Is Night Work an Equal Opportunity for Women Workers?
Kiran Moghe
EVEN as central trade unions and other organisations working towards securing workers’ rights and mobilising against the anti-people policies of the BJP led Modi government were preparing for the massive national strike against the four Labour Codes on July 9, some state governments were busy enacting the very provisions that are being opposed by trade unions in the name of “Labour Reform” but are really for the sake of “Ease of Doing Business.”
Prominent amongst them are the amendments to the Factories Act, 1948 and Shops and Commercial Establishments Acts, to allow for the employment of women in night work. Although night work has been allowed in the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code of 2020, it is yet to be notified. Using the concurrent powers available to state governments, several states have amended their laws to permit women to do night work and also increase the work day from 8 hours to 10-12 hours. These include Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Telangana, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Odisha and Uttar Pradesh; the latest to join them is Gujarat, and Delhi is expected to follow suit.
An examination of the list of states makes it quite clear that this move is not specific to a particular ruling party, but in fact reflects the attitude of the ruling class at large. This becomes apparent from the various statements that are issued by ministers and officials from time to time. For example in the case of Delhi, both the chief minister and the lieutenant governor observed during a review meeting that the process of “simplifying” (in other words ‘weakening’) labour laws had been unsatisfactory and that such restrictions were hindering businesses. Many corporate representatives see night work for women as a “game changer” that will promote economic growth.
It will be recollected that the proposal to introduce night work for women has a fairly long history that goes back to the late nineties, when the Ministry of Commerce proposed to the Ministry of Labour that night work should be permitted for women working in export oriented zones. Allowing women to work in the third shift would lead to better capacity utilisation and lower costs, enabling competition in the international markets, said the ministry. This proposal was opposed by the central trade unions in several tripartite meetings held during that period. However, the ministry kept assuring the unions that appropriate measures would be put in place to ensure that women did not face safety issues, but the trade unions stood ground and the proposal remained in abeyance. Once again the UPA government tried to introduce it as a cabinet decision in 2005, this time as a measure to promote women’s employment in the special economic zones that were being set up all over the country during that period. CITU had criticised the move and firmly opposed it.
Despite the offer for safety protocols such as safe transportation, CCTV surveillance, proper lighting, female security personnel, etc., there was resolute opposition of the trade unions to this proposal to revoke the ban on night work that has existed since 1948. This has prompted the capitalist class to peddle a new argument in favour of night work. This time it is the “equality” argument. The lifting of the complete ban on night work and permitting night work under certain conditions is being hailed as “a transition from prohibition to protection” and a “gender inclusive step”. It should be noted that it is not simply employers but also some well-meaning women’s organisations that have supported the move to lift restrictions on night work for women because they are “discriminatory” and violate the fundamental right to equality that is guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Further, the ban also violates Article 19 of the Constitution which gives women the right (‘choice’) to practice any profession or engage in any occupation, trade or business. It is on this basis that some High Courts have struck down the relevant Section (66) of the Factories Act of 1948. In fact the Madras High Court has suggested several mandatory measures including deterrence to sexual harassment and procedures to resolve such issues, including appropriate complaint mechanisms, employment of women in batches of ten or more, separate work sheds, canteens, all women transport facilities, proper lighting, proper working conditions with respect to leisure, health and hygiene, security at entry and exit points, at least twelve consecutive hours of rest or gap between shifts and fortnightly reports to inspectors and the local police station about night shifts. In fact many of these measures are welcome for women working in day shifts!
However, it should be noted that the opposition to night work for women does not arise only out of the concern for women’s safety, which of course continues to be an overriding aspect, especially at a time when violence against women in the country is increasing at a phenomenal rate. One of the major reasons to oppose night work has been health considerations. Several studies have shown the adverse impact of night work on workers’ health, including digestive and nervous problems, excessive consumption of addictive substances such as tobacco, increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, etc. For women, there are additional reproductive risks due to irregular working hours including spontaneous abortion, pre-term births and lowered birth weights. Family and social life is disturbed, with relationships and life style coming under stress. Most importantly, the double burden where women have to bear the brunt of housework and child care is the most critical factor that warrants that the ban on night work should continue. It is well known that while male workers may avail of the luxury of rest after night work, women invariably end up doing double duty with inadequate rest that affects them adversely.
According to the Gujarat government’s recent amendment, no woman worker can be compelled to work on night shifts and must give written consent if they opt for this duty. Extension of daily working hours from 9 to 12 hours has been permitted, and the continuous working period without breaks has been increased from five to six hours. However, it is well known that consent can be obtained easily when the sword of unemployment hangs over the heads of the workers. In a situation when there is such a huge employment squeeze for women, and when many workers continue to remain without the support of protective unions that will serve their interests, it is unlikely that women will resist night work when it is offered to them.
Long working hours are being promoted by the capitalist class in the name of productivity, and already many employees are demanding the right to digitally “switch off”, indicating the stresses and strains in the IT and ITeS industries. The ILO has studied the working conditions in export processing zones across the world and found that women workers in particular face many challenges when it comes to combining work and family responsibilities in a situation of excessive working hours and night work. It should be noted that now the demand from the industry is no longer for lifting night work restrictions in EPZs or the IT industry, but a general exemption across all sectors. In Karnataka, the government has gone one step further and is demanding a lifting of the ban on women working in hazardous industries! The assumption is that there will be “informed consent by workers and appropriate safeguards in place.”
However, it is clear that in a country where every labour law is not only flouted with impunity but labour rights are treated with contempt, workers end up working in the worst of conditions. The entire inspection and enforcement mechanism to implement labour laws has been deliberately weakened in the name of labour reform. For women, therefore, there is really no “choice”! If night work is introduced they will have to accept it otherwise they will lose their job. Even without night work, many women face sexual harassment and intimidation and most of them remain silent because of fear of reprisals. The ILO has very correctly pointed out that the review of protective measures for women is but one means of action to ensure equal opportunity. In deciding whether to repeal or revise protective measures, it is necessary to take into account existing working conditions, the effectiveness of the enforcement authority, availability of appropriate training and control measures and the importance of cultural norms. The current situation of women in our country is not at all conducive to lifting these restrictions. The fact that the capitalist class is now pressing for removal of all protective restrictions shows that it has nothing to do with equality, but all to do with appropriating women’s cheap labour for its rapacious profits.
