Workers’ woes in ‘Smart’ cities

Inequalities and Indignities

The Vision Document of Bengaluru Smart City Limited (BenSCL) states that its goal, among others, is to make Bengaluru “Liveable and Healthy” and that the company will be guided by, among other things, the key operating principle of ‘Employee Inclusiveness’, namely, to “Respect and value the contributions of employees because everyone is important to the success of the operations.” The ‘Mission & Strategy’ of the company further says that the objective is to promote cities that "give a decent quality of life to its citizens" and the focus is to be on "inclusive" development.

But how far are these noble goals being put into practice? For instance, the kind of workers’ shelters being provided by BenSCL on Rhenius Street, near Nanjappa Circle, Shanthinagar, put paid to the above-stated vision, mission, objectives and strategies promising “inclusive development”. The workers here are housed in squalid-looking, window-less tin-sheds. In such shelters, how will the workers live a dignified life, maintain hygiene and avoid Covid? The shelters on this street are exemplars of what is perpetuated across the city and state.

That such tin-sheds continue to be provided under this prestigious national project led by the prime minister himself, even after the miserable conditions in which migrants/workers live in cities was brought out before the entire country during the lockdown, shows that the sensitivity of the government to the lives of the marginalised has not improved at all.

What is even more galling is that, in contrast, the supervisor/engineer's cabin a little further down the same street has a "SMART" hygienic, portable cabin with neat doors, windows and attached toilet. Why is there such gross class discrimination if the goal and objectives of the SMART City Mission is to work for “inclusive development” and “give a good quality life to all citizens”? What prevents the mission authorities from providing the same kind of cabins to workers to make their lives also equally “SMART”?

It is worth recalling in this context that a memorandum had been submitted by CIVIC and CFAR even before the pandemic to Manivannan, then Labour Secretary. Based on the memorandum, a Government Order (GO) was issued in January 2020 -- more than a year ago -- mandating the Building & Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Board (hereinafter ‘Board’) to use the Rs 8,000 crore of cess funds lying unused with it to provide workers several benefits. The GO was also based on a Model Scheme suggested by the central Labour Ministry as per a directive of the Supreme Court.

The GO required that, based on the Haryana model recommended by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and commended by the Supreme Court, temporary/migrant workers’ colonies with decent houses, toilets, etc., should be provided in each ward as a common facility to enable such workers to lead a life of dignity. The GO required the Board to also start schemes for social rental housing and ownership housing, like those for beedi workers, for settled construction workers.

Engineers of all government departments -- BBMP, Housing Board, Slum Board, BWSSB, etc. – were to be designated as registering officers and licences for projects were to be issued only after contractors enrolled all workers with the Board. All these agencies were to communicate to the Board the list of approved projects every quarter; the Board was to update the progress made on the enrolment and disbursal of schemes to the workers on its website. This was to help civil society groups to monitor the enrolment of workers and also the disbursal of benefits.

Since many workers were finding it difficult to register themselves with the Board as they were unable to prove that they had worked for 90 days in the year as construction workers, the GO required employers and registering authorities to issue a passbook/employment diary to the workers so that a record of their employment remained with the workers, enabling them to self-certify the number of days worked by them. This would make it unnecessary for employers, local authorities, trade unions, NGOs, etc., to provide this certification. The need for such certification, social audits in Rajasthan had revealed, led to corruption. Enquiries with the workers on Rhenius Street revealed that they had not received such employment diaries.

The GO required the Board to run crèches -- or provide grants to municipalities or the Women & Child Development Department to do so in every municipal ward as a common facility for all construction workers’ children. The award of such grants to local authorities is supported by Sections 22 (2) and (3) of the BOCWW Act. The GO requires the contractor/employer to ferry children less than five years old at worksites to the nearest creches/Anganwadis (in cases where the employer is not required to provide the crèche himself) and ferry children above five years to the nearest school.

The Board was required to extend all the nine ILO Social Security benefits as per ILO Convention No 102 to every enrolled member. The monthly pension given by the Board was to be raised to Rs 3,000 and disbursed at the age of 55 years itself. More awareness was to be created about the ‘child care benefit’ of Rs 500 per month for a period of three years that mothers were entitled to after the birth of a child.

Hardly any of these measures that were outlined in the GO seem to have been implemented, not only for the SMART City workers but for all construction workers across the state. An email sent to all relevant officials in this regard elicited no response. A Board official was unable to provide an update on the implementation of the GO.

Bengaluru is elated that it has achieved No 1 ranking in the entire country in the ‘Ease of Living Index’. But it appears that not everyone in the city is enjoying that ‘ease of living’ equally.

(The writer is Executive Trustee of CIVIC Bengaluru)