How was the union formed at Samsung?

It’s claimed that CITU provoked and formed the union to impose leadership on workers. The truth is, workers must wish for a union. They form it, attach it to CITU, and invite us to lead. That’s how we get involved. The government is misinterpreting this. Workers aren’t sheep. They strike knowing they’ll lose salary, face police, and might even get dismissed.

Many factories around Samsung in Sriperumbudur have trade unions. What new challenges have emerged while forming this union? How has the government responded to the workers’ protest?

We’ve faced the same issues elsewhere: companies refusing to allow unions, CITU, or “outsiders”. Samsung is known for its global “no-union policy”. They tried to break a strike in South Korea, but workers prevailed and established a union. In India, Samsung has plants in Noida and Chennai. They’re determined to prevent unions here, resorting to aggressive methods.

Samsung objects to using its name for the union and to SIWU’s president not being an employee. Your comments?

Most unions nationwide use company names, with few exceptions. Companies may claim brand ownership, but there’s precedent. In Karnataka, when SBI objected to workers using its name, the court ruled in workers’ favour, asking if they’d compete with the bank. We’ve cited this case. If it’s a major issue, we’d consider changing to “Sriperumbudur Electronic Industries Union”. We’re not ego-driven.

Regarding outsiders in unions, this has been debated since the Trade Union Act’s implementation 98 years ago. Companies use professionals during conciliation. How can workers with limited education argue equally? If workers want someone knowledgeable in labour affairs, shouldn’t the company allow it? The Trade Union Act itself provides for the presence of outsiders as office bearers [they can hold one half of the positions in a union] . We’ll stay as long as workers want us.

The Union government has codified 29 labour laws into 4 codes. CITU noted this “eliminates protective components in terms of rights”. What effects might this have on labour movements?

Take one example: currently, factories with over 100 workers need Labour Department permission for closure, layoffs, or retrenchment. [Prime Minister Narendra] Modi’s Industrial Relations Code raises this to 300 workers. In Sriperumbudur, only about 100 companies exceed this. Smaller suppliers fall outside the law, leaving employers unchecked. A company with 400 workers could split into two units to evade the law. It’s unfair.

What role does the Samsung workers’ protest play in the broader Tamil Nadu workers’ movement?

This strike is about workers’ constitutional right to form associations under Article 19(1). It’s not just about wages, but about collective bargaining rights. The government is blatantly supporting the company. We were shocked when three Ministers behaved like Samsung spokesmen during discussions.

Registering a union is routine—25 were registered last month. But Samsung’s pressure on the Tamil Nadu government, and consequently on the Labour Department, is blocking SIWU’s registration. It’s mandatory to register within 45 days, but they’re delaying. We suspect the government asked Samsung to object after 60 days, which shouldn’t even be entertained.

The government’s actions mirror Governor [R.N.] Ravi’s treatment of Assembly Bills—neither signing nor returning them. They’re giving management time to form a committee of yes-men, creating an illusion of resolution through media coverage. They claim 14 demands were accepted, but it’s just drama. They say the registration issue is sub judice and won’t comment.

After talks, we were told we’d be invited again. Instead, they arranged workers to “represent” us, took photographs with them, and got signatures to publicise. It lacked transparency and seemed like a ploy to cheat us.

Our main demand is union recognition. If granted, we’ll immediately end the strike. Other issues can be discussed later. The promised Rs.5,000 is just an incentive, not a wage increase. The 14 accepted demands, like AC buses and locker repairs, prove how badly workers were treated before.

The Minister acknowledges 516 affected factory workers, implying 1,300 are protesting outside. In a democracy, this majority should be respected.

The DMK government’s Labour Progressive Front supports Samsung workers and CITU. What’s stopping the government from registering the union?

The Labour Progressive Front does support us and acknowledges working-class issues. But for political reasons, they can’t openly challenge their affiliated party.

In September, Chief Minister M.K. Stalin’s US trip reportedly secured investment pacts worth over Rs.7,000 crore. Some critics argue that the Samsung workers’ protest might deter such investments.

Employers calculate potential profits, subsidies, and workforce discipline before investing. Tamil Nadu offers all these. Industries should come, but workers’ rights must be secured too. To critics who say strikes scare companies away, I ask: Don’t these companies’ home countries have unions? France and Britain have powerful unions. Is there any country without trade unions? Nobody burns down their house fearing a rat. If preventing unions is the only way to attract companies, why not stop taxing them too? Is that possible? Nokia left Chennai over tax demands, costing 15,000 jobs. A government must implement laws—be it taxation or union registration.

What is CITU’s next plan of action regarding the Samsung strike?

We won’t stop until we establish the union. It’s our right to form an association. If workers stand firm for a month or two more, remember: Yamaha workers struck for 63 days to form their union. Samsung must eventually yield. They can’t operate without production. Competitors might exploit this situation, causing losses. We’re not happy about this either. This strike reflects the workers’ severe mental stress and other issues. The government needs to understand this.