Socio-Economic Equality and Value of Labour

The concept of “Social Justice” maintains that every person should have equal access to justice, privileges or sanctions, wealth, health and opportunities, regardless of their identity; political/social/economic, anything of the sort. Legal as well as social institutions are considered to be the primary means of achieving a socially just society, but these institutions are affected by certain other informal institutions which render the above stated goal quite utopian. Examples of this could include religion, culture, custom, descent or employment status. They provide the ideological basis to the dominant and suppressed section for their rights and duties, and their status and role. Illustrating the same is a fact; that the low socio-economic status of Dalits and Women today is the result of various factors which include suppressive ideologies and discriminating practices emanating from religious and cultural texts, going on to form an integral part of Indian society.

The culturally and symbolically enforced caste system in Indian society clearly reflects the caste-based division of labour, in which ‘dirty’ or particularly difficult jobs are assigned to those of Dalit communities. A multitude of derogatory attributes have been ascribed to Hindu Shudras by the writers of the Smiritis. For example, the Shudras are forbidden to study the Vedas or perform any sacrifices, as such they cannot become Brahmins; the so-called educated and pure upper caste. In Mistaken Modernity, Dipankar Gupta describes the caste-based division of labour as assigning specialized functionaries whose sole job is to absorb the pollutants exiting out of a human body. The washer man, the barber, the sweeper; manual scavengers are such persons who are culturally assigned the duty to absorb these pollutants. Such an ideology, ubiquitous as it is, has severely limited the employment spheres open to Dalit communities, effectively depriving them of the power to choose. Such labour is perceived more as a cultural duty enforced by upper castes rather than a wage-earning occupation.

The traditional socio-economic status of women is also a point of immense concern. Indian women tend to have a four-fold status-role sequence, i.e., her role as a daughter, wife, housewife (homemaker) and mother; which clearly reflect her status in relative capacity. The jobs of women were perceived primarily as reproducers in the society, secondly as caretaker of children, thirdly as caretaker of parents and husband, as a cook and as a housekeeper; not as an autonomous individual who ventures into the public sphere and earns money. Her roles as daughter, as wife, mother and housewife, more often restricted her to the four walls of her home from birth to death, thus denying her the freedom of mobility. An Indian woman, until relatively recently, was not a coparcenary to her father’s property, unlike a man who had the right to inherit, thus denying her right to own property and making her dependent initially on father and after marriage on husband. Left with no option, she must continue performing traditional roles enforced by religious and cultural institutions, often considered as her moral duties and lacking exchange value, unlike the roles of men, who worked outside and earned something in exchange. The social status of Dalit Women is needless to describe, as they are victims of both the caste-based and the sexual division of labour.

The traditional Indian occupation system, which is a mix of the caste-based and the sexual division of labour, ignores the exchange value of labour done by marginalised individuals. The social practice of disregarding or undervaluing such labour leads to dependency on the supposed goodwill of the dominant sections for a long time. Thus, undervaluing or devaluing labour not only creates an economically unjust society but also fences the freedom of making a choice; for living, for earning, for accessing resources, and even for affording basic amenities.

How is the Value of Labour Related to Freedom of Choice?

Simply said, the value of one’s labour directly affects the wages paid to the person; the income earned in return makes them more capable of availing and using resources and facilities that are needed for themselves and their family. For example, if a person’s labour is highly valued, he will definitely be paid higher wages which will make the person capable of using resources and facilities not just for mere subsistence but for comfort of his family and himself. His aim would not restrict only to earn for regular food but for nutritious food, a home, health services, education, insurance, etc. Availing and using such resources consequently enhance the capabilities of prospective generations both physically as well as mentally, who then have more freedom to choose the kind of work they want to do based on their learned skills and encouraged interests.

As said by Nobel laureate Amartya Sen,

”The success of a society is to be evaluated by the substantive freedoms that the members of that society enjoy, because having greater freedoms to do the things one has reason to value is

1. Significant in itself for the person’s overall freedom and important in fostering the person’s opportunities to have valuable outcomes.

2. A principal determinant of individual initiative and social effectiveness.”

The undervaluing or devaluing of labour done by Dalit communities and Women who are often victims of intersectional prejudice, and considering their labour as culturally enforced roles, made many of them an unpaid or lesser paid section of the workforce, leaving them excluded from the resources and facilities available to the public at large. This continued for so long that this section of society is historically poverty stricken, thus, making them unable to use resources and facilities provided for enhancing their capabilities and capabilities of future generations. Prospective generations, due to the lack of resources, were left with no choice but to surrender to the already prevailing caste-based and sexual division of labour. It not only made the caste system and patriarchy rigid and pervasive, whose ill-effects haunt the principles of equality and justice even today.

The contribution of social reform movements, various provisions of the Constitution of India, land reforms, and other legislation have no doubt aimed at improving the socio-economic and political status of Dalit communities and women but have not been immune to hinderances. It is pertinent to mention that as per the Economic Survey 2007-08, 93% of India’s workforce includes the self-employed and persons employed in unorganized sector. This unorganized labour force has been categorised by The Ministry of Labour into four groups; occupation, nature of employment, specially distressed categories and service categories. These include small and marginal farmers, landless agricultural labourers, share croppers, fishermen, leather workers, weavers, artisans, salt workers, workers in brick kilns and stone quarries, workers in saw mills, oil mills, attached agricultural labourers, bonded labourers, migrant workers, Toddy tappers, scavengers, carriers of head loads, drivers of animal driven vehicles, midwives, domestic workers, barbers, vegetable and fruit vendors and newspaper vendors, among others. In addition to these four categories, there exists various sections part of the unorganized labour force such as cobblers, Hamals, handicraft artisans, handloom weavers, female tailors, disabled self-employed persons, rikshaw pullers, auto drivers, sericulture workers, carpenters, tannery workers, power loom workers and the urban poor.

Upon carefully examining the nature of above-mentioned categories, one can clearly conclude that the majority of them are the traditional occupations of Dalit communities and women and, since their workforce is classified as unorganised labour, they remain excluded from the benefits of labour legislation, which are intended to empower them. Thus, the lack of recognition of unorganised labour primarily constituting of women and members of Dalit communities pose a major challenge to the successful implementation of constitutional guarantees and legislative enactments against socio-economic discrimination and exclusion.

Conclusion

The future of India seems concerning if seen in this context as it has failed to alleviate societal inequities and is yet to commit towards inclusive development even after 70 years of independence, leading to India’s abysmal ranking of 131 in the Human development Index (2020). The value of specific caste or gender oriented work/ occupation remains more or less same i.e., low, which is today the principle reason behind the hue and cry of unrecognized and unpaid domestic labour. The difference between the pay scale of women and men in the same industries or workplace, low wages of sweepers and manual scavengers, poor Dalit households have all thus resulted in and compound socio-economic Injustice. These Inequalities resulting out of various social divisions, like caste, class, gender, community, region, race, sub castes, language and rise in sub-nationalisms based upon them, run contrary to the essence of Indian Constitution, and have time and again proved to be major barrier in development of India.

Merely initiating social reform entirely disconnected from the realities of economic injustice cannot lead to a socially just society. The persons whose labour forms a major part of Indian work force, but is not valued as much as others’ labour, automatically acquire low socio-economic status in the eyes of society, influenced by the traditional and conservative approach towards the term. Therefore, until the labour of many within Dalit communities and women is not valued by society and market systems, in their individual capacity and not in relative or customary capacity, no matter how many State-enforced economic opportunities, subsidies and reservation schemes are provided, these sections of society will remain vulnerable to exploitation and subjugation by the dominant forces of society.

Marginalised workforces form the backbone of the Indian economy, as such its importance must be recognized. For this purpose, it is recommended that economic reform encapsulating the ‘inclusive approach’ towards all kinds of occupation be taken, to annihilate the economic inequalities which result into social inequalities. It is acknowledged that the successive Governments, till date, have adopted the approach of creating socially just institutions and providing opportunities for those that need them. However, capability/skill-building is the precedent required to exercise the freedom of making a choice which leads to socio-economic justice in the long run. Hence, the idea proposed here, is to value the labour done by such forces that do end up playing culturally assigned roles, and assess the exchange value of the same so as to pay standardized minimum wages in return.

(For References, Read ’Development as Freedom’ and ‘ Idea of Justice’by Amartya Sen and ’Mistaken Modernity’ by Dipankar Gupta.)