Sazzad Parwez

Evidence from special economic zone

Sazzad Parwez, School of Development Studies, Indian Institute of Health Management Research University

This paper examines a new and ever-growing feminization of workforce in Special Economic Zone and implicative dynamism based on theoretical and empirical methodologies. It focuses on furthering the understanding and reasoning of prevailing employment pattern, working condition and resultant implications for women workers in the backdrop of absentia of welfare regime both at state and sweatshop level. The paper combines descriptive analysis of manual labour of women at economic enclaves leading to series of exploitative practices

This study applied a two-phase methodology, to gather both quantitative and qualitative data. For largely logistical and financial reasons, the quantitative survey was completed first. Then, about a year later, the qualitative research was undertaken. Field work for the quantitative data collection was undertaken in July-October 2015 in state of Gujarat.

The quantitative survey was completed with Secondary data has been taken from various government reports (National Sample Survey, Annual Survey of Industries, Economic Survey etc.), and other relevant data sources. The second phase was a qualitative survey designed to capture the perspectives of other stakeholder groups on issues affecting the labour condition. It involved interviews with workers, SEZ unit’s manager, labour contractors, labour officers, trade unions members and civil society members.

The feminization of the labour force is taking place in India since independence- first it was slow to begin with, but it surged after economic reforms in 1991. Even though employment opportunities may have increased, but weak immobile labour class has been left to the mercy of mobile and powerful capital. Currant form of the labour welfare legislations and implementation is with the capitalism and appropriation.

Evidently bargaining power of labour, irrespective of gender is on the decline. Traditionally, women workers have found themselves at even a greater disadvantage position. This ‘greater disadvantage’ can be explained through a patriarchal structure, formed with the status of identities and their bearing on society. The bargaining power of lower caste, lower class women workers in this structure is much lesser, not only from upper caste and upper-class men but also than that of men with similar socio-economic backgrounds as them. Globalization has escalated the social and economic marginalization of women particularly contributed in forming this new form of lower rungs. Their bargaining power in the society reflects their status.

Since women were barred from the sectors that was not considered essentially fit for employment particularly in the pre-reform era, but skepticism remains. Even meaningful economic contribution made by women workers is not recognized. The perception that women workers are inferior has perpetuated companies to secure command over them. But on the contrary, women are found to be efficient and less demanding as a worker and better than men. Manufacturing shops are in orders to cut down on labour costs, replaces man workers with women. Men have lost jobs to women; but women are no winners considering the dismal working conditions. Women are exploited in both at home and outside. Even though some time being at the upper end of the job hierarchy with relatively higher paying jobs, but women are seldom exploited if one considers worldwide evidence.

Women constraints by socio-economic restrictions are often succumb to the exploitation. But existing opportunities has not changed the situation of women as much expected, absurdly it has sustained the feminization of poverty to the greater extent. Market economy has been calling the shots in quest of manipulating the system of subordination to their advantage; as SEZs workers in general and women happens to be latest casualty. The gender socialization and the unequal power relationship that men and women share is largely dominated by women’s self-perception and how they perceive their male counterparts. They feel they deserve less because men deserve more. Socio-economic-political equality can be considered imaginary under prevailing identities and experiences of the women.

In a broad sense, the approach and actions of the state and the employers towards the worker (women), socio-economic circumstances and poor working conditions remained the same. Thus, it is easy to identify identical characteristics of workers’ plight and exploitation practices in sweatshops across the region and time.

Economic reforms have opened a new form of paid work opportunity for women. For long, women have remained marginalised and only represented overwhelmingly in the informal sector, domestic work and other casual work. Industrialisation and emergence of new formal enterprises provided impetus to the position of the poor working women. This stems from earning wage provide opportunity to take decisions, greater say in the family and community and relishing greater movement. Nevertheless, despite of new prospects, most of the women workers still live in precarious conditions with considerable insecurity in terms of the dependency on the western MNCs and import policy. Competitive global environment increases the race to the bottom among the developing economies. Women are often among the last to be included into the labour force, but in case of recession first to be terminated.

Industries tend to employ women from poverty ridden rural areas in order to leverage on availability of surplus labour and lower cost. Whole design is to create more capital in the process of exploitation and taking advantage of vulnerability of poor women. The poor socio-economic condition discourages women from protesting and tend to form allegiance with the management despite being exploited. The massive employment of women workers in SEZ contributes to the stagnation of labour movements in globalization processes.

The industrial zones have witnessed surge in employment of large number of women in last few decades. It has been beneficial for women in terms of paid employment opportunity, but the quality of work is in question. On positive note SEZs has provided opportunity to earn in the formal sector, thereby enhances their position in the family and society.

Companies in these economic enclaves hire young women workers only to reduce production cost as they lack bargaining power and considered docile in nature. Women worker’s related welfare measures are entirely absent in most of SEZ units. It must be noted that SEZ and other forms of economic enclaves has been designed to overlook welfare of workers and to concentrate only on investment, export, and creation of employment. Absence of labour welfare measures has critical impact on women workers.

Women are exploited as workers and as women, and many times, both issues are mixed in such a way that they cannot be treated separately.

So far findings suggest that SEZ symbolises lackluster approach of judicial and administrative affairs, and it has several provisions which are highly undemocratic. Given some of these concerns, SEZs cannot be the only strategy for industrialisation, and even within a broader strategy, the specific features of this policy need a systematic re-examination.

Keywords: Women; Labour; Feminisation; Exploitation; Special Economic Zone; Development