Agnipath hiring: Armed forces must avoid the track Indian Railways took

The Railways' experience with its half-century-old apprenticeship programme offers a view of the problems that could occur with the armed forces' new recruitment scheme

In the din over the armed forces’ Agnipath recruitment scheme, it is worth stepping back to study a fairly similar pattern that the Indian Railways (IR) has followed for its apprentice programme. The problems are similar — trained apprentices demand a full-time job, but IR is willing to offer, at the most, concessions in the admission test. As the job market shrinks, the level of stridency is rising here, too. 

These controversies also go some way towards explaining why the private sector has been reluctant to jump on the apprenticeship bandwagon, despite successive governments asking it to do so. Explaining to trained cohorts that they should now carry their skills elsewhere in the job market is not easy in India. And the IR having undercut the system as a pioneer has not helped the conversation. 

IR began offering apprenticeship to two categories of apprentices under the Apprentice Act of 1961. These were either fresh candidates or Industrial Training Institute (ITI)-qualified candidates; there were also technician apprentices, basically diploma-holders. The two schemes were modelled on the earlier apprentice scheme for graduate engineers that had been running since 1927. But there was one crucial difference with the latter. The Jamalpur boys, named after the location of the institute in Bihar, were Special Class Railway Apprentice officers and had a confirmed job offer from the day they became apprentices. Traditionally, these men have gone on to become the senior-most officers in IR. Those lower down, who came under the 1961 Act, had no such assurance. 

Also Read: Agnipath Scheme: IAF starts registration process for Agniveers from today

But over the decades, the IR established an adroit compromise between the rules of appointment and the practice of convenience for these non-officer apprentices. It is a practice that went well for several decades. 

How? Principally, because IR allowed its employees to recommend their children for selection as apprentices. Twice a year, advertisements were published for the selection of apprentices from the nearest employment exchanges, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe organisations, ITIs and wards of railway employees. The largest number of apprentices came from the last category. There were also occasions when apprentices were recruited for non-technical posts such as office clerks.

With this level of soft catchment, it is obvious that the apprentices (about 2,000 each year) once trained in the various railway workshops would find powerful backers within the IR to be employed as temporary workers.

To be sure, the training programme of these men was governed by the provisions of the Apprenticeship Contract between the employer and the apprentice, under the 1961 Act. It offered no promise of employment — “It is not obligatory on the part of employer to offer any employment to the passed out Trade Apprentice on completion of the period of Apprenticeship Training in his establishment” (Railway Recruitment Cell, Engagement Of Apprentices, Notice, May 2022).

But in practice things were quite different. Once employed as temporary workers in IR, these apprentices would stay on for years. Some would file court cases demanding permanent employment rights, or, where the zone was considerate, an officer would regularise their posts. The railway labour unions also supported this pattern. 

This situation lasted despite the expanding role for the Railway Service Commissions since the 1950s. Those commissions were renamed the Railway Recruitment Boards (RRBs) in 1985 and expanded from four to 21. They were meant to recruit staff under various categories for all the railway establishments falling under their jurisdictions. None of these commissions had a uniform system of recruitment.  

Things began to change from 1998, when a centralised RRB was formed in the ministry of railways. The board soon developed examination systems for different categories of railway staff, which set off huge unrest. Once the examinations became the norm, hordes of unemployed engineers, ITI-trained graduates and others began to write the exams. The apprentices suddenly found themselves being muscled out.

On the jobs wagon

1. Railways takes in apprentices in non executive grade under Apprentice Act, 1961; numbers have risen from about 2,000 to about 20,000 a year
2. Apprentices given training for one year and paid a stipend
3. Certificate of training allows them to use it for other jobs
4. Selected candidates and Railways sign a contract of apprenticeship training
5. Under the contract, it is not obligatory for Railways to offer any employment to the trade apprentices
6. Until 1998, there were no clear rules for treatment of apprentices post training, which allowed for large-scale absorption under court verdicts, orders to fill temporary vacancies, etc.
7. Since 1998, all apprentices are eligible to appear for Railway Recruitment Board exams. Quotas introduced in exams from 2018
8. Railways also takes in apprentices in executive grade as Special Class Railway Apprentices, with offer of recruitment

Protests began by the next decade, supported by the unions, many of whose children were among these apprentices. There are associations of these apprentices that have periodically launched massive agitations. In 2018 there were widespread disturbances, including the ransacking of railway properties. IR bought peace by agreeing that 20 per cent of the posts advertised for technical trades would be reserved for the apprentices. It also decided to cut the level of qualification required for most of the jobs to that of class 10th pass instead of the stiffer ITI qualifications. 

This immediately expanded the universe of potential candidates every year. The ITIs produce about 1.2 million trainees, while the number of class 10 graduates is about 12 million. Then Railways minister Piyush Goyal argued that most of the posts do not need the candidates to learn anything more than they get to learn at the level of class 10. So the ITI eligibility requirement was unnecessary.  “Essentially the jobs in the railway have to do with basic services such as the clean-up and maintenance of tracks and coaches. These can be done by a class 10 graduate, too,” said a top official from the Indian Railway Personnel Service, the cadre of officers who handle these recruitments. 

But the truce was very thin. These apprentices have also demanded they should not be asked to write the recruitment exams for a permanent job, just as some of the would-be Agnipath candidates have also said they should not appear in any exam after the fourth year of their training. Since the recent IR advertisements for FY23 have reinstated the need for ITI or a National Apprenticeship Certificate to become an apprentice, tensions could be brewing again. There is a danger that unless handled well, Agnipath could also introduce this malaise in the uniformed services.