Headload Workers Act A Relic Of The Past : Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court while hearing a matter of a firm seeking police protection for its staff from the obstruction caused by headload workers in loading and unloading the goods, remarked that the Kerala Headload Workers Act should ideally not be in force in these modern times. 

During the proceedings, Justice Devan Ramachandran orally remarked that the practice of headload work should have been abolished a long time ago. He added that rather than continuing with the practice, the workers engaged in headload work should instead be trained to use machinery.

"This Act should not be in force in the first place. It was enacted as a result of the socio-economic and cultural atmosphere of the 1970s. It's a relic of the past. These tasks should be performed by machines, and the workers should be trained to operate them. Where else in the world is this practice of headload work this prevalent? It is demeaning for a human being to carry all this. It's high time this practise was abolished. It is unbelievable that this is going on in the 21st Century?"

The Judge added:

"Headload workers should be rehabilitated. They should be given training to use machines that are made for the purpose of loading and unloading goods. It is shocking to see the amount of effort they put into their work. Their health and quality of life are terrible after they are 50-60 years old."

Before dictating the order, the Court compared the situation with the practice of manual scavenging that unfortunately continues in other parts of the country.

"It is similar to how manual scavenging, which I hear continues to exist in other parts of India. People enter the septic tanks and clean it, it is unimaginable. These practices should have been abolished a long time ago. I'm not saying any more or I'll be accused of being too progressive and these days, being progressive is seen as a bad thing."

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the goods being dealt with by them is glass and is fragile and requiring extreme care, but their staff had been obstructed in carrying out the work by headload workers in the area. The Court, therefore, proceeded to issue an order stating that the petitioner and his vehicles must not be obstructed by any headload workers.

While issuing the order in the case today, the Court reiterated that if any headload worker has been wrongly denied the engagement, the only acceptable and lawful course of action is to approach the Headload Workers' Welfare Fund Board which is empowered to take the necessary action as per the Act.

"The issues relating to denial of employment to headload workers attached to the pool in the concerned area will have to be decided by the competent authorities under the act but they cannot be allowed to take law into their own hands or cause any physical obstruction to the activities of the petitioner. The Board and other competent authorities under the act will be at full liberty to initiate and complete any action with respect to any complaints preferred before them by headload workers of the pools designated to the area concerned and the petitioner will be bound to comply with the same subject to their statutory remedies thereupon." 

It is to be noted that upon the Judge's intervention, the State had recently proposed to amend the said Act to empower the competent authority to expel and impose heavy penalties on a registered worker who is established to have demanded nokkukooli (gawking charges).

Nokkukooli is a much-reviled practice where loaders charge fees without working. It is a term used to refer to the extortion by organized labour unions in Kerala under which wages are paid to trade union activists for allowing common householders/ investors/builders to unload belongings/materials using machines or their own labour

This Bench has extensively dealt with the matter of nokkukooli on a number of occasions in the past few months, calling for effective implementation of the said Act to eliminate this practice. During one such hearing, the Judge had observed:

"There can be little doubt that if the provisions of the (Kerala Headload Workers) Act are implemented properly, the impression of Kerala having militant trade unionism would vanish almost instantly. This is because, in the event of any employer refusing to engage a headload worker, the consequence would not be violence but a proceeding initiated before the (headload workers welfare fund) board which would then lead to the statutory consequences under the Act."

What is the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978?

The Act was introduced to regulate the employment of headload workers in the Slate and to make provision for their welfare, settlement of disputes in respect of their employment or non-employment and for matters connected therewith.

A headload worker is any person engaged or employed directly or through a contractor for an establishment for loading or unloading articles in or from or to a vehicle or any place in such establishment or stacking articles using manual labour. 

The provisions of the Employees Compensation Act 1923 and the Rules made thereunder apply to the headload workers employed in any establishment, and, for that purpose, they are deemed to be employees within the meaning of that Act.

Section 14 of the Headload Workers Act also establishes a board known as Kerala Head Load Workers Welfare Board to which members are appointed by the State government. 

Case Title: TP Hardware Centre v The Superintendent of Police & Ors