Scheme-based workers, the struggle for an identity

A protest by Accredited social Health Activist workers, in Bengaluru, in January 2025, for fixed wages
| Photo Credit: THE HINDU/K. MURALI KUMAR

The central government employs millions of regular and contract workers who are recognised as government employees and are in the pay spectrum of the government. The government also employs several types of workers such as Anganwadi workers or AWWs (13,51,104 workers) and Anganwadi helpers or AWHs (9,22,522), Accredited Social Health Activists or ASHAs (10,52,322 workers), and Mid-Day-Meals workers or MDMWs (25,16,688) under The Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Scheme since 1975, the National Rural Health Mission (NHRM) and the mid-day meals day scheme. Put together, around 60 million workers work in government schemes.

These schemes are those which carry out social and economic functions by taking care of children and lactating mothers and nutrition aspects. They are also a bridge between the community and the public health system, improving school enrolment and the nutritional health system.

The reality of their existence

Though there has been much recognition of their work (by the Prime Minister and even the World Health Organization), these workers face hardship — they have been denied basic labour market rights such as workers’ status, minimum wages and social security. Three basic issues among others have affected scheme-based workers (SBW) — an identity as “workers” just like any government employee, minimum wages and social security. They have adopted three strategies to highlight their plight — strikes, legal action and social dialogue.

Major central trade unions (AITUC, BMS, CITU) have organised the SBWs extensively. Since there are no prescribed wage negotiation timelines, trade unions have gone on frequent strikes over the issue of wage revision at random. State governments are more generous depending more on the strength of unions, their proximity with the party in power, and political factors such as elections. In March 2025, Anganwadis in Kerala called off their 13-day indefinite strike. The frequent and large-sized struggles of and by SBWs is a feat of labour mobilisation in modern times as State governments have not always been kind to striking workers. In fact, the Maharashtra government imposed the Maharashtra Essential Services Maintenance Act in 2017 to curb the right of Anganwadis in the State to go on strike. In a sense, the government has recognised the “essential” nature of work done by Anganwadis.

The judiciary’s approach

At the same time, Anganwadis have been knocking on the doors of the judiciary, with some success after initial setbacks. In State Of Karnataka & Ors vs Ameerbi & Ors (2006), the Supreme Court held that as Anganwadis do not carry out any function of the state, and do not hold a post under a statute, it did not consider them as workers. This was a judgment that was a blow against the struggles of these workers. But there was judicial relief.

The Court, in 2022, granted that Anganwadis are eligible for gratuity as they are covered under workers/employees under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Maniben Maganbhai Bhariya vs District Development Officer, 2022). In 2024, the Gujarat High Court (Adarsh Gujarat Anganwadi Union & Ors. vs State of Gujarat) observed that Anganwadis perform onerous duties and responsibilities apart from performing important services under the Right to Education Act (RTE) and the National Food Security Act (NSF). It directed the central and State governments to jointly frame a policy under which the AWWs and AWHs could be regularised as Class III and Class IV grade State employees. Until then, they would be paid minimum wages (Class III and Class IV, respectively).

The central trade unions have been raising the issues concerning the SBWs at the tripartite forum, the Indian Labour Conference (ILC), which is a social dialogue forum created during colonial rule. It is notable that in the 45th ILC, its tripartite Conference Committee made unanimous recommendations to the central government to treat the SBWs as “workers” and not as volunteers or honorary workers, and pay them minimum wages, pension, health insurance and provident fund, among others.

The usual stand

The government is concerned with the huge cost implications as the employment of SBWs as government employees is set to grow as the population grows. On the other hand, the Labour Minister, in 2016, said in the Rajya Sabha, that the recommendations require long-time policy formulation and that there can be no fixed time-line for their implementation. Policy delay and avoidance at best — and outright denial policy at worst — has been the clever policy of the central government, irrespective of the party in power. The government has been dodging these important issues. On the other hand, there are attempts to privatise the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme (ICDS). SBW organisations have been waging relentless struggles at all levels to oppose the privatisation of the ICDS and strengthen the labour rights of SBWs. Their struggle, which involves multiple issues, will go on.

It is not “applause” that they seek but “worker” status. It is an existential struggle. It is interesting to note that in both the traditional and modern (gig) sectors, workers are battling for their labour market “identities” as “workers” and earn “wages and not “honorarium”. It is not charity that they seek but a legitimate demand for “workers” status by dint of hard work over long hours.

K.R. Shyam Sundar is Professor of Practice, Management Development Institute (MDI) Gurgaon