Public awareness is key to the successful implementation of the Employment Guarantee Scheme in Rajasthan.

WHEN we reached the worksite of a gravel road in Loharcha village, Kyari Panchayat, Kotra block in Udaipur district, a group of 40 labourers, mostly women, were working hard to finish the 1.5-kilometre stretch from Kalkamata to Anjani, that would finally bring connectivity to their settlement.

Gomi Bai, working on the site, demonstrated with her spade how much more effort she now had to dig to get a survival wage. “Work was light earlier, now it is difficult. And earlier, we used to get grain. That was better,” she added.

Gomi summed up in those succinct lines, two of the vital issues emerging from the implementation of the Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS), from the point of view of the thousands of labourers it is intended to benefit. She was responding to a specific question on what she felt was different in the work she was doing today, compared to drought relief work in the past.

Gomi Bai may not have been aware of the nuances of “drought relief” versus the “EGS”, leave alone know that such an Act had been passed and what were her entitlements under it, but her practical common sense told her that something was wrong and this clearly concerned what she earned for her effort, and how the form of payment (fully in cash) under this scheme was depleting her purchasing power. The work on the road had started on April 1, and labourers had been paid a paltry wage of Rs. 40 a day for the month of April. Wages for a whole month and a half were still pending.

Gomi’s experience is one among hundreds recounted by labourers whom members of the Rozgar Evum Suchna ka Adhikar Abhiyan met and spoke to, in the course of a series of padyatras in Kotra block (Udaipur district), Abu Road block (Sirohi) and Nadauti block (Karauli) in Rajasthan, sparked by the massive social audit of the EGS in the entire district of Dungarpur earlier in April. The padyatras, undertaken by the Adivasi Vikas Manch (Kotra) and Astha Sansthan in Udaipur, Bhakhar Bhitrot Adivasi Manch and Jan Chetna Sansthan in Abu Road, and an umbrella of 15 organisations in Karauli, brought to light some burning issues on the implementation of the EGS in Rajasthan, with far-reaching consequences on the likelihood of achieving its purported objectives.

Unfamiliar with details

With some variations, general awareness about the scheme’s existence prevailed in these blocks (even here, the Act was less known, but the “100-days’ ga-run-tee” had become a household phrase), but labourers were often totally unfamiliar with the details of the scheme. Crucially, many were still unaware that they had to apply for work after registering and getting the job card.

This led to different sorts of problems. At the Naya Talab worksite in Badagaon panchayat, Nadauti, 80 people turned up for work where only 60 was required and a fight ensued on whose names should be written on the muster rolls. This was totally unwarranted, as the EGS spells out a procedure whereby people can apply for and will be allotted work in a systematic manner.

In Abu Road block, this lack of awareness often led to a potential situation of mass fudging of the muster rolls. In many work sites, it was found that the mate (the “manager” of the labourers at each worksite) had muster rolls in excess of the number of labourers actually working. For instance, in Tuti Nadi worksite, Girwar panchayat, mate Chatra Ram showed us muster rolls for 100 labourers (10 muster rolls of 10 each) with only 55 names filled in, and working. Leaving 45 rows blank could mean anything, including filling up fake names against them at a later stage. Interestingly, against Ratan Singh’s name were tiny pen-tip marks, instead of a clear numeral one (for present) or zero (for absent). The ploy was revealed — Ratan Singh was the actual mate, who had `deputed’ Chatra Ram to do his work while he himself would relax at his home and still earn the daily wage.

One of the most useful results of the padyatras was to ensure that muster rolls were brought out from the secretive depths of the mate’s plastic thela at worksites and labourers were informed that they had the full right to read it whenever they wished. Padyatris insisted that one of the labourers read the muster rolls on the site to check for frauds.

Serious problem

In all three blocks, measurement of work emerged as one of the most serious and rampant problems. As work was measured usually at the end of 15 days, jointly for all those at the worksite, those who worked more efficiently were punished, while the likes of Ratan Singh were rewarded.

Even as the blame game between the labourers and the administration, as to who is responsible for the low wage rates being paid continues, there’s no dispute that those who are actually working hard bear the brunt. In Mahad panchayat, Kotra block, a group of 150 labourers refused to take a payment of Rs 36 per day, as it was too low. Added to this, with the rising price of wheat, the labourers stand to lose, as payments are made fully in cash.

The `difficulty in work’, expressed by Gomi and many others, was another common problem directly related to the “task” specified under the EGS, in order to earn the daily minimum wage (in Rajasthan, it is Rs. 73).

The daily task is prescribed according to a Basic Schedule of Rates (BSR), which is a complicated matrix beyond a layman’s comprehension. On the ground, the labourers are told to dig a certain amount, which does not take into account the actual soil conditions or the horizontal and vertical distances he or she has to go to dump the soil (”lead” and “lift” factors).

For instance, in Nadauti block, labourers in all work sites had been told to dig 70 cubic feet (in case of water harvesting structures), when the BSR prescribed rates actually ranged from 45 cubic feet to maximum 61 cubic feet, taking into account various soil, lead and lift conditions. When asked why the labourers were being told to dig more than the maximum, the junior engineer reasoned that whatever task they were asked to complete, they would almost certainly under-achieve it, so if you said “70″ they might achieve 50 or 60!

While some provisions of the Act still need to be re-examined, the experiences of these padyatras highlighted that ironing out many of the existing hiccups in implementation would heavily rest on public awareness about the provisions of the scheme.

This is by no means an easy task, but if anything, this is where people’s organisations, NGOs and the government might want to heavily invest in with a sense of urgency to save the EGS.
SOWMYA KERBART SIVAKUMAR

Reference Link:
The Hindu Online
http://www.hindu.com/mag/2006/07/09/stories/2006070900190400.htm
Sunday, Jul 09, 2006

PHOTOS: SOWMYA SIVAKUMAR