COVER STORY

A question of uneven development

Interview with Lalit Deshpande.

SHASHI ASHIWAL

Professor Lalit Deshpande, former Director of the Department of Economics, University of Mumbai and currently a visiting honorary professor at the Institute for Human Development, New Delhi, has had a distinguished academic career. He is an executive committee member of the Indian Society of Labour Economics. He has held numerous positions in the Indian government - chairman of the Committee on Labour Statistics, member of the Rest of Maharashtra Statutory Development Board and member of the Services Board of Reserve Bank of India, and so on. He has done research studies on labour market behaviour for the International Labour Organisation and the World Bank and has published books on Indian labour with a specific focus on the extent of labour flexibility in India. Deshpande spoke to Lyla Bavadam on the related issues of unemployment, labour and regional inequalities. Excerpts from the interview:

What would be the best way to tackle the recurring problem of Sena activists turning violent with the `sons-of-the-soil' slogan?

One way for the Railways to tackle the Sena is to make transparent all the facts and figures. What are the facts before us? We have been told that there were 2,000 posts and eight lakh applications. That is all that the public knows and since the Railways has not said anything about it we have to take the Sena's word about these details. This is the worst thing. Since there is no other information, people lap up whatever they receive and are convinced that an injustice is being done to them. When information is restricted, there is no transparency and ultimately there is a violent outburst. Modern India has to give out facts - palatable or unpalatable. Then people would understand the issue. In the absence of this there is a clientele waiting to buy whatever is being sold.

The Railways' employment policy is not known. The Shiv Sena says the jobs that were available were for khalasis [unskilled labourers]. The Shiv Sena asks: "Is there a shortage of unskilled labour in Maharashtra that it has to be brought in from other States?" They emphasise that they are referring to all those who are domiciled here and not to Marathi-speaking people. The Railways should counter this by providing information. How many people from Maharashtra applied for these jobs? How many failed, how many passed?

Then there is the other issue. I read that these jobs were not advertised in the Marathi language papers. True or false? Fears need to be allayed about the general policies of recruitment. All these questions are very legitimate and all debates are useless unless you know the facts. As an average Indian I do not know what is happening. It is essential that people know what is happening so that those who are making public causes of issues cannot misuse opportunities to further their own aims.

A bit of background is essential to understanding the issue. To the man on the street it is about jobs, but there is more to it than meets the eye. The Railways has not been contributing to the general tax revenue as it was doing earlier. It is in a dilemma too. If it starts operations in a profitable State it will make money, but the basic mandate of the Railways is to provide infrastructure to backward areas so as to raise the development levels. No doubt it will initially make losses but after that it will make profits.

Are you referring to taking a stand on regional inequalities?

Yes, there needs to be a principle of distribution. Larger shares of the development budget should be earmarked for States with low incomes. So, if we do not want Biharis to come here then we should be prepared to give Bihar a larger share of the development budget. Or we should provide employment to Biharis regardless of where they are located.

Maharashtra is among the fastest growing States. The annual rate of growth here is 6 per cent as compared to 3 per cent in Bihar. Since the levels of poverty and unemployment are higher in Bihar, it is natural for Biharis to migrate in search of jobs. If a State is mismanaged, as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are believed to be, then what is the Centre doing to make them perform? A situation is bound to come when other States will grudge the behaviours of the non-performing States. Our Constitution does not have any provisions for punishment for bad performances by States.

Bal Thackeray says that he is not against Biharis per se but against all people who take away unskilled jobs from local people. He says that all States, and not just Maharashta, should reserve unskilled jobs for local people and this would significantly reduce unemployment levels.

(Laughs) Take the Railways again, for example. If no investment is made by the Railways in Bihar then how can unskilled Biharis apply for jobs in Bihar? This is a serious responsibility of the public sector. It has to make investments, especially in backward areas, otherwise how will there be employment for the people of those areas?

Do we have any idea of the extent of unemployment? How would you define an unemployed person?

An unemployed person is not just a person who does not have a job. In developed countries the jobless get unemployment insurance. Therefore, the person is unemployed but yet has an income. Not so in India. So in India how do we measure unemployment? Take the example of a cobbler who sits on the footpath in his stall. He would come in the category of self-employed, but consider his earnings. He may get one customer or 10 customers a day. There has to be a minimum income per day to consider a person as employed.

Therefore, income measure is the best measure to judge employment/unemployment. These are also the reasons why it is difficult to get accurate figures of the unemployed. One can get numbers from employment exchanges but it is still not accurate. People who are looking for a better job, though they already have one, people who want to hold more than one jobs - all these people register with the exchange.

In cultural and demographic terms, is there any indication of an increase in the number of unemployed Maharashtrians in the State? Likewise, is there any indication of a trend in which more numbers of the so-called `outsiders' are getting employed in the State? There is a general belief that migrants come in and corner particular jobs.

Since employment and unemployment issues are not clearly defined, there are no definitive answers to this. However, one thing is true. Migrants find jobs easily because they will work for anyone and any wage. Look at some of the jobs in the city. Most of the rag-pickers are from Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, most of the ship-breaking jobs are done by migrants. No Maharashtrian will do these jobs unless they are from very poor regions like Solapur. It is not correct to say that these people are cornering the jobs in these industries. It is just that no one else is willing to do them. This is a universal fact. A migrant is also usually a single mouth to feed - himself - since he leaves his family in the village.

There is another reason for this belief that migrants corner certain jobs. People from Rajasthan, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh have local skills that are transmitted from father to son. For instance, diamond cutters, carpenters, polishwallahs and gawlis [milkmen]. Take the example of gawlis. They are mainly from western Uttar Pradesh, which is an area of many rivers and hence milch animals do well there. Gawlis are a traditional occupation there. Maharashtra, especially the interiors, is a dry area, so the profession of gawli is not so common. So when the Uttar Pradesh gawlis came here they filled a natural niche. Because these people have traditional skills it gives the impression that they are taking over a profession.

How about the non-skilled areas? For instance, jobs like taxi drivers, lift men, security guards. There is a popular perception that these are dominated by people from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh.

One of the possible explanations is that migrant populations work much harder. At one time, vegetable markets were dominated by Maharashtrians, but that percentage has decreased. The migrant workers get up at 2 a.m. and begin the business of getting in fresh produce. Another reason is that Maharashtrians have not been broadly noted for their entrepreneurial spirit. They have more of a service nature, at least among the middle classes.

Are there any statistics that you can give to show the flow of migrants into Mumbai?

One very telling figure is from the 1961 Census, which says that 40 per cent of migrants to Mumbai came from the rest of Maharashtra. However, more recent figures from the 1981-1991 Census show that the share of Gujarati migrants has dropped. From 16 per cent in 1961 it has come down to 12 per cent in 1991. For Uttar Pradesh-Bihar, the inflow into Mumbai has gone up from 12 per cent in 1961 to 20 per cent in 1991. You must remember that when the Census is taken if someone is born outside the State he is considered a migrant even if he has been living away from his place of birth for several years.

What was the Shiv Sena-Bharatiya Janata Party combine's track record in providing employment when they were in power in Maharashtra? Sena leader Raj Thackeray had expressed concern about unemployed youth and had even started a sort of employment bureau.

In the totality of population in the State, it becomes difficult to claim success or failure. No figures will directly show you whether more Maharashtrians got employment though this can be inferred from the data.

Do you think the violence was an expression of the Sena's `sons-of-the-soil' policy or is there something more to it?

Let me put it this way. You need an issue to come to prominence in a State. Once you come to power your ambition looks to other States and you alter your ideas. From the cause of the Marathi manus to Hindutva to the Muslim vote, it is all the language of convenience. Professor Kaushik Basu, who used to be with the Delhi School of Economics, spoke of the hierarchy of ideologies and beliefs. He says that your basic ideology may conflict with your lesser ideologies. Each person has to come to terms with this. The basic ideology of the Shiv Sena is to promote the interests of the Marathi-speaking population, but their ambition is to go to the Hindi-speaking States now, especially since they have partnered with the BJP.

So what does the Sena do so as not to embarrass the BJP in the Hindi belt? That is their conflict right now. Full employment can only be assured if there is denial of Fundamental Rights of others, that is, Article 19 which guarantees freedom of movement. This is a political decision to be made and that is where the compromises in ideology are made.

A very common complaint by locals against migrants is that of integration. Even citizens who do not support the Sena's extreme views say that migrants do not integrate and, in fact, impose their culture on the older, more established culture.

`They don't integrate', `their habits are dirty'... these are the common prejudices that locals all over the world have against first generation migrants. I was talking to an Uttar Pradesh rickshawallah the other day and he was expressing his opinion about Biharis. He was talking about his neighbour who is a Bihari and who he says does not save any money to send back to his family. From this he came to the conclusion that Biharis are immoral and selfish people and that is why others do not like them.

I thought to myself that when he first came here he must have been looked down upon by others for similar things, but he has forgotten that. Our minds are prejudiced. I remember reading a letter in a Marathi paper some years ago in which a woman reader said Biharis and people from Uttar Pradesh are dirty and spit paan. Now paan is more of a north Indian habit, but what about the fact that Maharashtrians eat tobacco and spit that? The basic idea seems to be that we can spit but others cannot.

The other prejudiced accusation against migrants is that they tend to band together. A migrant is looking for security, so he will naturally stay with his own people for the sake of familiarity and convenience. This has happened in New York, in London... Just about everywhere. We have to remember that integration is a slow process. You now have Punjabi and Gujarati families taking out Ganesha idols for immersion. It is not a part of their original culture, but some families have been here so long that it has become part of their culture.

Or take the matter of the local language. In Mumbai you can get away with Bambaiya Hindi so many migrants do not feel the need to learn Marathi, but a great many still do. And if they send their children to school then they will learn Marathi because it is the second language.

In Amsterdam the migrants from Surinam, particularly women, are very reluctant to mix with the local people. So local volunteer groups formed clubs, which were initially only for women, and they used to go out on picnics, hold Dutch classes. Integration is a two-way process. You cannot put the responsibility entirely on the migrants. If we want them to integrate, then the question we have to ask ourselves is this: What are we doing to help them to achieve this?

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail