus; and having further considered the attitude of the management in not agreeing to a conciliation Board on the above issues after suspending further adverse measures and in consideration of the overwhelming opinion of the workers expressed through the ballot in favour of strike as a defensive measure to protect themselves against the present retrenchment policy, this Union resolves that the decision of the me n be ratified by authorising a strike, being declared from 6-30 p m on Monday the 24th October 1932 on the above issues at present by Perambur Workshops' employees.5
The union has been making strong representations against the policy of compulsory discharge in the name of retrenchment.6 It insisted that the principle of spreading work be applied to avoid not only compulsory discharge on this score in future but also to reinstate 93 men who were "retrenched" in 1931 in the Perambur shops.7