Different from the earlier Export Processing Zones (EPZs), the Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in India are conclaves meant to attract capital both domestic as well as foreign by providing benefits, which are exclusive to those operating within these zones. SEZs are self-contained and integrated zones with their own infrastructure and support services, and offer the most convenient terms for attracting capital over a long period, without any obligation. The policy under the SEZ Act 2005 provides for setting up of SEZs in the public, private and joint sectors. Today, most SEZs produce ready-made garments, gloves, spices, processed food, electronic parts, jewellery, diamonds, etc.

The pace at which SEZs have been established in the country has been very fast. As of 2007, more than 500 SEZs have been proposed [Sunanda Sen and B Vasdeb Dasgupta, “SEZs: Modern Enclaves to Reward Capital by Exploiting Labour and Displacing Livelihoods in the Agrarian Economy,” Seminar, 14 (19) May 2007].  In 2006, in Maharashtra alone, the setting up of 41 SEZs was proposed. The pace at which land is being acquired has also been fast and has been met with resistance and public scrutiny. The amount of land to be acquired has ranged between 2,500 and 10,000 hectares of land per SEZ (Aparna Pallavi, “SEZs: Invitation to chaos?” India Together, 27 November 2006).

In this article, we attempt to look at the employment question, particularly in the context of women workers. Whereas SEZs are being touted as engines of economic growth that can boost manufacturing and generate employment, the nature of the employment generated and the working conditions needs to be examined closely.

SEZs today are being projected as the way out of India`s employment impasse, but this is far from the entire truth. Data based on a series of field surveys conducted in three SEZ units Santa Cruz, Mumbai, in Maharashtra, Noida in UP and Falta in West Bengal reveal that despite the opportunities offered by the SEZs in terms of job openings, the state of working conditions and the security availed of by the workers seem to be at a critically low level (Sunanda Sen, op. cit.). The findings confirm a state of severe insecurity in terms of job contracts, income and other labour status for those employed in these highly subsidised and growth-oriented enclaves of SEZs.

Similarly, a study conducted by Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA) on the plight of workers in Indian zones, shows that gains generated by SEZs in terms of employment are not long-term (M Suchitra, “The high cost of `easy` foreign exchange,” India Together, March 2006). Few workers have long-term employment contracts. Short-term contracts are used for flexible hiring and firing and for avoiding costs such as maternity and redundancy pay. The same study also shows women workers constitute 70-90 per cent of the workforce, and it is they who bear the brunt of the competition since the industries are export-oriented and the emphasis is on minimising production costs to price the product competitively in the international market. To meet production targets, they are compelled to work harder and longer until they burn out or quit. They work 10-12 hours a day without or with improper overtime payment. Minimum wages are not paid. Social security benefits are not implemented. Women are forced to work night shifts. Maternity leave is not allowed and sexual harassment of women workers is common in the zones.

Another study on the Cochin Special Economic Zone (CSEZ) shows similar conditions of women`s employment. The zone has 79 factories manufacturing ready-made garments, rubber gloves, electronic items, software, hardware, food items and jewellery. More than 7,000 people work in these factories. The zone has its own water supply, power supply and effluence-treatment plant (PN Venugopal, “Special Exploitation Zone,” India Together, January 2008).

About 60 per cent of the workers in the CSEZ are women. Approximately 55 per cent of the total workforce is made up of contract workers, who do not enjoy any of the benefits and privileges that regular employees do. Almost all the activities conducted by the units in the CSEZ are permanent and perpetual in nature and yet the practice of employing contract workers goes unabated. Most women are confined to repetitive tasks in production whereas the men move on fairly quickly to better paid supervisory jobs. The study states that women workers of the CSEZ complain of forever remaining `helpers` even as their male counterparts move on to become `operators` (Ibid.).

Workers are paid as low as Rs 35 to 75 a day, and are often made to work more than the stipulated eight hours for no extra payment. Worse, they have to part with anything between Rs 10 to 15 daily to the contractor as his commission. Once the workers enter the premises, they do not have any contact with the outside world. The work atmosphere is oppressive. The workers are reluctant to talk, and are afraid of being quoted. Most of the women workers come from distant places and are often the only bread winners of their families. Groups of five or six of them rent a room and live together with very limited facilities. Despite employing more than 3,500 women, the zone does not provide accommodation facilities nor are there any crèches. Transportation facilities are inadequate. The lofty ideals of each zone developing into townships catering to all the needs of the workforce, including housing, education and medicare, remain only on paper. Often the shifts run 10-12 hours a day to achieve production targets, without the workers receiving any overtime allowances (Ibid.).

Women workers often have no organisation, representation or voice to speak for them. Rarely part of any trade unions, they therefore have little bargaining power. Collective bargaining is rarely employed. As it is, the women workers belong to weaker sections of society; in the SEZs, their position gets even weaker. Any demand voiced through an organisation, whether of individuals, professions or industry, is always strong, and that is why organisations are promoted wherever there is awareness among the workers. Organisation is not merely a medium to resolve problems but also an effective means to build the awareness of the economically weak and the backward, and to help them join the mainstream. In the CSEZ, only about 1,500 of the total workforce of 7,000 are members of any trade union. They do not join for fear of retribution from the management and the contractors. Women workers also allege that they are tutored on what to say to the State Women`s Commission and the Labour Commission when these visit the zone. They confess that they always abide by the management`s instructions for fear of reprisals and the apprehension that the company itself might close down if they revealed the truth.

Unlike in many other countries, in India, labour laws are applicable, in theory, to the SEZs too; however, in practice, these are rarely implemented because there are many loopholes in the labour administration. Workers hardly benefit from any of the labour laws.

A separate authority for each SEZ to ensure greater administrative autonomy has been set up. The administration of the SEZ is vested in a Development Commissioner and a fairly large bureaucracy, which sees their responsibility primarily as ensuring that the units function without any interruptions. In the SEZs, the powers of the labour department have been transferred to the Development Commissioners, who are in charge of the administration of the zones. The rationale for doing so was apparently to `facilitate the smooth functioning` of the zones and to stop `outside interference`.  With this, the last resort for redressal of grievances of workers has been taken away. Except in emergency situations, state government agencies themselves require the prior permission of the Development Commissioner to inspect the industrial units in the zone. 

Employment without healthy and safe working conditions and reasonable wages mark the working conditions of women workers in SEZs. Extreme insecurity social, economic and physical and increased vulnerability characterise the working life in SEZs. The recent public outcry and intense debates on SEZs have revolved primarily around the question of land acquisition and the displacement of the agrarian community. But the quality of employment, particularly for the women workers in SEZs, remains an area of deep concern. Action at the ground level and macro policies need to be directed to building skills, setting up systems of security and increasing the bargaining power of women workers.