An overview of women’s rights in the workplace in India.

Introduction

“If they don’t give you a seat at the table, bring a folding chair”

Well, quoted by Shirley Chisholm and believed by every aspiring woman of India.

Women’s right to express, grow, contribute, feel safe, etc. at the workplace should be a tone-apparent verity. They do not ask for special boons or treatment, all they ask for is equal opportunities, equal stimulants, and appreciation.

But numerous times their introductory requirements as a woman are considered as an honour just because men don’t need those introductory effects for illustration maternity leaves shouldn’t be looked at as an honour for them, rather it must be conceded as their birth-right because it is the demand of nature.

We belong to a society that has labeled women to be weaker, Indian working women face delicate paths to make a place of their own in their workplaces like social station, reliance, and Sexual importunity at the workplace similar as

• Physical contact and advances
• A demand or request for sexual favors
• Showing pornography
• Any other unpleasant physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

To break these problems Indian government introduced “The Prohibition of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013[1]” which helps women fight against these immoralities at their plants.

Subject Matter

Indian legal system has introduced numerous different acts so that women can work with quality and respect at their plant without any fear. These are: –

The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961

The Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 is legislation that protects the employment of women at the time of their Motherliness. It entitles women workers to ‘maternity benefit’ which is completely paid stipends during the absence from work and to take care of their child.

The act applies to establishments employing 10 or further workers. The Maternity Benefit Act, of 1961 has been amended through the Maternity (Amendment) Bill 2017 which was passed in the Lok Sabha on March 09, 2017. Later, the said Bill was passed in Rajya Sabha on August 11, 2016. Further, it entered assent from the President of India on March 27, 2017.

The vittles’ of the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 came into effect on April 1, 2017, and the provision about crèche installation (Section 111 A) came into effect with effect from July 1, 2017[2].

In the case of Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Female Workers[3] the Supreme Court declared that the maternity benefit applies to casual workers and diurnal paycheck workers also. In this case, the question was whether the muster roll workers (which are casual and diurnal paycheck workers) of a municipal corporation are entitled to motherliness benefits.

There is nothing in the Maternity Benefit Act that entitles only regular women workers to the benefit of maternity leave and not to those who are engaged on a casual basis or muster roll on a diurnal pay check base.

The Factories Act, of 1948

Women in our country form an integral part of our pool and the General Census 2001 stated that 127,220,248 people in the pool are women[4]. In other words, 149.8 million womanish workers[5] live, 121.8 million women work in pastoral areas, and 28 million work in civic areas. Women in our country face certain demarcation in the plant.

There was a time when women were not allowed to do certain jobs but that was latterly amended and now women can do any job they choose to do. Indeed, though there are laws against demarcation women still face demarcation occasionally, especially in work which is generally seen as a men’s job similar to working in manufactories or mines.

As stated in Article 15 of The Constitution of India[6] there will be no demarcation grounded on gender in anything. Yet some women face demarcation while working in manufactories. Though the Factories Act, of 1948 does provide for numerous vittles related to women and women’s health, safety, well-being, and benefits, it still is lacking in certain areas[7].

In the case of Pearson vs. Belgium Co. Ltd.[8], the question was whether the stationary corridor of a machine can be gutted by women if the machine as a total is in stir. It was held by the court that if machinery as a total is in motion indeed stationary corridor of the machine cannot be gutted by a woman for safety reasons.

The Equal Remuneration Act, of 1976

The introductory concept underpinning, the veritably controversial subject, Feminism, is “equity”. Equity refers to the treatment of equals with equals and Unequal with unequal. The Equal Remuneration Act, of 1976[9] does just that.

It provides Equal remuneration for both men and women but also understands the fact that it will not stamp any special treatment handed to women in the country. There was a time in India when women used to face heavy demarcation in pay. But, after the arrival of the equal remuneration act, 1976 women have been able to sue against malpractices prevailing in their workplace.

In the case of Sanjit Roy vs. State of Rajasthan[10], the Supreme court directed the state government not only to pay the minimal stipend but also to pay a stipend in agreement with the principle of equal pay for equal work to both men and women workers engaged in shortage relief work.

Also in the case of Bhagwan Das vs. State of Haryana[11], the Supreme court was of the view that persons doing analogous work cannot be denied equal pay on the ground that the mode of recruitment was different and a temporary or casual hand performing the same or analogous duties and functions is entitled to the same pay as that of a regular or endless hand.

The Supreme court in the case of FCI vs. Shyamlal K Chatterjee[12] held that equal stipends will be outstanding indeed to casual workers engaged through contractors when they’re doing the same work.

Minimum Wages Act, 1948

It’s primarily designed for the protection of workers in the unorganized sector, where the majority of women work. It’s to give minimal statutory stipend for the listed employments to avert the chances of exploitation of labor through payment of the veritably low and sweating stipend, especially to women. It also provides for the minimum daily working hours, daily rest days, and overtime.

As in the case of Sanjit Roy vs. State of Rajasthan[13], the court held that every person is it man or woman who provides labor or service to another is entitled at least to a minimal paycheck and if anything lower than the minimum wage is paid to him, he can complain of the violation of abecedarian (fundamental) rights under article 23 and ask the court to direct payment of minimal stipend to him so that the breach of article 23 may be abated.

Presently, in India, there are women achievers in every field. The constitution of India has handed positive demarcation for women, and the Indian state has passed several laws and enforced programs to ameliorate their condition. But, still, Indian women face visible and unnoticeable demarcation in their paths like sexual importunity in the workplace, unsafe roads, thinking of the society, pay gap between men and women, etc.

There are numerous cases in past decades through which we came to know that currently what kind of difficulties women are facing at their workplaces. Then a case that’s one of the significant cases among cases of women’s safety as it paved the way for the Vishaka guidelines.

In this case, Bhanwari Devi[14] was a Dalit government hand who was engaged in spreading mindfulness about hygiene and running juggernauts against dowry and child marriage. As part of her job, she was helping a young girl who was forced to marry at a young age by her parents. She tried to stop the marriage and carried out a rally but was not able to do so.

To take vengeance for the rallies, a group of people attacked Bhanwari Devi when she was walking along the road with her husband. She was also gang-raped by these men. After that, she filed a felonious case of rape against these men. Still, she wasn’t taken seriously by the policemen and other law officers. The Rajasthan high court condemned the five men of assault whose degree of discipline is much lesser than the crime of rape.

The judgment of the Rajasthan High court gave rise to rallies and demurrers by various women’s safety associations and the general public. This forced the government and the Indian legal system to give justice to Bhanwari Devi. That followed the case of Vishaka vs. State of Rajasthan which results in the confirmation of Vishaka Guidelines.

The Vishaka guidelines[15] were a set of guidelines related to guarding women in the workplace. These were instituted by the supreme court of India in the year 1997. Features of the Vishaka guidelines. The main points of the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India are as follows:

Description of sexual importunity.

• Give a safer working terrain.
• Duty of the employer to file a complaint.
• Complaint redressal commission.
• Employer to help the hand if she is sexually wearied.
• Duty of employer to spread mindfulness.
• The government has to widen the scope of this guideline.

 Conclusion

The abecedarian rights of equivalency and particular liberty should be defended and the citizens of our country shouldn’t be discerned against on any grounds. Hence, it’s legal as well as a moral duty to give a safer work terrain for women to prosper. So, we all should admire the constitution and all the authorities.

It is not only the responsibility of the judiciary but we also have some responsibilities. As a society, we have to develop our old and primitive thinking. It’s the ultramodern period everyone has the right that what they’ve to do or what they don’t have to do.

References:

[1] https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A2013-14.pdf

[2] https://blog.ipleaders.in/the-maternity-benefit-act/?amp=1

[3] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/808569/

[4] https://censusindia.gov.in/census_data_2001/india_at_glance/workpart.aspx

[5] https://labour.gov.in/womenlabour/about-women-labour

[6] https://samistilegal.in/article-15/

[7] https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.ipleaders.in/employment-women-factories-factories-act-1948/%3famp=1

[8] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/951276/

[9] https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.ipleaders.in/equal-remuneration-act-1976/%3famp=1

[10] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1150530/

[11] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609ac38e4b014971140e4e4/amp

[12] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1303921/

[13] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1150530/

[14] https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-236-vishaka-case-1997.html

[15] https://www.iitg.ac.in/iitgicc/docs/Vishaka_Guidelines.pdf

This article has been authored by Sakshi Mishra, a student at Prestige Institute of Management and Research, Gwalior.