The name of the company is Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL). The product in question is A brand-named Cif, an abrasive cleaner. It is manufactured by Unilever (China) Co. Ltd at its unit located at the Economic & Technical Development Zone at Hefei City in China. The key ingredients of the product are: sodium salt of linear Alkyl Benzene (LAB), sulphonic acid, alcohol ethoxylate and calcium carbonate. All of them are plentifully available in India. The product is being advertised through all major channels across the country. Although one does not know the sales volume and the actual marketing cost of Cif, they could be substantial and the market is growing. HUL could have easily used one of its several units in India to manufacture Cif, but chose not to. Could it be because of an export obligation that Unilever's China subsidiary had and it found India a soft target to fulfill its entry-level export commitment there?

HUL is not the only MNC with a large manufacturing base in India using off-shore production facility to import and sell products in India. There are several others. The products — from bathroom cleaners, toothpastes, biscuits, industrial items, white and brown goods, electronic items, computer peripherals, data cards and luxury consumer goods - are imported by these MNCs mainly from countries where they operate under strict export obligation and when unit costs are lower. They come mainly from their bases in East Asia, South-East Asia, West Asia and Australia. For India, these imports are causing a big loss of domestic jobs and hard-earned foreign exchange.

Going by the half-yearly corporate results of India's top 1,000 companies during 2009-10, it is feared that there have been considerable loss of jobs in almost every sector. The turnover of most large companies shrank though their profits surged. The imports went up sizably. Corporate India's net sales dipped by around 10 per cent, but operating profit was up by over 8 per cent. Cheaper imports, lower borrowing cost, job rationalisation (meaning job cutting) and price escalation helped. Imports by companies like HUL, Nestle, Suzuki, Bayer, Siemens, Haier, LG, Samsung, United Spirits and Procter & Gamble went up substantially during the first half of the current financial year. Most of them are listed foreign companies. HUL's foreign currency spending more than doubled to nearly Rs. 2,000 crore during the period. No public data on imports by unlisted foreign companies selling consumer products, the number of which are fast growing, is available. India is already faced with a trade deficit of over US$ 20 billion with China during this current fiscal.

In addition to the import blues, the MNCs are also directly exporting their surplus staff from home countries and other locations to man India operations even at lower level jobs. These expat executives are costing huge amounts in salaries and perks to their employers in India as they get compensation equivalent to what they generally got abroad. They also take away jobs of more dedicated local professionals, who are available for a much smaller remuneration. Project imports are bringing in their train hordes of even semi-skilled workers in erection and construction jobs. A few years ago, such practices were unthinkable. Companies such as HLL, ITC, Pfizer, Glaxo, Pepsico, Procter & Gamble, LG, Samsung, Maruti-Suzuki, Hyundai and Haier were all built by Indian executives. But, times are changing. Expat managers and workers are flooding the Indian job market. Their numbers, including the so-called consultants, run into tens of thousands. Haier, the Chinese multinational, maintained only two or three Chinese employees in India in 2003. Now, it has a huge presence of Chinese staff in India, disproportionate to the size of its business in the country. Haier sells home appliances and electronics products. More or less, the same is the story of Korean, Japanese, Malaysian, French, German, Italian, British, Scandinavian, Swiss, Australian and American enterprises.

Not long ago, companies such as the erstwhile Hindustan Lever (now HUL), Britannia, ITC, Union Carbide, Excide (Chloride India), ICI, ITC, Phillips, IBM, Siemens etc. all had to work under severe export obligations or import substitution commitments to retain their overseas management control over India operations. The result was an industrial boom through the 1980s and the early 1990s and huge job creation in the organised sector. It was also challenging times for Indian executives at the helm of most of those companies to meet the government regulations and export obligations. Other countries such as China, South Korea, Malaysia and Singapore replicated the India model with stricter export obligations for foreign direct investments (FDI) with great success. They all are now eying the large Indian consumer market to export their products to create more home jobs, earn foreign exchange and deploy their surplus staff in India operations. All these are bad news for Indian job seekers. The unorganised sector is already under severe pressure from cheaper imports of consumer goods. Many domestic companies find it more profitable to import and distribute low-cost overseas products than having them manufactured in their local factories. Ironically, the growth (GDP) statistics do not say it all. In a year when the country's foodgrains productions registered a negative growth, some 17 fertiliser companies spent nearly 200 per cent more on imports in 2009 or Rs 25,800 crore. Several of these companies had kept their own production capacities underutilised.

The job scene in the organised sector is depressing. On the one hand, imports are taking away domestic jobs. On the other, increasing number of big and medium-sized companies are farming out even technical and semi-technical jobs of permanent nature to supply contractors to save on wage bill. Contract workers are invariably under-paid and exploited. Both are having a demoralising impact on the local job market. They are also not in the long-term interest of the economy and its stability. Few would appreciate this better than Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, an architect of the country's industrial resurgence through the 1980s, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who steered the economic reforms in the 1990s. Unfortunately, there are too many vested interests in the government who are working more for the individual benefit of a small number of business persons and enterprises than for the lasting gains of the nation.

The forthcoming Union Budget for 2010-11 provides an opportunity for the government to refix its priorities and provide economic stimulus to those sectors which create domestic jobs and ensure minimum living wage to employees. The export sector deserves a special attention in the coming Budget. If the world's top economies such as the USA, Japan, China, Germany, the UK, France and South Korea are export-led and job-protective, why should India be seen as an import dump? Imagine, India is running a US$ 20-billion-plus trade deficit with China alone, this year! Unnecessary imports are snatching away local jobs. They are also constantly causing trade imbalance of a very large magnitude. Unnecessary imports, be they goods or services, are weakening domestic enterprises. This is unthinkable in any other country.

The key focus of budget for 2010-11 should be job - its creation and retention - with the government taking a strong position on the wage aspect in private sector jobs, including contract jobs. All industrial workers, irrespective of their nature and description of jobs, must be brought under a pension scheme, which guarantees a minimum monthly pension to all members and its periodical revision to catch up with inflation. The government has been taking good care of its employees. It should now turn its attention to private sector jobs and pension. Any economic stimulus or tax and other concessions should be linked with job creation and job retention. To make jobs available to eligible persons and build a benevolent image of business leaders are all the country needs to keep its head high before other powerful and emerging economies. The budget can make this happen. It can make a beginning on February 26. (IPA Service)