Domestic workers constitute less than 10% of the 55 lakh workers in Bengaluru’s unorganised sector.
Credit: DH Photo/B K Janardhan
Lakshmi (name changed), 62, a domestic worker from Chennammanakere, works in three households, seven days a week, for a total monthly wage of Rs 5,500. She lives alone and pays a monthly rent of Rs 2,500. When Lakshmi started as a domestic worker, about 35 years ago, she used to work in 10 houses. She had to raise three children.
Two years ago, a 16-year-old girl who was standing in for her mother at work, was touched inappropriately by a male member of her employer’s family. Startled, and her “claim” dismissed by the employer’s wife, the girl was silenced by her mother and others in the community. They did not want the incident to affect her future.
Chaitra (name changed), 42, does not take her weekly day off. She visits her native town Thiruvannamalai, at least once a year, on three to four days’ leave. Often, she returns from these breaks to attend to work piled up during her absence. She does not eat at her employer’s house but was once offered breakfast. When she asked for a bonus during Deepavali, she was told, “We gave you breakfast and tea, like you are our own. How can you ask for extra money?”
In Bengaluru’s unorganised domestic workplaces, many workers – mostly women from underprivileged, Dalit and migrant families – grapple with long hours, low wages, and unsettling questions about their integrity.
Legislative mechanisms intended to empower this workforce do not appear to have reached a large section of the community. Domestic workers under the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) areas are entitled to a minimum wage between Rs 17,300 and Rs 19,500. However, several workers DH interacted with were not even aware of the minimum-wages provision.
Domestic workers constitute less than 10% of the 55 lakh workers in Bengaluru’s unorganised sector. Of these, 232,916 are registered with e-Shram, a national database of unorganised workers. So far, only 2,473 labour ID cards have been issued to domestic workers in Bengaluru Rural and 9,519 in Bengaluru Urban.
Undefined relationship
Maitreyi Krishnan from the All India Central Council for Trade Unions (AICCTU) noted that a harassed domestic worker cannot find redressal without the backing of a workers’ union because, in domestic labour, there are no mechanisms to formally establish an employer-employee relationship.
“The threat of termination is high if the worker questions her employer or demands a bonus, which forces her to choose submission over revolt,” Maitreyi said.
She also highlighted the plight of live-in domestic workers who face restrictions in going out and are often not paid their wages on time. Food and accommodation provided to them are also considered components of their salaries.
Geetha Menon, Joint Secretary, Domestic Workers Rights Union (DWRU), said the identity of domestic workers as workers, and not as an essential part of servitude, needed to be established. “The employer, more often than not, appears to be entitled to treat the employee almost like a bonded labourer,” she said.
e-Shram which promises a Rs-3,000 pension for registered domestic workers is still in the early stages of adoption. Domestic workers are also easy targets of theft allegations, placing them under constant scrutiny, Geetha said.
Household as workplace
Several employers DH spoke with said they treated the workers as “extended family” who were given clothes and sweets and provided medicines when they fell sick. Labourer unions want households recognised as workplaces and labour relationships regularised, outside of informal arrangements that facilitate “favours”.
A C Thammanna, Assistant Labour Commissioner, said cases registered under the PoSH Act were handled by a Local Complaints Committee under the District Administration.
“If an inquiry on sexual harassment is initiated by this committee, both the complainant and the employer can question it. This is where the Labour Department steps in,” he said. Similar challenges arise while registering child labour cases in domestic work, since the workplace is a household where the department cannot directly intervene.
Rajesh Joseph from the School of Development, Azim Premji University, pointed to large apartment complexes where domestic workers’ entries and exits are recorded along with the names of the employers. Rajesh has been studying, for years, collective efforts by Bengaluru’s domestic workers to formalise their workplaces. He said the onus was on the government to step in and formalise the employee-employer relationship. “It will take time to bring this system into individual houses but this can be applied, at least, in apartment complexes and societies,” he said.
Rajesh suggested that with several government schemes mandating bank accounts, employer-employee relationships in domestic work could also be formalised through UPI transactions or wages credited to the employee’s bank account. He also called for stronger social security mechanisms to help domestic workers avoid financial dependence on employers during emergencies, which could push them into debt.