Though these exercises have often not reached their logical conclusion,
all that the discontent does is to keep the anxious race goers on
tenterhooks as they are always kept in the dark about the happenings.
This year too, the first week’s races are under threat as all the
trainers, licensed by Bangalore Turf Club, have surrendered their
licenses, protesting the newly incorporated clause that holds them
responsible for all the liabilities of the past, present and future with
regard to the vexed problem of paying Provident Fund to the syces. The
case filed by the Karnataka Trainers’ Association is in the courts but
the Bangalore Turf Club has sought to safeguard its position by
identifying the principal employer of syces through this clause but the
trainers, backed by the Karnataka Race Horse Owners Association, have
brought about a stalemate by surrendering the licenses granted to them.
The first and final entries, handicaps and scratchings now stand
postponed to Wednesday and the parties’ concerned hope to resolve their
respective apprehensions by that deadline failing which the first week’s
races will go void.
The parties concerned right now are involved in an ego clash, harping on
technicalities. Is the syce (a person who looks after the horses) an
employee of the trainer or that of the turf club is the question that
begs to be answered. The owner entrusts the job of training horses to
the trainer who in turn employs personnel to take care of them and as
such there is no ambiguity about who has to fulfill the statutory
obligations with regard to the employees. However, the trainers dispute
this and say that by accepting the clause that they are the principal
employers of syces, they are inviting disaster as they may face the
unenviable task of having to undertake to pay the Provident Fund with
retrospective effect if they lose their case.
Ashok Raghavan, Secretary of the Karnataka Racehorse Owners’ Association
says that "the term employer has been defined under various enactments
differently and the true meaning of such term will be squarely decided
by the definition under the relevant enactment concerned. Further, such
definition can be interpreted and decided by the courts of law and any
other person claiming authority to define the same does not arise."
It is contented that the trainers have not been notified as an
establishment under the PF Act as on date whereas the clubs and
associations have been notified as an establishment for this purpose
right from 31-5-1963.
Several rounds of talks with the representatives of the Management of
the Bangalore Turf Club, the Karnataka Trainers’ Association and the
Karnataka Racehorse Owners’ Association have not resolved the deadlock
and at the time of writing, no body is prepared to hazard a guess except
being optimistic about the racing season starting on time.
The KROA and KTA says that the simple way to solve the crisis is to
withdraw the newly introduced clause unconditionally and leave the
matter to the courts and act when and if a final judgment is delivered
by the courts. The BTC on its part is not willing to postpone the
inevitable and wants individual trainers to undertake the responsibility
as they are the ones who employ the syces, pay their salary and all
other requisites under the law.
For the record, the Western India Trainers’ Association pays the
Provident Fund to syces after registering itself as an establishment
with authorities concerned. "Why should we be in undue haste to identify
the source from which the PF has to be paid when it may take several
years for the case to take a concrete shape. And the whole is exercise
is tantamount to waking up the giant we may not be able handle," opines
Raghavan.
The simple resolution to the problem could be for all the parties
concerned to sit together and work out a plan to face the contingency by
creating a corpus fund for this purpose through contributions from 'all
the limbs' that constitute racing.
The problem is not insurmountable but the ego clash seems to be the
biggest hurdle.
