I. CRITIQUE OF STATE SCHEMES
Nowhere have states appointed Programme Officers, and BDOs are designated as Programme Officers everywhere. The BDOs end up being overburdened.
Some Areas of Concern in State Schemes
|
West Bengal
|
Households are not defined as nuclear family, nor are single-member households recognized
|
There is no provision for individual cards
|
BDOs are extremely wary of encouraging applications or implementing the unemployment clause since 11 (5) threatens disciplinary action "In all cases where unemployment allowance is due to be paid…and if the reasons are not satisfactory the State Government may initiate suitable action against the defaulters."
|
10(2) and 8(a) allow the liability to pay unemployment allowance to cease under certain circumstances such as high rainfall, floods, water logging and other natural calamities, which is a dilution of the guarantee at the time when it is needed the most, namely the post-sowing food-deficit months of August and September
|
Section 19 permits non-payment of minimum wages by putting the onus of productivity fully on the workers with the wages directly linked with the quantity of work done. "…lower quantum of work will lead to payment of proportionately lower wage." There is no obligation on the State Government to have a schedule of rates that ensure that workers normally earn the minimum wage rate.
|
The State Employment Guarantee Council was not constituted by mid-September but was due shortly.
|
Tamil Nadu
|
Under 4(iii), the payment of minimum wages is subject to the out-turn of work as determined by the schedule of rural rates. However, even though the State Scheme does not so specify, the government has taken the commendable step to revise the schedule of rural rates in such a way that workers can earn the minimum wage.
|
Contractors are not explicitly banned in the Government Order.
|
The Gram Panchayats may either execute the works themselves or handover the works for execution to the line department/ Self Help Groups, if necessary.
|
The government has issued an order to ensure a high threshold level and large works since they argue that will make monitoring easier by reducing the number of worksites. They have placed a lower limit of Rs 3 lakhs.
|
Works with a material component within the permissible 40 per cent are often rejected, and the State Government has asked DPCs to keep this near-zero
|
Some Areas of Concern in State Schemes (contd.)
|
Orissa
|
The verification process is unnecessarily complicated and requires documentary evidence for age, local residence and household entity. The Gram Panchayat is required to refer to the electoral rolls of the GP, scrutinize voter ID card and/or other evidences
|
Photographs are compulsory on the single job-cards for each household.
|
PRIs can execute these works through Line Departments/reputed NGOs/Self Help Groups/Other Central or State Government Agencies, etc. However, no clear procedure or criteria is laid out for the selection of NGOs or SHGs.
|
The intimation to applicants regarding when and where to report for work is only to be displayed at the offices of implementing agencies rather than the residence/ notice board in the village of residence
|
Labourers are expected to turn out the quantity of works required as per the schedule of rates to be "eligible" for minimum wages.
|
The insertion of the word "diligently" is not in conformity with the NREGA and introduces an element of discretion and provides a ready excuse for underpayment
|
There is also no safeguard against delayed payments
|
There is no prescribed manner for compensation
|
Private parties are not debarred from making payments.
|
There are no procedures regarding the system of wage payment. In accordance with 23(4) of the NREGA, this should be in public and in prescribed manner.
|
Maharashtra
|
In districts not notified under NREGA, the Zilla Panchayats and line departments will continue to be the implementation agencies, and the three-tier administrative structure, with the Collector and Tehsildar will be in charge at the district and block level respectively.
|
Wages are to be paid on a piece rate basis - "according to the quantity of work done on the basis of rates for different items so fixed that an average person working diligently for 7 hours a day will earn equal to the minimum wage”. Again, the use of diligence is not in conformity with the NREGA.
|
Wages are to be paid within 15 days after closure of the fortnightly muster, which might imply payment after 30 days of work and therefore violates the NREGA.
|
II. Implementation Of NREGS
Some State Governments have taken important steps to ensure minimum wage payment, in conformity with the Act. While Tamil Nadu has substantively reduced out turn requirements, Orissa is on the way to revising its Schedule of Rates. Maharashtra has revised its minimum wages upwards to Rs 66. West Bengal has made marginal download revisions of out turn requirements in two districts, not enough to ensure minimum wage payment.
-
General Observations Common To All/Most States
There is a general tendency to keep spending low through a combination of measures that violate the NREGA in letter and spirit. This is through low coverage of the eligible population in notified districts, unfulfilled entitlements even of the registered population, inadequate administrative capabilities and little effort to overcome deficiencies in manpower, skills and training, impermissible restrictions on eligibility, verification, works, etc.
There are systemic forces at work which result in invisibilising women's work through a focus on productivity-linked earth works and high productivity requirements. The urge to save costs and make additional assets by exploiting existing gender biases that already invisibilise women's work and pay her less/nothing for her labour is the most important underlying factor behind the continued clubbing together of easily divisible tasks and low payment. In a sense, women’s labour at public worksites gets treated almost in the same way as women’s work in the household. Unfortunately, administrative laziness has exacerbated this situation further whereby difficulty in computing women’s work has resulted in not being recognized as independent work.
-
Access and Registration
-
Registration is not seen as a continuous process and “last dates” are announced
-
Documentary proof for verification of age, residence and family entity like Ration Cards, Voter ID cards etc. are insisted upon
-
Non-issuance of individual cards
-
Non-recognition of separated/divorced women in natal home and female headed households as independent households
-
Lack of will to register female headed households, the elderly and handicapped
-
Arbitrary and unjustifiable criteria like age, BPL card, income, or disability etc. for eligibility not permitted by the Act
-
Exclusion of migrants
-
Backlog in registration and very high gap between registration and job card distribution
-
Entitlements
-
Use of the Census definition of household as common kitchen instead of nuclear family and consequent reduction of per capita entitlements
-
Very low wages (close to market wages) and non-payment of minimum wages
-
Unrealistically high productivity norms under piece rate
-
No distinction between male and female outturn requirements, no reduction in norms for women and the elderly
-
Inadequate identification of separate tasks in the labour processin the Schedule of Rates
-
Imprecise task specification and decomposition, sketchy soil identification, stingy lift and lead provision and faulty measurement of outturn at worksites
-
Despite the amendment in Parliament deleting the requirement of ‘diligence’, most states have retained it to describe work;
-
Delayed wage payment, ranging from 3 to 4 weeks.
-
Payment in cash only in most places is not in keeping with workers’ preferences for foodgrain
-
No attempt to encourage applications for work
-
Inadequate generation of employment
-
No unemployment allowance or compensation paid to anyone
-
Poor worksite facilities, esp. childcare and drinking water
-
Insufficient resources with workers to purchase implements and non-provision of implements by the implementing agencies
-
Administrative and Financial Issues
-
Massive under utilization of EGS funds
-
Low awareness about details of Scheme on the part of potential beneficiaries, panchayat members and officials
-
Lack of official will to transform from a supply driven public works programme to a demand driven employment guarantee
-
Shortage of staff, especially technical staff, and a hesitation to hire Block level Programme Officers on contract or permanent basis
-
Inappropriate persons appointed as mates without adequate skills
-
Absence of muster rolls at worksites
-
Non-innovative approach in the selection of works with an overemphasis on roads and ponds
-
No creative thinking on works in the most food-deficit rainy months when there is greates need for wage employment and lowest possibility of large-scale earth works
-
Delayed commencement of work due to non-issuance of work orders despite sanctions
-
Unwillingness to provide necessary means of production or material costs even to the extent permitted under the Act
-
Reluctance to include the cost of implements in Project material costs
-
Monitoring and vigilance committees have not been formed in most states
-
State Specific Observations (emerging from the State Seminar)
|
Yüklə 3.85 Mb.