India made a gigantic surge in its GDP between $326.608 billion in 1990 to $2.0485 trillion in 2014 (Bank, 2016). This impressive surge in its GDP made India cynosure to academic circles; with one side pitching it as “success story” of globalization while another proving otherwise.
Let’s come on the same page, let’s define ‘Globalization‘ first. Nath (2008) defines it to a widening and deepening of the international flow of commodities, capital, technology, and information with integrated global markets. While the supporters of globalization emphasize on increased productivity and competitiveness, whereas the opponents term it ‘Exploitative’ and ‘Neo-imperialist’ (Patnaik,2012).
Of the many discourses on the subject, the side focused on elements labor relations and social justice has gained significant ground. The recent ILO report titled ‘A Global Alliance against Forced Labor’ further highlights the exploitative nature of neoliberal process though, in a subtle way. It defines forced labor as indecent work or service ‘extracted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered voluntarily’ (ILO, 2005).
Here are a few more points that make the report problematic:
- It takes a limited account of forced labor, which is prevalent in India.
- deals with symptoms, not the cause. ILO views “indecent labor” in isolation and considers only forced and child labor as exploitation; thereby, remaining silent on standard free labor relations
INDIA’S GROWTH EXPERIENCE
These macroeconomic changes led to an infusion of capital and technology, leading to a further surge in service and manufacturing sector. But this came at the cost – agriculture.
The decline in the agriculture sector has led to something called ‘freed labor’. These are basically former farm-workers who don’t have any capital at their disposal as they lack access to formal credit institutions. As a matter of fact, they borrow capital from maistries to meet their consumption needs and in turn, must accept exploitative contractual terms. They usually end up working in sectors like brick-kiln and construction, etc.
The current ILO framework also tends to overlook the phenomenon of debt bondage, which constitutes the core of exploitation. It fails to acknowledge the blurred lines that exist between voluntary and forced labor. It also doesn’t take into account whether workers have a choice or not.
The ILO framework argues for fairer globalization, notwithstanding the fact that it is the same process of globalization which is spitting the laborers into a vicious cycle. There are multiple dimensions of caste, class, gender and identity attached to labor markets which are being used by market for its resource optimization. The paper categorically explains the convergence of these dimensions with respect to exploitation in a globalizing world.
Labor Markets: The Neo-Liberal Ripple
Labor market segmentation in India is very simplified. You get paid less than minimum wages if you work in the unorganized sector (like a brick-kiln, or construction labor). The pay reduces further if you are a woman, a child or simply someone from a caste that is seen as ‘low’ or ‘backward’.
The Neo-liberal process further scatters labor as it leads to arrested development. Per capita income in states like Gujarat, Haryana, Maharashtra, and Delhi is much higher than that in low-performance of states like Bihar and UP. This leads to large-scale migration from the low to the high.
Since migrated laborers don’t constitute vote bank in their new states, they are vulnerable to exploitation through low wages, long working hours and inadequate leave and/ or work conditions. Further depoliticization takes place as they are not able to form unions and collectively fight for rights.
Women Everywhere
The inferior status of women in Indian society is capitalized on by neo-liberal markets very well. Why? The answer is simple – low input cost. Not that their output is lower than men. It is just that the work that women do commands less value, owing to dominant social construct that only men can do skilled jobs (Aseem,2009).
DAMN. LET’S JUST DROP THE UNORGANIZED SECTOR.
We wish. Post liberalization, the characteristic feature of labor market has been a dearth of productive employment. In fact, organized sector’s capability to generate employment has stagnated, giving rise to underemployment as there is no resort to social security. In lieu of the Structural Adjustment Programs, the government emphasizes on controlling fiscal deficit and inflation rate. This has rendered a large chunk of population esp. women and children undertake exploitative or ‘Indecent work’.
There seems to be a vicious cycle perpetuated both by state and market to reproduce labor at bare minimum. However, it would be unfair to expect ILO to be vanguard of labor rights owing to the neo-liberal framework within which it operates. ILO derives its funds from UN which in turn receives large chunk of share from countries like USA; whose, interest is inextricably linked to globalization.
Notwithstanding neoliberal constraint, ILO is trying, albeit in vain to find an amicable solution. However, the current framework within which efforts are being made is itself imperfect. It needs to incorporate different dynamics that confront labor markets in India and other developing countries, not to find a panacea for eliminating ‘Indecent work’ but at least for addressing the phenomenon of neo-liberal bondage in its totality.
SOCIAL SOLDERS 