23 Labour migration: trends and implications II

Somyabrata Bagchi

epgp books

 

 

Introduction

 

This module is in continuation of the Module 4.4 A in which we learnt about some of the general features of migration. In the same module, we learnt about different types of migration and paid particular attention to seasonal migration besides delineating some of the general causes associated with the migration of labour in our times. We surveyed a wide range of literature to cover some of the important aspects of the migration of labour. To build on our earlier discussion, and to extend it further to complete our understanding of migration, this module discusses the consequences of migration in general and for the rural poor in particular. It also describes the experiences of migration of rural women in India and their conditions in terms of work and employment. Towards the end, we underline some of the possible trends in the study of labour migration.

 

We devote this much time and an intellectual resource to the issue of migration as it has acquired added momentum in our country in the last few decades or so. Moreover, we are convinced that migration is a significant process affecting the agrarian relations and social structure in contemporary times. Villages are no longer to be seen as stable communities of birth. In fact, they were never so. However, as an increasing number of people circulate across vast geographic distances they are likely to be the carriers of new ideas, values and ideals of life. The migrants are likely to acquire and develop socioeconomic and cultural wherewithal to escape many of the handicaps of their communities and places of origin. They can exercise new livelihood choices and thereby move from lower paying sectors and places to the relatively higher paying ones. They need not remain saddled in the older economic grooves of the patron-client relations in the village, or carry on the burden of indebtedness through working for the same employer across generations. Migration opens up possibilities of upward mobility as well. True, it also disrupts some of the older certitudes of life in a sheltered and protected social environment even if that life remains characterised with an abysmally low level of economic resources.

 

Consequences of rural labour migration

 

In India, almost 60 per cent of labour force maintains their livelihood form agriculture (The Economist Intelligence Unit, 2008). At the same time, it is also true that women are generally excluded from the right to property including ownership of agricultural land in many parts of the country (Rao, 2007: 299). Interestingly, gender disparity in land holding apart, the proportion of women as agricultural labourers has been increased over the last 40 years in comparison with men (Garikipati, 2008: 630). The rising share of women in agricultural wage employment has been called the ‘feminization of agricultural labour’ (ibid, 2008: 630). Scholars argue that the increasing feminization of agricultural labouris an important consequence of rural to urban migration. Given the predominantly male character of migration,the vacancy created by the absent men in the villages gets filled by women. While men work in urban areas and thereby create a vacuum in agricultural wage employment sector in the countryside, women come forward to take up agricultural jobs in addition to other household activities. This phenomenon is more apparent in dry regions where a substantial number of small farmers and casual labourers undertake seasonal migration (Bhattacharyya et al, 2007: 517). Garikipati’s (2008) empirical study of Andhra Pradesh observes that 66.7% agricultural labourers are women. Moreover, these women spend 88.3% of their non-domestic work time in the fields (Garikipati, 2008: 635). The male members of their families migrate for off-farm employment and their income constitutes 33.4 % of their household income on an average (ibid, 2008: 635).

 

Migrant’s earnings are spent in different ways. It compensates for the vagaries of agricultural production. Rural poor pay back their loans from these earnings (Korra, 2011: 70). Some people invest part of their income in buying agricultural equipment, irrigation pumps, and jewellery. It also takes care of expenses incurred on life cycle rituals and festivals and thereby helps them gain social position in the village society (Mosse et al, 2002: 79). Indeed, some migrants do succeed in creating productive assets like land and house after returning home. Others, as mentioned earlier, channel their income in repaying debt. Be that as it may, scholarly findings indicate that in many cases migration do not improve the quality of life of the rural people. Rather, it undermines it in several cases. But then, for the rural poor, migration has turned out to be a time-tested strategy of survival (ibid, 2002: 60).

 

In a way, migration raises male’s position in the households as the family becomes more dependent on their earnings. The voice of the women thins down even as their work increases. Men who migrate for work spend their time in leisure and recreation after returning home. Women who migrate with their husbands have to continue managing their domestic and reproductive roles together with wage earning. Seen thus, migration actually increases work load of women. Some of the migrant labourers become local labour contractors. After spending couple of years in urban areas they develop their network with the employers, other contractors or the big agents. This helps them increase their earning capacity. Such successful migrant families leave their village homesand begin to reside permanently in urban areas.

 

As a result of migration, rural people are also introduced to new types of consumption opportunities. Some of them stay mostly in urban areas, and only for few months, especially during the time of harvesting, they visit their villages. This has implications for family structures in the villages. In villages, large extended families begin to split into small nuclear families because of the income differentials between migrant and non-migrant members of the family.In some cases, workers go to town early in the morning and return home late at night. So, they have less time to spend with their relatives. In this way, migration brings changes in the nature and character of existing family and social relationships.

 

The migrant labourers move from one place to another, and stay in distant places with people from various castes and ethnicities. Rogaly et al (2001) argue that such interactions lead to changesin their social identities. They are also of the opinion that the employers’interaction with the workers too affect the latter’s social identities (Rogay et al, 2001: 4555). Many migrant labourers have improved their personal and family’s economic condition (Mehra et al, 2014: 25, Bhutia et al 2014: 1837). They have also shown the tendency to learn local language, cultural practices, dress pattern, and even religious practices in order to feel comfortable and make themselves acceptable in the local society (ibid, 2014: 25). Such transformations are the outcomes of social and economic exposure and economic well-being (ibid, 2014: 25).

 

Migration of rural women in India: conditions and consequences

 

In the last half a century, women are migrating more than ever. Earlier migration was largely a saga of male migrants. Even when the latter were accompanied by women, women always appeared in the larger narrative as dependents. It is only recently that scholars have started looking at migration as a process empowering women. Fromwomen’s point of view, as some scholars have underlined, migration could be a liberating experience despite the heavy burden placed on women asperpetual negotiators between two cultures – the migrant and the host.Much of the credit for the centrality of women in contemporary research on migration must go to the efflorescence of feminist scholarship.

 

In fact, the 1970s saw the study of labour migration from gender perspectives. Scholars gradually realized that the process, consequences, and factors of migration have gender related consequences. Scholars argue that migration of rural women is impeded by two reasons. First, women are responsible for all domestic works. They have to do all the chores in the houses. When the male members of a family migrate to distant places for works, they leave their farm, livestock, and children in the care of the women. Second, most of the migrant labourers stay in open areas. There are little or no sanitation facilities (Bhattacharyya et al, 2007: 523). Therefore, it would be an awful situation for the women migrants. In many cases, women migrants are physically harassed by the employers or contractors (Mosse et al, 2002, Rogaly and Coppard, 2003).

Therefore, it is clear that the high level of male migration reduces the chance of female migration due to the latter’s heightened household responsibilities and the rise of local employment opportunities. Women migration is impeded by women’s vulnerability and the need for their protection.

Sometimes though, contractors favour to take both husbands and wives into service. If husbands fail to complete the work due to sickness or some other reasons, their wives would work in place of their husbands. Garikipati (2008) has noted that labourers who migrate with their wives earn more than that of the labourers who move alone (Garikipati, 2008: 638). Apart from this, the number of women migrantworkers has been increased today because of globalization (Sundari, 2005: 2295). In India, a substantial number of young women have migrated to cities in search of work, and for attaining a better life for themselves and their families. They are mostly involved in service, manufacturing and informal sectors (ibid, 2005: 2295). Sundari (2005) is of opinion that in all countries migrant labourers are mostly men except India where the number of women migrant labourers is higher than the male counterpart (ibid, 2005: 2295). In large cities, male migrant workers are large in number whereas women migrate short distance within their rural areas. In India, rural to urban migration of women is more pronounced than that of urban to urban migration.Figure 9: Women at a construction site

 

Lack of employment opportunity in the rural areas is the primary push factor of migration for the rural women (ibid, 2005: 2296). The rural women are traditionally engaged in agriculture. But the labour intake capacity of agricultural sectors has been reduced drastically due to economic reforms, structuration, natural disasters, and poor infrastructure for irrigation. Roberts (1997) has pointed out that export industries have a continued demand of gender specific labour (cited in Sunari 2005: 2296). The growth of export industries in some parts of the country ensue the out migration of rural women. Drought is an important cause of women migration (ibid, 2005: 2296). It has been observed in the drought prone regions of Tamil Nadu that when the intensity of drought is increased, women agricultural labourers begin to migrate in industrial town and cities in search of work (ibid, 2005: 2296).

 

Social capital as well as Social Network has significant impact on women migration (ibid, 2005: 2298). Social network provides job information, temporary shelters to the newcomers, and a sense of security among the rural women who for the first time begin to adjust with the urban environment. Lisa Eklund (2000) is of opinion that women workers are more dependent on their social networks in faraway places in comparison to men (cited in Sundari, 2005: 2298). Such social capital works as pull factors for their migration and assure them a sense of security in unfamiliar surroundings. In many cases, employers refuse to take migrant workers without the reference of some known people.

 

It is equally true that the decision to migrate is mostly taken by both male and female members of the families. It is the men who first move to the workplace and then he asks his family members to accompany him. In case of widow or divorced women, the migration decision solely depends on them or sometimes their relatives assist them to take decisions.

 

S.Sundari’s (2005) empirical investigation in Tamil Nadu led her to conclude that a large section of women migrants belong to the age group of 21-30. The majority of women migrant labourers are from Hindu backward castes. The Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) women comprise around one-third of the labour force. More than half of the migrant women are married and stay with their husbands after migration. A considerable portion of women migrants lacks school education. Those unskilled labour forces crowd in urban labour market and engage in low paid jobs under dreadful conditions. Mosse et al (2002) in their work have observed that women migration is high among the Bhil community. In their survey they found that 42% of migrant labourers were women.

 

In India, a large number of women migrants are employed in the construction sector. They migrate with their husbands and children. As they are mostly uneducated and low skilled, they are recruited as manual labourers for works such as digging, and carrying construction materials. Their wages are comparatively lower than that of the male workers in spite of India’s Equal Remuneration Act.

 

Besides, their job security, living arrangements, and earnings are quite appalling. They have no regular working hours, and they have to work every day in under severelystressful conditions. And of course, there is always the risk of termination. The women workers are not provided maternity or sick leave. Bhattacharyya and Korinek (2007) have observed that some women migrant workers to carry weighty bricks in the late stage of their pregnancy. Their children often go along with them. They also suffer from health problems because of inhaling dust, smoke, and other perilous components of the worksites. Sometimes they have to pay a percentage of their income to the agent through whom they get the jobs. They are not well aware about the labour laws, and government rules and regulations. They hesitate to discuss their working conditions to the outsiders. They think it will increase their job insecurity. It is because they perceive that there is no way for redressing harassments. They have no unions for potential protections. Bhattacharyya and Korinek (2007) is of the opinion that although women become independent earners in the wake of migration, there is no improvement in their household decision making power when compared to their pre-migration condition because it is difficult to estimate the earning of the migrant women. In case of a couple, contract wages are not negotiated separately for husband and wife. The couple are given a fixed amount of money as wages. Sometimes the wives of the migrant labours work as maidservants in the houses of the employers. They hand over their incomes to their husbands (ibid, 2008: 641, Bhattacharyya et al, 2007: 524). Some scholars argue that as the rural labourers are exposed to the urban environment through migration, gradually it transforms the traditional rural life and joint family into modern urban life with nuclear family. It also brings sufficient autonomy to women. Bhattacharyya and Korinek (2007) in their empirical investigation among the women migrant labours in Delhi have observed that majority of them, around 75%, want to stay in their jobs in spite of hazardous working and living conditions. They perceive that in urban areas they would get a stable source of income which they would not be provided with in their villages. They also feel that their economic position has ameliorated after migration.This amelioration assumes added significance when viewed against the backdrop of gender divide in the places of origin.

 

A recent report by P. Sainath, the well-known journalist and commentator on rural affairs, describes a strong gender dividecharacterising agricultural tasks in the countryside. Women are barred from ploughing. But they almost exclusively perform operations like transplanting, weeding, harvesting, threshing and also do post-harvest workAccording to one analysis, women form32 per cent of the work force that prepares the land for cultivation76 per cent of those sowing seeds90 per cent of people engaged in transplantation82 per cent of those transporting the crop fromfield to home100 per cent of workers processing food, and69 per cent of those in dairying.Most of these activities mean a lot of bending and squatting. Besides, many of the tools and implements used were not designed for the comfort of women. The work women do in the fields sees them move forward constantly while bending and squatting. So, severe pain in the back and legs is very common. Often standing skin-deep in water during transplantation, they’re also exposed to skin diseases.Then there’s injury from implements made for men and never refashioned for women. Injuries from sickles and machetes are common and decent medical care is rare. Tetanus is a constant threat.

Conclusion

Karl Polanyi in his famous book ‘The Great Transformation’ argues that Land, Labour and Money are fictitious commodities 8. Commodities are those which are produced for sale in the market. But, land is a gift of nature, and labour is the work of human beings. So land and labour cannot be artificially produced. The earnings of the rural migrant labourers entirely depend on their labours. Following Marx, it can be argued that when society moves from feudalism to capitalism, two types of transformation happen. First, it transforms the social means of subsistence into capital, and second it converts the associated producers into wage-labourers (Levien, 2012: 937). Hence, it converts the peasant class into labour class. It also separates peasants or workers from their means of production. In this module, we have seen as to how rural poor peasants migrate to other areas and work as labourers. In their case, ‘alienation’ also occurs because they have little control over what they do. They have no authority to decide what to do and how to do. Marx too propounds that capitalism creates ‘a reserve army of labours’ to maintain a constant supply of cheap workers. But, in reality, it is observed that such reserve army of labour does not take shape as seamlessly as Marx would have us believe. One important reason is low level of education of the workers (Levien, 2012: 949). At present, knowledge based economy is growing rapidly. Bob Jessop (2007) is of the opinion that knowledge is the newest factor of production, and it provides an edge to the modern capitalist system 8. In this system, workers are remunerated in exchange of their intangible output. But, the rural labourers do not get proper access to education. So they have to rest content with jobs in the informal sectors. Therefore, the peasants or migrant labourers cannot easily transform themselves into skilled wage labours because of lack of ‘knowledge’.

 

Somehow, most of the scholarsfail to appreciate the intrinsic value of labour migration as a dynamic aspect of rural livelihoods. Moreover, they mostlyreveal economistic viewpoints alone. Scholars need to focus on how the migrant labourers maintain their social networks both in their new work places and back in their villages. For example, in many places participating in village festivals is mandatory. The migrant workers often return to their villages for the celebration of certain festivals. If someone does not show his or

her presence during festivals, s/he will be ostracized from the community or may be looked down upon. In this way, through festivals and periodic visits migrant workers maintain their social networks in their villages as well. Mosse et al (2002) takes note of this aspect of rural labour migration in their work. Yet, we need an in-depth understanding of the migrants’ urge to keep their social bonds active in both the settings.

 

Some of the migrant labourers become successful entrepreneurs in towns and cities. Future research can focus on the emergent entrepreneurship among the migrants. As of now, much of the research on migration either document or depict the awful condition of the poor migrant labourers or explore the multiple reasons for migration. Some of the policies, namely MGNREGA, are ostensibly geared towards reducing migration. The fact of the matter is that in India most of the job opportunities are now in the informal sectors. Given this trajectory of growth, the drivers of the economy will increasingly rely on the dependable supply of labour in the informal sectors. It would be worthwhile on the part of scholars to focus their attention on the ways and means through which the migrant labourers can enhance their quality of life given the overall macro-economic constraints. There is the need to identify such policies that will aid the migrants’ quest for a relatively secure and dignified livelihood. We need policies and regulatory frameworks that will contain and mitigate their exploitation.

 

After Independence, Government of India took several initiatives to provide institutional sources of cheap credit so that villagers do not fall prey to usurious loans. Yet, large number of migrant workers still depends on usury. We need to think about productivity gains not only from the point of view of the GDP but also from the perspective of the migrant labourers. We await further research on the role of NGOs, political parties, and civil societies to create awareness and thereby help secure legal protection for the migrant workers. In this context,Rogaly et al. (2001) argue that,in West Bengal,KrishakSabha, a CPI (M) organization comprising of small cultivators and wage workers, has played an important role in improving the working conditions of the migrant labourers. KrishakSabha allows migrant labourers to work during the peak seasons. Their wages are also fixed and are made equal to the non-migrant labourers. It also reduces the gap between male and female wages. In fact, it is surprising that migrant labourers are often at the mercy of employers and contractors despite the presence of a vast cadre of government labour officers. Fieldwork based research reveals gross violation of human rights of the migrant labourers and theunder-recording and under-reporting of their exploitation. They evoke too much of pity even on the part of scholars as the migrants’ dreadful working and living conditions are seen of a piece with the poverty-stricken and hunger-stricken environment that they come from. It is time we granted migrants their agency. We should not paint them all as victims of the insurmountable structures. They do not always react to their existential conditions with such passivity that the literature often recounts. They may elect to opt for certain livelihood options in accordance with their socioeconomic conditions, and their own assessment of their income-earning abilities and their judgement of the surrounding environment.

 

Be that as it may, it is also true that the migrant workers are the first victims of ethnic politics and the regional chauvinism that some political parties indulge in. In Mumbai it is generally the poor migrant worker from the Hindi-speaking region of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh who get targeted as and when the Shiv Sena, and its splinter group, the Maharashtra NavnirmanSena (MNS) give a call for the open display of their nativism and parochialism. In different places in Assam, poor Bihari workers get beaten up and killed in the name of insider versus the outsider. Examples abound when communal riots, ethnic clashes and civic disorders of multiple sorts make lives extra difficult for the poor migrant workers in different parts of the country. They are often looked at as the scum of the urban landscape whose aesthetics and civility get compromised by the sheer presence of the under-fed and ill-clothed migrants.

 

In any case, the rural labour migrants are going to be the persistent presence in our midst. It would be limiting if we look at them only in relation to the urban-industrial complex. Indeed, they have a constitutive presence vis-à-vis the rural as well.Scholars need to factor in fundamental changes emanating out of the all-pervasive rural labour migration even for an understanding of the rural and the village.

    Web links and interesting facts/points to ponder

Please visit the following website for the relevant video and multi-media resources on women’s migration

http://www.ruralindiaonline.org/articles/visible-work-invisible-women-a-lifetime-bending-panel-2/

Please visit the following as an updated repository of resources on migration

http://www.shram.org

you can view video on Labour migration: trends and implications II

References

  • Allotey,   Pascale.   “Guest   Editorial:   Is   Health   a   Fundamental   Right   for Migrants?.” Development 46, no. 3 (2003): 6-9.
  •  Bhattacharyya, Sanghita K., and Kim Korinek. “Opportunities and vulnerabilities of female migrants in construction work in India.” Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 16, no. 4 (2007): 511-531.
  •   Bhutia, Sherap, Sunny Rawat, and AshishChhetri. “Labour Migration and Their Exploitation: A Case Study in Hill Towns of West Bengal.” European Academic Research 2, no.2 (2014): 1831-1845.
  •   Breman, Jan, ed. Footloose labour: Working in India’s informal economy. Vol. 2. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
  •  Dannecker, Petra. “Transnational migration and the transformation of gender relations: The case of Bangladeshi labour migrants.” Current Sociology 53, no. 4 (2005): 655-674
  •   Economist Intelligence Unit (2008), India: Country Profile, London: The Economist Intelligence Unit.
  •   Gadgil, Madhav, and RamachandraGuha. Ecology and equity: The use and abuse of nature in contemporary India. Psychology Press, 1995.
  •   Garikipati, Supriya. “Agricultural wage work, seasonal migration and the widening gender gap: Evidence from a semi-arid region of Andhra Pradesh.”The European Journal of Development Research 20, no. 4 (2008): 629-648.
  •   Gidwani, Vinay, and KalyanakrishnanSivaramakrishnan. “Circular migration and rural cosmopolitanism in India.” Contributions to Indian Sociology 37, no. 1-2 (2003): 339-367.
  •  Keshri, Kunal, and R. B. Bhagat. “Temporary and seasonal migration: Regional pattern, characteristics and associated factors.” Economic and Political Weekly 47, no. 4 (2012): 81-88.
  • Korra, Vijay. “Labour migration in Mahabubnagar: Nature and Characteristics.”Economic and Political Weekly 46, no. 2 (2011): 67-70.
  • Levien, Michael. “The land question: special economic zones and the political economy of dispossession in India.” Journal of Peasant Studies 39.3-4 (2012): 933-969
  • Levitt, Peggy, and B. NadyaJaworsky. “Transnational migration studies: Past developments and future trends.” Annu. Rev. Sociol. 33 (2007): 129-156.
  • Levitt, Peggy. “Transnational migration: taking stock and future directions.”Global networks 1, no. 3 (2001): 195-216.
  • Mehra, Shruti, and Gian Singh. “Migration: A Propitious Compromise.” Economic and Political Weekly 49, no. 15 (2014): 25-26.
  • Miller, Barbara D. Cultural Anthropology. PHI learning. 2011.
  •  Mosse, David, Sanjeev Gupta, Mona Mehta, Vidya Shah, Julia fnms Rees, and KRIBP Project Team. “Brokered livelihoods: debt, labour migration and development in tribal western India.” Journal of Development Studies 38, no. 5 (2002): 59-88.
  • Rafique, Abdur. “Floods, poverty and seasonal migration.” Economic and Political Weekly (2003): 943-945.
  •  Rao, Nitya. “Custom and the courts: ensuring women’s rights to land, Jharkhand,India.” Development and change 38, no. 2 (2007): 299-319.
  • Rogaly, Ben, and Daniel Coppard. “‘They Used To Go to Eat, Now They Go to Earn’:The Changing Meanings of Seasonal Migration from Puruliya District in West Bengal, India.” Journal of Agrarian change 3, no. 3 (2003): 395-433.
  •  Rogaly, Ben, JhumaBiswas, Daniel Coppard, AbdurRafique, Kumar Rana, and Amrita Sengupta. “Seasonal migration, social change and migrants’ rights: Lessons from West Bengal.” Economic and Political Weekly (2001): 4547-4559.
  •   Sundari, S. “Migration as a livelihood strategy: a gender perspective.”Economic and Political Weekly (2005): 2295-2303.
  • Thakur, Manish. “Understanding Ruralities: Contemporary Debates.” CAS Working Paper Series. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi (2014): 2-20.

 

Web Sources

  • http://censusindia.gov.in/(S(joetrn45vpclmo55eq5w5zit))/Census_And_You/migrations.aspx   (accessed on 28th October, 2014 at 02: 56)
  • http://www.unfpa.org/pds/migration.html (accessed on 14th October, 2014 at 22:31)
  • http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-tops-global-chart-of-emittances/articleshow/23457369.cms accessed on 15th October, 2014 at 01:31)   http://www.ilo.org/migrant/areas/migrant-domestic-workers/lang–en/index.htm (accessed on 15th October, 2014 at 01: 43)
  • http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html (accessed on 15th October, 2014 at 02: 38)     http://www.worldwatch.org/node/496 (accessed on 15th October, 2014 at 02: 44)
  • http://www.umich.edu/~snre492/Jones/narmada.html (accessed on 15th October, 2014 at 02: 56)
  • Bob  Jessop,  “Knowledge  as  a  Fictitious  Commodity:  Insights  and  Limits  of  a
  • Polanyian Perspective” retrieved from http://bobjessop.org/2014/01/14/knowledge-as-a-fictitious-commodity-insights-and-limits-of-a-polanyian-perspective/ on 25th November, 2014, 17:05 PM.

 

Image sources