The recent violent demonstrations by garment workers demanding a minimum monthly wage of Tk 30,000 have once again exposed the growing pressure on workers struggling to cope with the rising cost of living. The government’s decision to form a six-member wage board to review and recommend an increase in garment workers’ wages is a response to a legitimate concern. However, the question is whether the government is taking a sufficiently comprehensive view of the economic consequences of repeated wage and price adjustments.
There is no denying that garment workers deserve fair wages. They are among the principal contributors to the country’s export earnings, and their livelihoods must receive serious attention. The rising prices of food, house rent, healthcare, transport and other essentials have made it increasingly difficult for low-income families to manage their daily expenses. Their demand for a reasonable wage revision cannot simply be ignored.
But the government should have taken the initiative to review garment workers’ wages much earlier, particularly after the recent salary increases for public servants. The increase in government employees’ salaries has added to purchasing power in the market, while the prices of essential commodities have already placed considerable pressure on household budgets. A wage review for garment workers was therefore necessary well before the situation deteriorated into street protests and violence.
Our concern is that successive wage increases, without adequate assessment of their impact on prices, could further intensify inflationary pressure. If garment workers receive higher wages, their improved purchasing power will be welcome. But if the resulting increase in production costs is passed on to consumers, the benefits could be partly or entirely eroded by higher prices. This is particularly worrying for people who are neither government employees nor workers in the formal industrial sector.
A large section of the population works in small businesses, informal occupations, agriculture and other low-paid jobs. They do not necessarily receive regular salary increments when the government revises public-sector pay scales or industries increase wages. Yet they have to bear the consequences when the prices of daily necessities rise. Their purchasing power continues to decline, making ordinary life increasingly difficult.
The government must therefore adopt a pragmatic and coordinated approach to wage adjustments. Before approving any increase, the wage board should carefully examine workers’ actual living costs, the financial capacity of garment factories, productivity, export competitiveness and the possible impact on consumer prices. Employers should also be encouraged to improve efficiency rather than shift every additional cost onto consumers.
Equally important is the need for stronger market monitoring. The government must prevent unjustified price increases, hoarding and profiteering, particularly when wage or fuel price adjustments create opportunities for market manipulation. Any increase in production costs should not become an excuse for arbitrary price hikes.
The government should also review the broader impact of its own decisions, including increases in public-sector salaries, fuel prices and electricity tariffs. Such decisions have direct and indirect effects on production, transportation and the prices of essential goods. They must be assessed together rather than in isolation.
The formation of the wage board is a step towards addressing workers’ concerns, but wage policy must be linked with a wider strategy to control inflation and protect purchasing power. Fair wages are essential, but so is the right of every citizen to afford food, housing, healthcare and other basic necessities. The government must ensure that improving the income of one section of society does not make life even harder for millions of others.
