Neena Malhotra was the first woman in her family to become her own boss. A bank loan started her up in ’72. In those pre-liberalisation years, few women ventured outside the home. There were simply no jobs, even for an educated woman, in a part of the world where women are encouraged to marry and stay at home, not work. Malhotra “pushed her way” into the male-dominated world of factories and offices with difficulty. Much effort went into convincing reluctant bankers that she meant business “despite being a woman”.
Forty years later, Malhotra operates two small businesses. One prints, transcribes and laminates patient-cards for hospitals and employs only women. Some of the employees work out of their own homes, never coming to the small South Delhi office. Looking at the six women who do commute to work here daily, one gets the distinct impression that this organisation is more a social service than an economic exercise. Indeed, the women’s incomes are tiny, and the profits smaller still. “Too tiny to even mention,” says Malhotra.
They stay on to work here, the women say, because the environment is “safe”. “The reason I continue to work here is the reasonable timings and the assurance of safety. In another place, God knows what could happen,” says Pratibha, who has worked here for five years. Even better offers have not lured her elsewhere as yet. “I know women come to work with many apprehensions, against which they need to be made secure,” Malhotra says. She ensures that her employees leave by 5.30 pm and takes them home if they stay later. For the occasional night shift, she hires temporary workers—all men.
Take as macroscopic a view as you like: this is the niche most Indian women occupy when they step out to work—basic, low-skill, low-paying work, with “safety” a bonus. In India, only units that employ more than 10 workers are said to be “organised”, with wages regulated, hours clocked, terms and conditions clearly defined. Just over 11 million units are organised—of a total 52 million manufacturing outfits. The rest often have terrible working conditions that, according to recent research, are deteriorating. “Wages are declining and, by all accounts, treatment of workers has worsened, which may show up as the near-absence of women,” says Jayan Jose Thomas, who teaches economics at IIT Delhi and has done extensive work on India’s labour market.
Thomas notes that there is very little research on gender-based employment in India, largely because government surveys don’t capture the details of how or where women work. It’s clear, however, that more rural Indian women work during periods of distress and difficulty, whereas fewer urban women work—as a percentage of the population—because the economy is simply not creating enough viable opportunities for them. Worryingly, employment in the services sector has begun to slow down, while agricultural incomes have also dwindled, reducing employment options for women.
Companies and industry organisations that, for the first time, participated in the recent spontaneous public protests on crimes against women have finally decided to take action. “The response comes from the fact that, over the last two decades, women have become a large chunk of the services sector workforce,” reasons Manish Sabharwal of TeamLease.
In this context, industry lobby groups like CII and FICCI have sent recommendations to a new government panel convened under former chief justice J.S. Verma to explore how workplaces can be made safer for women. FICCI has said that every company, whether small or large, should appoint a warden-like officer responsible for its women employees’ safety. It wants senior police officials to be held accountable when their juniors have been complicit or inept in dealing with crimes against women. They want resident welfare associations (RWAs) in city neighbourhoods to report atrocities against women.
Often, industry acknowledges, women employees returning home from late night shifts become victims. “More than anything else, we want companies to take responsibility for what happens to their women employees. That includes blue collar workers, not just executives,” says Manju Kalra of FICCI Ladies’ Organisation, who heads a new task force on women. It wants laggard companies to set up sexual harassment committees and is seeking proposals on a system to ensure women’s safety.
How far these go is anybody’s guess. According to a Mumbai-based senior HR executive, new norms for the safety of female employees pose a real challenge to human resource teams. “On the one hand, you are trying to draft policy befitting an equal opportunity work environment and on the other, you have to introduce norms that will mean special factors for female employees. It is a tough balancing act.”
This, however, doesn’t entirely explain the declining numbers of women employees, even in the service sector. “The issue is that Indian women stop working after turning 26 or so, around the age of child rearing. And there’s no avenue for their return in place,” says Sabharwal.
For now, women in the NCR have responded with abundant caution. S. Sahai, an employee of data analysis, research and advisory firm CEB India, says the December incident was a reality check. “I feel a kind of anger I never felt before,” she says of the crime. Though already accustomed to call home while leaving work, she now does so under more urgent instructions from her family. Going home alone at night even with a driver and guard is little reassurance. She considered options other than Delhi, but decided, “My work is here; why should I leave?”
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Please consider my opinion, if at all, lightly. The reason why men marry in India, is to support and provide for their wives and children. When they see women in similar positions, or superior, they see rivals, or superiors. They might feel, that their families are more important. If unmarried, they might feel, it is not imperative to marry ladies, who are independent. It might occur to them, women don't need to be married. This is just what the general reality is, perhaps very obliquely. You don't need sex because you are married, this is what some might feel. And, you don't need a sexologist, to feel uninhibited. I mean, people feel that it is o. k. to talk in any way to a lady, because she is equal or holds a position relatively junior at work, is what it seems. Even in physical intimacy, as any sexologist will vouch for, one needs to respect the partner, when intimate. I mean, it is o. k. not to feel anything about yourself, when alone, and it is pretty degrading to not feel regard and respect, when even putting your arms around a lady. And, I suspect, people are physically intimate otherwise, and feel nothing at all. Men are finding, there is no reason why they need LED displays, and 'consumer durables', and they are buying them anyway. I mean, were people who divorce, needing marriage, and in what way? It is pretty clear to me, that if a man respects a woman, he doesn't want sex particularly. I forgot to express, the words, 'regards and', before respects.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT