With fourteen sewer deaths in the last week, both due to the loopholes in PEMSR (Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation) Act 2013, the new labour laws and the lack of implementation of it on the ground highlight that the manhole to machine hole transformation is far from reality and merely analysing the promises under the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) is not enough. Each sewer death in India is a unique case of negligence of the government, social exclusion, the incompleteness of labour policy and legislation in India and the failure in taking any cognisance of the offence and prosecution after it.
The MTNL Case
Four men fell in a sewer line this week in Delhi; two were contractual employees, one the contractor of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) and one e-rickshaw driver who went to help. The employees were linemen working for several days inside the sewer, securing the underground line distribution.
What makes the MTNL case unique is that such cases are often excused from the provisions of the PEMSR Act 2013 since the person engaged in the hazardous work is not a sanitation worker, especially not a manual scavenger. This is similar to sewer deaths in factories like the Azadpur case in 2020, where two men died cleaning gold and silver residues. Therefore, the authorities fail to apply the principles. But the question is, since the PEMSR Act 2013 also follows some tenets of the Contract Labour Act, 1970, should it really matter?
Not Just Sanitation Workers, But Other Daily Wage Labourers Too Die in Sewers
Such complications also showcase a very important misleading database of the actual number of sewer deaths in India, for all who die in the sewer, are not just sanitation workers or manual scavengers during the hazardous cleaning operations but also labour employed to do the work of maintenance, repair, distribution, etc. In certain cases, daily wage workers not designated as labourers do both.
The pandemic has brought to the surface many such cases where a worker and a labourer do the work of a manual scavenger and also do casual and seasonal work in other areas. Since the socio-economic status of an employee in such cases, be it a worker or labourer, does not let him negotiate with his employer, mere conversations on mechanisation are not enough while such mechanisation trials need to be genuinely sped up, but the reality is that their availability on the ground is less than two percent.
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued notice and has sought a report from MTNL in a month’s time and so have many unions releasing questions asking the government about the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) and sewer deaths in India, yet the real question is what would happen even if they are reverted? Since actions are merely taken 10 percent times, with only one percent overall conviction rate in such cases.
Since MTNL is a bigger player when the government fails to even convict local contractors, will the government exert any pressure on MTNL? But before that, the question is, does the government even have the ‘will’ to do so?
In 70 Percent of the Cases, Safety Gears Not Present at Site
Secondly, in such cases, everything stops at the question of safety gears but is simply inquiring about the usage enough? In 70 percent of all these cases, the safety gears, devices and equipment are not even present on the site. If they are not even there, how can the labour or the manual scavenger seek for it or let alone even use it?
In the MTNL case, the question is also that shouldn’t such a big network use even 10 percent of what it spends on maintenance of distribution on not only such gears, devices, and equipment but also machinery exchange, invention, and implementation.
Thirdly, the question is, will MTNL answer on the precautions that were taken against the possibility of such dangerous fumes and gas. Even the PEMSR Act needs the newer provision of the constitution of committees for site appraisal with detailed guidelines on ways to check the levels of chemicals and toxic substances, but then first, they will have to accept that the sewer deaths are very much a reality.
In the cases of sewer deaths, contractors often claim that the labourer had a prior understanding of the nature of the danger, or they willingly did refuse to wear the safety gear. This assumption that the gravity of such situations is fully understood by an employee is also the main reason why so many sewer deaths happen in India.
The labourer is never fully exposed to all kinds of the imminent danger involved in a given task of getting inside a sewer or a septic tank and the hazardous nature of the work therein.
Implementation of India's New Labour Codes Still the Weakest
The employer, in such cases, also argues that the employees were not working within the premises of their infrastructure, unit, or a factory for the sewer tank is outside it. This is also their way to get exemptions. For example, here, too, since MTNL maintains such systems in the sewer and is routinely involved in the repairing and maintenance work in the erection of electrical overheads etc, they should have disclosed all the information regarding the danger involved in the task with also setting up these employees with training on emergencies and plan of actions.
This leads to another question for MTNL, whether the employees, in this case, had the assigned qualification to showcase such experience in handling contractual assignments of this nature.
India’s labour legislation is based on the principles of social justice, but even with the new labour codes, the implementation remains the weakest since the new codes have failed majorly in that area. Meanwhile, the family members of Bacchu, Pintoo, Suraj, and Satish are seeking justice like 632 other families who have lost someone to sewer death in India, manual scavenger or otherwise, counted or uncounted.
(Pragya Akhilesh is a trade unionist and the Director of World Sanitation Workers Alliance. She is known as the ‘sanitation woman’ of India. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)