Q. Rakesh was working as a Joint Commissioner in Transport department of a city. As a part of his job profile, among others, he was entrusted with the task of overseeing the control and functioning of City Transport Department.
A case strike by drivers’ union of City Transport Department over the issue of compensation to a driver who died on duty while driving the bus came up before him for decision in the matter.
He gathered that the driver (deceased) was plying Bus No. 528 which passed through busy and congested roads of the city. It so happened that near an intersection on the way, there was an accident involving the a middle-aged man. It was found that there was altercation between the driver and the car driver. Heated arguments between them led to fight and the driver gave him a a blow. Lot of passerbys had gathered and tried to intervene but without success. Eventually, both of them were badly injured and profusely bleeding and were taken to the nearby hospital. The driver succumbed to the injuries and could not be saved. The middle-aged driver’s condition was also critical but after a day, he recovered and was discharged. Police had immediately come to the spot and FIR was registered. Police investigation revealed that the quarrel in was started by the bus driver and he had resorted to physical violence. There exchange of blows between them.
The City Transport Department management is considering of not giving any extra compensation to the driver’s (deceased) family. The family is very aggrieved. depressed and agitated against the discriminatory and non-sympathetic approach of the City Transport Department management. The bus driver (deceased) was 52 years of age, was survived by his wife and two school-college going daughters. He was the sole earner of the family. The City Transport Department workers’ union took up this case and when found no favourable response from the management, decided to go on strike. The union’s demand was two fold. First was full extra compensation as given to other drivers who died on duty and secondly employment to one family member. The strike has continued for 10 days and the deadlock remains.
(a) What are the options available to Rakesh to meet the above situation?
(b) Critically examine each of the options identified by Rakesh
(c) What are the ethical dilemmas being faced by Rakesh?
(d) What course of action would Rakesh adopt to diffuse the above situation?
Question from UPSC Mains 2022 GS4 Paper
Model Answer:
The case involves balancing administrative objectivity (adhering to rules) with empathy for a bereaved family, alongside resolving a severe public transport crisis (Utilitarianism).
1. Options Available and Critical Examination (Parts a & b)
- Option 1: Strictly reject union demands
- Merits: Upholds the rule of law; penalizes workplace violence (Kant’s Categorical Imperative).
- Demerits: Prolongs the 10-day strike (public hardship); lacks compassion for the destitute family.
- Option 2: Accept all demands to end the strike
- Merits: Immediately restores public transport; provides total financial security to the family.
- Demerits: Sets a dangerous precedent; rewards indiscipline and violates administrative rules.
- Option 3: Middle path (Standard statutory dues + alternative livelihood support)
- Merits: Balances justice with empathy; refuses bowing to blackmail while showing humanistic governance.
- Demerits: Union leaders may initially resist partial concessions.
2. Ethical Dilemmas Faced by Rakesh (Part c)
- Objectivity vs. Compassion: Enforcing strict service rules (denying extra benefits due to driver’s violence) versus empathizing with a vulnerable widow and daughters.
- Public Interest vs. Union Pressure: Restoring essential transport services quickly versus yielding to unjustified, coercive strike tactics.
- Means vs. Ends: Evaluating if the tragic end (death) justifies ignoring the unethical means (initiating physical violence).
3. Proposed Course of Action (Part d)
- Engage the Union: Initiate immediate dialogue. Clearly communicate the police FIR findings proving the driver’s culpability to delegitimize the strike.
- Invoke Statutory Levers: Threaten invoking the Essential Services Maintenance Act (ESMA) if the strike continues, prioritizing public welfare.
- Resolve Compensation: Deny “extra” compensation, but immediately expedite standard statutory dues (PF, Gratuity, Workmen’s Compensation Act).
- Alternative Family Relief: Deny compassionate government appointment (prohibited when employee is at fault), but leverage CSR funds or NGOs to fund the daughters’ education.
- Systemic Reform: Mandate stress and anger management workshops for all transport staff to prevent future road rage.
Rakesh must exercise emotional intelligence and adhere to the Nolan Principles, ensuring administrative firmness against unjust demands while demonstrating humanistic governance toward the grieving family.
