Joanne Barriga

Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2007 511

Opportunities and Vulnerabilitiesof Female Migrants in

Construction Work in India

Sanghita K. Bhattacharyya

Public Health Foundation of India

Kim Korinek

University of Utah

This paper is based on a case study of female migrants working in construc-tion−the second largest industry in India and one which employs almost 30million people, approximately 30 percent of which are women, many of themmigrants. In this paper, we extend beyond an empirical description of femalemigrant workers in the field of construction, considering the subjective andnuanced realities linked to women’s lived experiences as migrants. The studyis based on interviews of 110 female construction workers who have mi-grated from various regions of India to the city of Delhi. An in-depth,qualitative exploration of these women’s lives and perceptions capturessome of the more latent risks and rewards associated with both migration andwork in the informal sector. Specifically, the results shed light on how strongsocietal norms may actually prevent women from acknowledging or articu-lating the true reasons for their migrations.

Introduction

Persons of rural origin, including men, women and children, are increas-ingly on the move in search of employment opportunities in India’s vastcountryside and its dynamic and growing urban areas. While comprehen-sive data are limited, migration, especially of the seasonal and circularvariety, has become a core element of rural household livelihood strategiesacross many regions of India (Deshingkar and Start, 2003; De Haan, 2002;

512 ASIAN AND PACIFIC MIGRATION JOURNAL

Mosse et al., 2002; Rogaly, 1998; Srivastava, 2003). Migrant laborers areespecially concentrated in labor intensive, casual, and informal sector jobsacross India, working in brick kilns, quarries, construction sites, and manu-facturing plants—sites where workers’ access to formal welfare schemes,health and safety protections, and health and sanitation infrastructure andfacilities are often limited (Deshingkar and Start, 2003; Dev, 2002; Srivastava,2003). While much of female migration within India derives from thetraditional practice of short-distance, rural-rural, post-nuptial migration tohusbands’ households, it increasingly includes women’s participation ineconomically-motivated migrations to aid in household survival strategies(Deshingkar and Start, 2003). In India and throughout developing Asia, thechanging gender structure of labor opportunities also creates a noveldemand for women’s wage labor that is increasingly met by recruiting andhiring international and domestic migrant women (Asis, 2005; Chant andRadcliffe, 1992; Ward, 1990).

Internal migration in India is highly differentiated, and women’s in-volvement in wage labor and geographic mobility is also highly variable,their tendencies to migrate and forms of migration depending on theirsocial rank, or caste, and socioeconomic positions at origin; religious andregional cultural differences and prescriptions for female behavior; de-mands for female labor; and other social and economic factors (De Haan,2002; Mosse et al., 2002; Rogaly, 1998). The consequences of migration forIndian women are thought to be highly variable and whether migrationfosters new forms of female autonomy, versus recreating dependence andpatriarchal subservience, likely depends on characteristics of the socialstructure and the organization of migration, such as the nature of theemployer-contractor-employee relationship and whether women migratealone, with immediate kin, or more distant relatives (Mosse et al., 1997;Rogaly, 1998; Rogaly and Coppard, 2003). In any event, it is no longer thecase that women stay behind when their husbands or other male familymembers migrate (Deshingkar and Start, 2003). Although a handful ofstudies have begun to illuminate the unique experiences of female migrantsin India, such as Jatrana and Sangwan’s (2004) analysis of female migrantconstruction workers’ health concerns, research on female migration inIndia in general, and on migration as a gendered process and experience,remains quite limited (Srivastava, 2003). Using a qualitative approach, wefurther elaborate upon the opportunities and vulnerabilities encounteredby female migrant workers in the construction industry of Delhi - one ofIndia’s fastest growing cities and a prominent destination for internalmigration.

The globalized feminization of migration has been accompanied by arich and growing body of research that expands upon and corrects empiri-

513FEMALE MIGRANTS IN CONSTRUCTION WORK IN INDIA

cal research and theorizing that had omitted women’s experiences, oryielded a gender neutral, unidimensional perspective (e.g., Curran andSaguy, 2001; Hondagneu-Sotelo, 2003). Overly simplistic portrayals ofwomen as passive followers, or as movers “tied” to their male kin (e.g., Lee,1966), have largely dissipated, replaced by research featuring more sophis-ticated and nuanced understandings of gender and patriarchy that revealthe complex and diverse explanations for women’s migrations, and theirexperiences of both emancipation and vulnerability that arise through themigration process (e.g., Grasmuck and Pessar, 1991; Hondagneu-Sotelo,1994; Pessar, 1999). Previous research has pointed to both economic andcultural forces as guides for women’s migration behavior in India. Whileextant research on the subject is limited, the nature of gender relations andthe position of rural migrants in the broader Indian society suggest thatwomen in India are made vulnerable when they migrate alone or when theyare employed in poorly regulated informal sector jobs. The aim of thecurrent study is to draw upon the migrant women’s experiences in Delhi tofurther our understanding of how the contexts of migration and migrantemployment encourage new forms of empowerment and vulnerability.

This paper focuses on female migrants working in the constructionindustry, addressing several dimensions of the migration experience perti-nent to women’s social positions vis-à-vis men and vis-à-vis non-migrantpopulations. Specifically, we examine the migration process, the networkswithin which migrants operate, and whether, through geographical mobil-ity, female migrants actually achieve social and economic autonomy. Draw-ing upon interviews in which migrants describe their experiences andsurroundings in Delhi, the paper further assesses the working and livingconditions of female migrant workers in unorganized sectors and whetherthey, as migrants, are able to access and/or benefit from existing socialsecurity and welfare measures. Relating to gendered theorizing on migra-tion, we consider how gendered social norms influence the ways in whichwomen articulate their own experiences of migration, often forcing them touse limited descriptions that may not fully capture the both liberating andexploitative aspects of their employment and migration experiences.

Female Migration in India: Theoretical Background andPrevious Research

Thadani and Todaro (1984) were among the first to propose a conceptualframework for female migration in developing countries and delineate thestructural forces that account for female migration patterns. A key insightderived from this early research is that although economic criteria, such as


unemployment, low wages, poverty, and limited social and economicopportunities play a key role in women’s migrations, their migrations, moreso than men’s, may be hindered by traditional cultural norms that restrictwomen’s mobility and public roles. Subsequent migration scholarship hasshown that a comprehensive examination of the causes of female migrationmust take into account not only the decision-making processes of individualwomen, but also the wider contextual forces which impinge upon and shapetheir decisions. As Mosse et al. (2002:61) observe, movement beyond anarrow, economistic viewpoint is needed to fully understand migrationand gender in India. While individual decisions are embedded withinmacro-level structures, it is also important to distinguish micro-level deci-sion-making processes, and to assess economic conditions, as well as thenorms, values , and cultural forces at play in shaping the gendered roles andrelations that inform women’s migration behaviours (Lim, 1993). Whilenew economics of labor migration theories conceive of migration as part ofa cooperative family strategy of risk minimization (Lauby and Stark, 1988),in societies like India families have often deterred the autonomous migra-tion of women. On the other hand, women in particular locales within Indiahave exercised significant degrees of autonomy through mobility, forinstance migrating to better their individual financial status or to securemore suitable husbands (Thadani and Todaro, 1984).

The most common cause for female migration in India is considered tobe marriage, as custom has required the movement of the bride to theparental household of her spouse. Dictated by the practice of villageexogamy and caste endogamy, marriage migration within India has beenprimarily rural to rural in nature (Libbee and Sopher, 1975). Nevertheless,the socio-economic resource bases of families also influence the probabilityof migration, including female migration. In societies where there are strongnormative pressures against the independent migration of women, it islikely that poorer families will experience economic need so severe as toviolate these norms (Findley and Diallo, 1993). Both family size and struc-ture are likely to be related to sex-selectivity of migration. In the case ofIndia, restrictions on women’s labor force involvement and mobility seemto be attenuated in those communities and households where povertydictates women’s involvement in wage work (Mosse et al., 2002).

Community-level influences such as economic integration, gender andage structure as pertains to labor demand and the prevalence of migrantnetworks also play a key role in female migration – both women’s propen-sities to move, their experiences as migrants, and their adherence to societalnorms, such as expectations to remit or otherwise provide support to originhouseholds (Curran and Saguy, 2001). Households exist within geographi-cally based communities, which are linked, to varying degrees and by


various types of linkages, to other communities, and these linkages withinand among villages influence migration (Hugo, 1991). In communitiescharacterized by high levels of male out-migration, the probability offemale migration is often reduced due to women’s heightened productionand social reproduction responsibilities and local employment opportuni-ties (Lele, 1986). Social networks play a special role in facilitating femalemigration since in most societies the migration of women is constrained dueto fears about women’s vulnerability and need for protection (Findley andDiallo, 1993; Huang and Ching, 1983; Srivastava, 2003). In India, there arestrong normative pressures against migration of women for employmentpurposes. Thus, the organization of urban migrant labor markets alongcommunity and caste lines, and the presence of fellow villagers in the placeof destination have made female labor migration possible (Lessinger, 1990;Mitra and Gupta, 2002). Networks also have an effect at the communitylevel by influencing norms concerning mobility. Once migration has oc-curred and networks have been established in a community, migrationmight be viewed as acceptable and desirable. Men are likely to move first toestablish networks which later facilitate women’s moves (Breman, 1990).

Social and cultural factors have strongly influenced decisions to mi-grate within India, specifically when it comes to women’s migrations(Singh, 1978). Cultural beliefs and local politics may restrict women’sautonomy and movement, especially among women of high and middleclass strata. However, customs and expectations for women get blurredwhen lower caste women’s migrations are considered. In areas of SouthIndia, lower caste women have greater work participation levels, despitepreferences for female seclusion, due to the greater demand for their incomecontributions to households (Mosse et al., 2002; Singh and De Souza, 1976).Though males dominate the labor migration process in some sectors,especially construction, brick kiln work, sugarcane cutting, and fish pro-cessing, family migration is prevalent as it is often economical for employ-ers to recruit male and female migrants together.

Several studies have indicated that female migrants in India, especiallythose engaged in seasonal migration, in unprotected jobs at the bottom ofthe labor market hierarchy, and whose contact and support from kin isrestricted, are subject to exploitation by their employers and others (Rogaly,1998). Mitra (1987), in her study of Santhal, an indigenous tribal peoplecoalfield laborers, revealed that female workers were subjected to sexualexploitation on job sites. Similarly, seasonal migrants travelling to the ricebowls of Bardhaman district, West Bengal, and those working in the brickKiln industry of Muzaffarnagar, not only suffered wage discrimination andlong working hours but also sexual exploitation (Rogaly and Coppard,2003). In the fish processing industry, migrant women from Kerala have


experienced serious exploitation in terms of poor working and livingconditions, low wages, and, at times, sexual harassment (Sarodamoni,1995). The difficult after-effects of migration are also documented in anumber of micro-level studies in India. For instance, a 1991 survey of 10slums in Delhi, where migrant females were mostly engaged in the urbaninformal sector, found that although the situation of migrant familiesimproved in the new environment, the women, themselves, did not achieveupward mobility, primarily due to their poor access to basic ser-vices(Fernandes, 1991).

Despite some commonalities, the reasons for migration in the case ofmales and females continue to diverge significantly. Whereas work oremployment is the most important reason for migration among males,women have tended to make short distance moves with marriage continu-ing to be cited as the foremost reason for women’s migration within India(Bhattacharyya, 2003; Srivastava, 2003). While these moves for marriageaccounted for nearly all rural-rural migrations in India in the mid-20th

century (Bose, 1967), more recently women’s migrations have increasedand diversified in terms of their purpose, destination, and distance. Still,short distance, rural to rural migration remains predominant among bothmales and females throughout India, representing slightly more than 70percent of moves (Bhattacharyya, 2002).

Table 1, derived from Indian census data indicates that the proportionof women reporting that they migrated for employment is very small andmuch lower than that observed for males; the proportion of women report-ing that they migrated for employment or economic reasons has varied littleover time. However, this low and relatively constant figure for employ-ment-related migration by women likely reflects the fact that in most datacollection efforts, respondents are allowed to give only one reason for their

TABLE 1REASONS FOR MIGRATION IN INDIA, 2001

Reasons for Migration Total Male Female

Work/Employment 14.7 37.6 3.2Business 1.2 2.9 0.3Education 3.0 6.2 1.3Marriage 43.8 2.1 64.9Moved after birth 6.7 10.4 4.8Moved with households 21.0 25.1 18.9Others 9.7 15.7 6.7Total Migrants 100.0 100.0 100.0

SOURCE: Census of India, 2001, Migration tables, D3


migration and marriage or family movement is cited by women as aprimary motivation, even if diverse motivations are involved (Srivastava,2003). The women questioned may be working in the destination, but ifwork was not their primary reason for migrating, even if it was theirhusband’s primary motivation, the data fails to capture this motivation onthe part of women (Shanthi, 2006). Moreover, the emphasis on primarysector and full time work in surveys often leads to an underestimation offemale employment and its relationship to migration.

The vast majority of the migrant workers in the construction industryare Dalits,1 tribals and people from the lower castes. The rural poor in India,mainly farmers and manual laborers, migrate to the cities to find work in theconstruction industry in times of drought and poor harvests. Womenworkers in the construction sector are mostly engaged in work such as soildigging, carrying inputs for concrete mixing and placing, concrete curing,and brick carrying. All the skilled work, such as masonry, carpentry andpainting, is reserved for male laborers. As stated in the introduction,construction is the second largest industry in India, and women from poorbackground constitute a large portion of its workforce. This industry isunique, however, in that 98 percent of the women employed are casuallaborers, a much higher percentage compared to other industries (Deshpandeand Deshpande,1998).

Various empirical studies have described the vulnerable conditions ofwomen engaged in construction activity. Besides the physical stresses anddangers associated with construction labor, especially when it is performedin a weak regulatory environment, workers’ wages tend to fall significantlybelow the minimum wage (Anand, 1998; Cherian and Prasad, 1995; Sinhaand Ranade, 1975) and they are often compelled to work due to familycircumstances or to supplement the low income of their households (Pandey,1998). Construction activity, whether it is for residential or commercialconstruction, irrigation projects, or roadways, offers employment to bothmen and women. Hence, this sector generates the movement of women bothindependently and as part of household groups (Hema Kumari and Tataji,1998). Anand’s (1998) study on the rights of construction workers found thatwomen’s work on construction sites was considered menial, non-essentialand of the lowest nature in the whole process. Lingam (1998) also reportedthat women were mostly restricted to head-loader positions while men hadopportunities to move up to the position of helper, mason, supervisor, laboragent, or contractor. The nature of construction work itself is highly labor-

1 Often called untouchables − these are persons outside the four castes of Hindu religion,and considered below the others.


intensive, arduous and hazardous. The job sites are also geographicallydispersed and lack job security. Migrants are hired on a casual, day-to-daybasis through “naka mandis,” or casual labor hiring centers. This flexi-bilization leaves many workers vulnerable to exploitation, accidents atwork, and for women workers, lack of benefits such as maternity leave. Thisweak position extends into migrant workers’ domestic spheres whereinonly a small percentage of women workers reported having a say indecision-making related to daily expenses, education, or the marriagepartners of their children (Mathew, 1999a; Pandey, 1998; Sinha and Ranade,1975). Studies also revealed that although women construction workerscontributed substantially to family income they did not obtain help inhousehold work from their husbands.

Study Design

For the purpose of the current study, primary data was collected throughinterviews with 110 Indian females who had migrated to work in construc-tion jobs in Delhi, the capital and one of the biggest cities in India. The studywas conducted between October 2002 and May 2003, immediately follow-ing the monsoon season when construction activity peaks.2 The survey offemale migrant workers was carried out at a construction site whereworkers live temporarily in makeshift houses. Due to the difficulties ofaccessing this vulnerable population, a convenience sampling approachwas utilized at the construction site and workers who were willing andequipped to offer their time to answer the questions were included in thesurvey. Only females who had stayed in Delhi for at least six months priorto the survey were included in the study. The questionnaire was canvassedat the end of the workday in order to preserve the interests of all parties andso that migrants could speak more freely about their work conditions.Migrants from the different districts of Delhi, e.g., east and southwest, arerepresented in the study; equal numbers of migrants were interviewed fromeach zone. In the course of completing the study researchers also gatheredrelevant information from secondary sources on migration, such as theCensus of India, Migrant Labour Laws, and previous empirical studies.

Before collecting the final data, a pilot questionnaire was canvassedwith mostly open-ended questions. Based on migrants’ responses to thepilot a final questionnaire with a more structured format was prepared. Thefinal questionnaire contains a single schedule with five main sections. The

2 This study was part of the first author’s dissertation submitted to Jawaharlal NehruUniversity and was supported by a fellowship from the University Grants Commission, India.


first section deals with the individual background of the female migrantworkers, i.e., their religion, caste, age, marital status, and educational level.The second section refers to background characteristics of migrants in termsof the socio-economic and demographic profile of their families at the placeof origin. The third section highlights migration stages and processes,emphasizing the nature and type of migration along with the migrant’shousehold composition in Delhi. The fourth section addresses the nature ofthe migrant’s current work, followed by a final section on the dual effects ofmigration and employment on living conditions and the potential forwomen’s empowerment. This final section also considers the nature ofcontact migrant women have with their home communities, both in termsof remittances and networks for future migration of friends and family.

Results

Social and Demographic Characteristics of Female Migrants

While it is important to interpret the following descriptive results withcaution, due to the selective representation that may arise through theconvenience sampling approach, a summary of the female migrant popu-lation laboring in Delhi’s construction industry is warranted. In terms of thetypes of labor women performed, survey results confirm that jobs per-formed by women in the study were largely menial and labor-intensive. Infact, all 110 respondents in the study were engaged in manual work such asdigging soil, carrying bricks, and transporting inputs for concrete mixing.Meanwhile, their male counterparts were mostly engaged in masonry,machine operation, carpentry, and painting. The average age of the sur-veyed women for the current migration trip was approximately 25 years.Fewer than three percent of the migrant women surveyed were over age 40.The relatively youthful age structure among the migrants reflects thestrenuous nature of work in which they are engaged in.

Most surveyed migrants reported being Hindu and members of lowercastes (i.e., scheduled castes and scheduled tribes). Members of these socialranks have traditionally been engaged in menial labor and subject toextensive social disadvantage and exclusion.

The vast majority of surveyed female migrants are married and hadmigrated along with their husbands to the urban job sites. While womenwho refused to participate in the study may have included a larger share ofsingle women, this distribution of marital status favoring married womenis indicative of the normative controls and prescribed social positions ofrural women in India. Widowed and separated women, about four percentof the sample, also had migrated with some male relative to the city.


Education levels among the female construction workers are quite low – 95percent report being illiterate, a figure consistent with other studies ofmigrant populations (e.g., Haberfeld et al., 1999; Rogaly et al., 2001). Due totheir low educational attainment, their lack of vocational training, and theirstatus as women, they remain restricted to the most menial occupations inthe construction industry.

The socio-economic resource base of one’s family, as well as demo-graphic factors like the size and composition of the family, appears to shapethe probability of out-migration among sampled female migrants in theconstruction industry. Female migrants tend to come from large originfamilies which typically consist of more than four adult members betweenthe ages of 20 and 40. This pattern suggests that when families are larger itis possible to diversify income through migration; such households canafford to send migrants to other places, while the remaining membersprovide the necessary manual labor for agricultural activities at their placeof origin. The economic position of the family also appears to encourageout-migration as a survival strategy among sampled migrants. The majorityof sampled construction workers come from low income families that earnless than 1000 Indian rupees, i.e., approximately US$23, a month.

In societies where there are strong normative pressures against theindependent migration of women, socio-economic characteristics of fami-lies play a key role in the decision for a woman to migrate. During the study,women were asked about family perceptions of female migration andparticularly autonomous female migration. In the case of constructionworkers, it was found that families’ attitudes toward autonomous femalemigration were largely negative. However, family members were notperceived to be averse to females migrating with their spouses or with othermale family members. This attitude is seemingly so strong that only onefemale in the entire sample reported that she had migrated alone. Thesesocietal normative prescriptions and behavioural restrictions raise severalquestions in the context of this study, not only as they relate to the absenceof lone female migrants, but also in the way they potentially influence theresponses of all study participants.

Ninety-five percent of the surveyed women cited family movement asthe main reason for their migration; this usually translates to migration withtheir husbands. Marriage is the second most common reason offered for thesurveyed women’s migrations. There are various societal norms whichmight prevent women from acknowledging the true, or more complex,reasons for their migrations. In the case of construction workers, laborcontractors recruit most of the women along with their spouses at their placeof origin. So, soon after migration, approximately 40 percent of the surveyedwomen got jobs immediately and nearly 40 percent got jobs within six


months of arriving in the destination. Strong societal norms prevent themfrom migrating alone, so they migrate with their spouses, thus reportingthemselves as tied movers, but their employment potentiality is also a majorreason for their migration. This pattern often leads to an undercounting andunderreporting of employment as a motivation for female migration inIndia.

The majority of construction workers migrated from adjoining states,such as Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan, which areall within approximately 250-300 km of Delhi. Sixty percent originated fromthe states of Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh and around six percent migratedfrom distant tribal areas of Chattisgarh. The construction workers tend to beseasonal migrants, travelling only when there is work available in Delhi;during the harvesting seasons they go back to their villages. A significantproportion have stayed in Delhi for less than one year and the others havemoved from one work site to another within Delhi. When contractors recruitseveral people from the same village to work on a construction site, it createsa sense of community and security at the workplace:

We do not migrate alone; we migrate with our families. If there isa single woman, she also migrates with her relatives. As we movein a group, it protects us from harassment at the work site.

Kunti, 31 years old, migrant from Uttar Pradesh

Despite the proximity of kin and village members, about 16 percent ofthe surveyed migrants reported having faced harassment at the construc-tion site in the form of gestures, remarks, or unwanted touching, either frommale co-workers or from supervisors at the work site. The women were veryhesitant to report these acts in detail to the interviewer. A major reason theyhesitate to report is fear of losing their jobs in a context where there is nomechanism for redressing harassment or retaliation.

Consequences and Conditions of Migration

Through the interviews it became apparent that both positive and negativechanges occurred in women’s lives as a result of migration, depending uponthe timing and type of move involved, and the local cultural or socialenvironment in which the migration took place. Migration is a processwhich has important consequences for the women construction migrantsand the effect is more pronounced if she is earning money independent ofher husband or other family members. Migrants always have to adjust to anew environment in the destination and difficulties are compounded if afemale is migrating alone, or if she has to enter into employment upon


arrival. The female migrant has a multifaceted experience in the destinationand the migration is experienced on at least two levels –the experience as amigrant and as an income-generating member of her household.

The majority of construction workers are employed as casual and daylaborers. Working in the informal and unorganized sector, they suffer fromheightened job insecurity. Job tenures are not fixed and there is always a realthreat of termination. Due to the absence of any contract, the women lackaccess to employee benefits, such as health care or sick leave.

For most of the respondents, depending on the nature of the work, theworkday begins between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. and ends between 5 and 6 p.m.On average, the women worked 10 hours per day with a half hour break forlunch. Every woman worked for approximately 20 to 25 days in the non-rainy season and received an average of 80-100 rupees per day (aboutUS$$2). Even though the women performed more physically demandingjobs than their male counterparts, there was a wage differential that favouredthe men by about 10 to 30 rupees per day. Despite India’s Equal Remunera-tion Act, female migrants are paid less than male migrants and are viewedas assistants to their husbands, as if they possessed no labour skills of theirown. Study participants frequently complained about the irregularity oftheir work and significant delays in getting their salary. They are mostlypaid in husband–wife pairs and as a result, most of them could not reporttheir own exact salary. If they got a job through a middleman, they turnedover nearly 10 percent of their monthly income to him. As Suraiya, a 24 yearold migrant from Bihar observed,

At end of the month they pay my salary to my husband, and thecontractor also takes some portion of it. I do not keep a count of howmany days I have worked and how much I should be getting.

Despite the low salaries characteristic of construction work, womenconsidered it more desirable than the largely unpaid jobs they performed intheir home communities. Delhi, being a huge urban center with betteremployment and earning opportunities, attracts migrants from a widerange of rural areas. Through the interviews we learned that irrespective ofthe nature of occupation in the destination, female migrants found that theireconomic position generally improved through migration. According toKamala, a 19 year old migrant from Chattisgarh,

At least now I have some money in my hand to buy some clothesand cosmetics for me and my children. This was not possible backin the village as all the money was either held by my father-in-lawor my husband.


In the construction sector there is no uniformity of wages or fixedworking hours, leading many migrant women to suffer the brunt of indus-try exploitation. Results of the survey reveal very low participation bywomen workers in unions which offer potential protections. Despite theirinvolvement in the construction sector, where there is excessive flouting oflabor laws, and rhetoric in regards to wages, working conditions, and hours,not a single migrant worker in this study was part of a union. Althoughmigrant construction workers are scattered all over the city, an organiza-tional initiative for union participation is lacking, in part because the workcrews consist of migrants belonging to different regions and communities.The seasonal nature of their jobs, fear of job loss, and victimization bycontractors only further complicate the situation and discourage labororganizing. According to Munni, a 42 year old migrant from Uttar Pradesh,

The contractors take advantage of us and try to exploit us. We,construction workers assemble on the “nakas” i.e., street corners, insearch of work from the contractors. We are ill-treated because wedo not have any identity and nobody listens to us. Often we do notget work for more than 15 days in a month. We also cannot bargainabout our wages as there are other laborers willing to work forlower wages.

Living Conditions among Delhi’s Migrant Construction Workers

Low levels of earning act as a hindrance to migrants seeking improvedliving standards. Visiting the construction sites and workers’ makeshifthouses, a general perception was gathered by the researchers about mi-grants’ living conditions. Construction workers live in some of the mostdeplorable conditions to be found in Delhi. They have no facilities for theprovision of safe drinking water and the sanitary conditions, in general, arevery poor. In spite of the Contract Labour Act, which stipulates that acontractor or employer must provide suitable accommodations to thelaborers, dehumanizing living conditions remain typical among the con-struction migrants.

Illness and accidents are both common and symptomatic of the dangersthese migrants face in day-to-day life. For a woman worker, there is noprovision of maternity leave. Four of the women workers interviewed inthis study were still carrying heavy bricks in late stages of their pregnancy.They report suffering from myriad untreated occupational health hazardssuch as body aches, sunstroke, and skin irritation. Female migrants areoften accompanied by their children into the workplace, as there is no crèche


or other childcare facility available to workers. The children, too, experiencevarious health problems due to exposure to dust and other substances at thework sites. Low wages and job instability puts education beyond the reachof many migrant families and their children. By the time children approachtheir early teens, many of them are helping their parents on the constructionsites, working largely without pay. Sakuntala, a 35 year old migrant fromRajasthan, sums up the difficult conditions of migrants’ daily lives in Delhi:

We get up before the sunrise and go to far away open spaces as thereare no toilet facilities in the construction site where we stay. Wewash our clothes and clean our utensils mostly with muddy waterfrom the construction site. Construction work demands great physi-cal labor and hard work. We toil hard and at the end of the day, wedevelop headaches, pain in our limbs and hands. Despite this, wehave to do all of the daily chores for the household.

There is a dual effect of migration and employment on women’s rolesand positions within the family in the destination context. Numerousscholars have suggested that migration, which involves transition from arural, traditional, joint family system toward a more nuclear family andmodern urban life, brings increased autonomy to women. The specificconsequences experienced by women depend upon the norms and valuesthat prevail within the migration context, the nature of the work women areengaged in, and the locations from which women originate (Cackley, 1993).Although approximately half of migrant women reported some improve-ment in their freedom of movement in the destination as compared to theirnative place, their increased autonomy and earning power does not oftenenhance their control over family decision-making or their say in financialmatters. Deeply embedded in patriarchal family structures, income is oftenhanded over to husbands who determine the allocation of family members’earnings (Pandey, 1998). As Kanta, a 25 year old migrant from Rajasthanobserves,

As lots of people from our same village live together on the sameconstruction site there is hardly any difference in life here in termsof women making decisions in family matters. My husband makesall the major decisions on his own, just like he used to do back in ournative place.

The seasonal nature of construction work leads the majority of migrantsto visit their families and villages at least once a year, typically during theharvest season. It was difficult to determine the amount of money thatfemale migrants remit as their earnings are part of the joint family income.Nonetheless, in considering the behaviors of the women and/or their


families in the destination, about 15 percent remit on a regular basis, whilethe majority only remit “from time to time.” Through the interviews we alsoattempted to discern whether remittances were allocated to either of twopurposes – first, toward economic or production activities in the household,such as agricultural and family business investments, and second, towardconsumptive purposes, such as housing, education, ceremonies, or healthcare costs. The surveyed migrants indicated that the vast majority (about 97percent) of remittances were put toward household consumption purposes.It is important to note, however, that providing for the education andhealthcare of family members may, in the long run, be a valuable investmentin household members’ human capital, and hence in the future capacity ofthe household to engage in productive activities and generate income.

In spite of the temporary and often difficult nature of their jobs, themajority of the female migrant construction workers (around 75 percent)expressed a desire to remain in them. They expressed a feeling that theurban environment would provide a permanent source of income, whilevillages and agriculture could only offer low and irregular income. So,despite the hardships they face while on the construction sites, living in anurban area is seen as a more viable option for making a living than persistingin the largely agricultural opportunities available in rural origin villages.

Conclusion

The construction sector in India employs a significant proportion of femalemigrants. This study has attempted to explore the different aspects of themigration experience among female construction workers in Delhi. Thesurveyed workers have migrated at relatively young ages, are mostlyilliterate, and the majority belong to lower castes. They have migrated withtheir families (husbands usually, and often children) in order to escape thelow and irregular incomes associated with agricultural work in theirvillages. Almost all the women workers were engaged in physically de-manding, low skill jobs, such as manually transporting construction mate-rials. The average daily wages of the female workers were found to besubstantially lower than the male workers’ wages, and as they are paid aspairs with their spouses, they are largely unaware of their exact, personalearnings. The conditions in terms of their living arrangements, job status,and income are quite deplorable. There are no fixed working hours and theyare required to work every day of the week under extremely harsh condi-tions. Moreover, despite the benefits of migration that some women enjoy,their level of autonomy in familial decision-making often does not improverelative to pre-migration conditions.


Though there exist a number of labor laws to protect migrant construc-tion workers, violation of these laws is common. The study found thatworkers employed in this sector, generally, are unaware of governmentrules and regulations that regulate employment conditions and protectthem from abuse by employers. Because migrant workers, and especiallywomen, are reluctant to give full information about their living and workingconditions, as they fear this will only enhance their job insecurity, there is aneed for state bodies to make policies and enact protection measures that aremore accessible to workers in this flexible, unorganized sector. The studyresults suggest that labor unions are not presently effective in this sector,especially in reaching out to women. Accordingly, there is a demonstratedneed for civil society interventions and trade union activism around issuesof migrant workers’ rights and living and working conditions. Except forthe State of Kerala, no other state government within India has notifiedworkers of the rules that govern their employment or identified enforce-ment agencies under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act of1996.

Economic development and liberalization in India have resulted in amassive drive towards the building of infrastructure, residences, and otherbuilt environments, which have in turn resulted in a huge influx of peoplefrom the rural areas to work on urban construction sites. Consequently,numerous new employment opportunities have been created for women.But these women migrating from poor rural areas to the urban informal andunorganized sector have weak bargaining power and they are often forcedto take lower end jobs. The results of the study suggest directions for policyand advocacy to protect female migrant workers. First, there is need forproper implementation of already existing safety nets and welfare schemesso that women migrants can also benefit from the existing process ofdevelopment and economic growth. Also, on a more immediate level,creating a forum for women to describe both their realities and concernsaround migration and the informal sector is of primary importance. Inaddition to reviewing the government and industry negligence that exists,this study illuminates that women employed in this informal sector of thelabor force do not have adequate financial or social means to voice theirconcerns and get their due treatment and compensation as required by law.In order to create policy that is more reflective of women’s interests andneeds in this sector, the distinct voices of migrant women must be heard.


REFERENCES

Anand, Vaijayanta1998 “Advocating for the Rights of Construction Workers: Nirman’s Experience,” The

Indian Journal of Social Work, 59(3):847–863.

Asis, Maruja M.B.2005 “Recent Trends in International Migration in Asia and the Pacific,” Asia-Pacific Popu-

lation Journal, 20(3):15-38.

Bhattacharyya, Sanghita2003 “The Economic Migration of Females in India: A Regional Analysis,” Geographical

Review of India, 65(1):85-92.

2002 “Work Pattern of Migrants in India,” Geographical Review of India, 64(1):40-50.

Bose, A.1990 Labour Migration and Rural Transformation in Colonial Asia. Amsterdam: Free

University Press.

1967 “Internal Migration in India, Pakistan and Ceylon.” In Proceedings of theWorldPopulation Conference, Vol. IV, Selected Papers& Summaries, Urbanization andMigration. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

Cackley, A.1993 “The Role of Wage Differentials in Determining Migration Selectivity by Sex: A Case

of Brazil.” In Internal Migration of Women in Developing Countries. New York: UnitedNations Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy.

Chant, S. and S.A. Radcliffe1992 “Migration and Development: The Importance of Gender.” In Gender and Migration

in Developing Countries. Edited by Sylvia Chant. London and New York: BelhavenPress.

Cherian, J. and K.V. Prasad1995 Women, Work and Inequality, The Reality of Gender. New Delhi: National Labour

Institute.

Curran, S. and A. Saguy2001 “Migration and Cultural Change: A Role for Gender and Social Networks,” Journal of

International Women’s Studies, 2(3):54-76.

De Haan, Arjan2002 “Migration and Livelihoods in Historical Perspective: A Case Study of Bihar, India,”

Journal of Development Studies, 38(5):115-143.

Deshingkar, Priya and Daniel Start2003 “Seasonal Migration for Livelihoods in India: Coping, Accumulation and Exclusion.”

Working Paper 220, Overseas Development Institute, London.


Deshpande, Sudha and Lalit Deshpande1998 “Impact of Liberalisation on Labour Market in India: What do facts from NSSO’s 50th

Round Show?” Economic and Political Weekly, 33(30 May), L31-L39.

Dev, S.M.2002 “Pro-poor Growth in India: What Do We Know about the Employment Effects of

Growth 1980-2000?” Working Paper 161, Overseas Development Institute, London.

Fernandes, W.1991 “Urbanization, Coping Mechanisms and Slum Women’s Status,” Social Action, 41(4):

382-398.

Findley. S and A. Diallo1993 “Social Appearances and Economic Realities of Female Migration in Rural Mali.” In

Internal Migration of Women in Developing Countries. New York: United NationsDepartment for Economic and Social Information and Policy.

Government of India2002 “Report of the Second National Commission on Labour.” New Delhi: Ministry of

Labour.

1996 “Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condi-tion of Service) Act.” New Delhi: Ministry of Labour.

1991 “Report of the Study Group on Migrant Labour,” New Delhi: National Commission onRural Labour.

1979 “Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service)Act.” New Delhi: Ministry of Labour.

1976 “Equal Remuneration Act.” New Delhi: Ministry of Labour.

1970 “Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act.” New Delhi: Ministry of Labour.

Grasmuck, S. and P.R. Pessar1991 Between Two Islands: Dominican International Migration. Berkeley, CA: University

of California Press.

Haberfeld, Y. et al.1999 “Seasonal Migration of Rural Labour in India,” Population Research and Policy

Review, 18(6):471-487.

Hema Kumari, T.A. and U. Tataji1998 “Seasonal Migration of Women Workers,” The Indian Journal of Social Work, 59(3):

791–805.


Huang, N. and H. Ching1983 “Female Migration to Taipei: Process and Adaptation,” Population Geography, 5(1-2):

12-33.

Hondagneu-Sotelo, P.2003 “Gender and Immigration: A Retrospective and Introduction.” In Gender and U.S.

Immigration: Contemporary Trends. Edited by Pierette Hondagneu-Sotelo. Berkeley:University of California Press.

1994 Gendered Transitions: Mexican Experiences of Migration. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.

Hugo, G.1991 “Migrant Women in Developing Country.” In Internal Migration of Women in

Developing Countries. New York: United Nations Department for Economic andSocial Information and Policy.

Jatrana, Santosh and Suresh Kumar Sangwan2004 "Living on Site: Health Experiences of Migrant Female Construction Workers in North

India,"Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 13(1):61-88.

Lauby, J. and O. Stark1988 “Individual Migration as a Family Strategy: Young Women in the Philippines,”

Population Studies, 42(3):473-486.

Lee, E.S.1966 “A Theory of Migration,” Demography, 3(1):47-57.

Lele, U.1986 “Women and Structural Transformation,” Economic Development and Cultural Change,

34(2):195-221.

Lessinger, J.1990 “Work and Modesty: The Dilemma of Women Market Traders in Madras.“ In Struc-

tures and Strategies: Women, Work and Family. Edited by L. Dube and R. Palriwala.New Delhi: Sage Publication.

Libbee, M. J. and E.D. Sopher1975 “Marriage Migration in Rural India.” In People on the Move. Edited by L.A Kosinski

and R.M. Prothero. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd.

Lim, Lin Lean1993 “The Structural Determinants of Female Migration.” In Internal Migration of Women

in Developing Countries. New York: United Nations Department for Economic andSocial Information and Policy.

Lingam, L.1998 “Migrant Women, Work Participation and Urban Experiences,” The Indian Journal of

Social Work, 59(3):806–822.


Matthew, A.1999 “Women Construction Workers: Participation in Decision Making,” Loyola Journal of

Social Sciences, 13(1):39–44.

Mitra, M.1987 Women’s Work and Household Survival Strategies: A Case Study of Santhal Women’s

Lives and Work. New Delhi: CWDS Report.

Mitra, A. and I. Gupta2002 “Rural Migrant and Labour Segmentation: Micro Level Evidence from Delhi Slums,”

Economic and Political Weekly, 37(2):163-168.

Mosse, David et al.2002 “Brokered Livelihoods: Debt, Labour Migration and Development in Tribal Western

India,” Journal of Development Studies, 38(5):59-88.

1997 Seasonal Labour in Migration in Tribal (Bhil) Western India. Report to DFID-India,New Delhi KRIBP Working Paper. Swansea: Centre for Development Studies, Univer-sity of Wales.

National Commission on Rural Labour1990 Report on Study Group on Migrant Labour. New Delhi: Ministry of Labour.

National Sample Survey Organisation2000 Migration in India, Report No. 470. New Delhi: Registrar General of India.

1993 Migration in India, Report No. 430. New Delhi: Registrar General of India.

Pandey, D.1998 “Migrant Labour, Employment and Gender Dimensions,” The Indian Journal of Social

Work, 56(3):743–765.

Pessar, Patricia R.1999 “The Role of Gender, Households, and Social Networks in the Migration Process: A

Review and Appraisal. In The Handbook of International Migration – The AmericanExperience. Edited by Charles Hirschman, Philip Kasinitz and Josh DeWind. NewYork: Russell Sage Foundation.

Registrar General of India2001 Census of India, Migration Tables Part V A and B, India and States. New Delhi:

Registrar General of India.

1991 Census of India, Migration Tables Part V A and B, India and States. New Delhi:Registrar General of India.

1981 Census of India, Migration Tables Part V A and B, India and States. New Delhi:Registrar General of India.


Rogaly, Ben1998 “Workers on the Move: Seasonal Migration and Changing Social Relations in Rural

India,” Gender and Development, 6(1):21-31.

Rogaly, B. et al.2001 “Seasonal Migration, Social Change and Migrants’ Rights – Lessons from West

Bengal,” Economic and Political Weekly, 36(49):4547-4459.

Rogaly, B. and D. Coppard2003 “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(3):395-433.

Saradamoni, K.1995 “Crisis in the Fishing Industry and Women’s Migration: The Case of Kerala.” In

Women and Seasonal Labour Migration. Edited by Loes Schenk –Sandbergen. London:Sage Publications.

Shanthi, K.2006 “Female Labour Migration in India: Insights From NSSO Data.” Working Paper,

Madras School of Economics.

1978 “Rural Urban Migration of Women among the Urban Poor in India: Causes andConsequences,” Social Action, 24(3):326-356.

Singh, A. and A. De Souza1976 The Position of Women in Migrant Bastis in Delhi. New Delhi: Monohar Publication.

Sinha, G.P. and S.N. Ranade1975 Construction Workers: Report of Two Surveys. Bombay: Allied Publishers.

Srivastava, R.2003 “An Overview of Migration in India, Its Impacts and Key Issues.” Paper presented at

the Regional Conference on Migration, Development and Pro-Poor Policy Choices inAsia, Dhaka, Bangladesh, 22-24 June 2003.

Srivastava, R. and Sanghita Bhattacharyya2002 “Globalisation, Reforms and Labour Mobility: Analysis of Recent Indian Trends,”

Labour and Development, 9(2):31-55.

Thadani, V and Michael P.Todaro1984 “Female Migration: A Conceptual Framework.” In Women in the Cities of Asia:

Migration and Urban Adaptation. Edited by J.Fawcett et al. Boulder: Westview Press.

Ward, K.1990 Women Workers and Global Restructuring. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Joanne Barriga

Documents

Transcript of Joanne Barriga