The Hindu Business Line : Unfinished job

There is something rather strange about the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS). By the Union Labour Ministry’s own admission, it generates employment of fewer than 40 days per household, much less than the legal entitlement of 100 days per household at the minimum wages fixed. According to the agenda document prepared for the Standing Labour Conference held on October 30, “the scheme has so far provided employment to 3.04 crore households and re sulted in generation of 118.54-crore persondays”. It is odd that the poorest rural households should volunteer to claim less than what is seemingly available to them on a platter.

There are two possible explanations for this trend. One, the scheme might have succeeded in raising the minimum wage across all activities, thereby giving people the option of working elsewhere for the same wage. Second, the NREGS authorities do not pay the entitled amount to job-seekers when work for 100 days is not available. The first seems rather improbable in view of the extent of rural unemployment and distress, and the fact that over 80 per cent of the non-farm unorganised sector consists of single-entrepreneur households. Therefore, it seems logical to conclude that the functioning of the scheme leaves much to be desired, with the rural poor unable to claim their entitlement. Independent surveys suggest that key implementing agencies, such as Gram Sabha functionaries, are not aware of the some of the scheme’s essential features, one of which is the official commitment to offer work for 100 days and pay wages to any bona fide job-seeker. In this situation, it is doubtful whether the panchayati raj institutions place a demand for funds for 100 days of work.

It is hard to believe that, given the state of irrigation infrastructure, schools and hospitals in Rural India, there is no scope for creating 100 days’ work for rural households at the minimum wage. The Labour Ministry points out that 23.37 lakh works have been undertaken under the NREGS and 5.28 lakh works have been completed so far. This works out to about four schemes per village, of which one has been completed over four years. Either this is not enough to create 100 days of work for needy rural households or those turning up for work are not bona fide job-seekers but non-domiciled workers attached to contractors. If the latter is indeed happening, despite institutional mechanisms such as ‘social audit’ to check the role of contractors in the selection of works and jobs, it needs a serious re-look. The Ministry of Rural Development says that the NREGS is driven by “a demand for labour” rather than “…for works”. More attention needs to be paid to the latter by dovetailing NREGS with the rural schemes of other departments. NREGS should be seen as an asset-creation programme that generates employment rather than an employment programme that incidentally creates assets.

Related Stories:
Civil groups’ body to submit suggestions for NREGA
Tweak NREGA to target truly poor and needy: Jalan
Social inclusion in the NREGS

More Stories on : Editorial | Employment | Rural Development

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Polishing standards

The true and fair override

Impact of debt covenants

Unfinished job

Provisioning sans publicity

Climate: Facing up to ‘red line’

Cities need innovative financing

Open agriculture

Small packs