Report on Mass Complaints Camp - Concerning implementation of MGNREGA 2005.

Introduction:

The Right To Food and Work Network - RTFWN of West Bengal organised a mass complaints camp on 5th February 2020, in association with its member organisations like Udayani Social Action Forum, Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Committee, Paschim Banga Khet Majoor Samity, Swayam, SEWA Bharat, Association of Bengal Collaborators for Development, Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha, Human Rights Law Network and numerous people’s movements across the state. The mass complaints camp was organised for people residing in the rural parts of West Bengal to facilitate the process of documentation of their grievances concerning implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005. Workers from more than twelve districts of the state participated in the process of registering their grievances and about three hundred and forty individual complaints were recorded in the camp. A structured questionnaire was also utilised by the facilitators to record the responses of the complainants to a set of indices, designed to assess the first-hand experience of implementation of the concerned piece of legislation.

Lack of access to the higher echelons of bureaucracy and inherent power relations often proves to be an impediment for people, especially from marginalised communities in escalating unaddressed grievances. The enormous influence of the political class at the grassroots level of governance also prevents the effective registering of instances of fraudulent practices by the workers. Therefore, a camp held centrally for whole of the state provides an opportunity for the complaints to register their grievances under a cover of anonymity and also offers them a platform to interact with workers across the state. A central programme offers a much needed scope for the workers to air their concerns about structural issues affecting implementation of the piece of legislation as well as to put forward their arguments on including enabling provisions in it.

The overall picture from MIS:

The enormity of the creeping issues can be gauged from the data analysed from the official Management Information System of the Central Government. Only 47.31% of the workers are active in the state of West Bengal with the percentage of active workers from SC and ST households barely measuring up to their respective representation in the overall population. Rural households from marginalised communities are at a considerable disadvantage owing to less land assets and access to formal sector employment. Hence, their representation in the active workers population should have been significantly higher.

46% less person days have been generated in the current financial year as compared to the previous year. With only around 45 days to close the current financial year, the implementing agencies will fall far behind the figure attained in the previous one.

With only 39.74 days of employment provided to a rural household on an average, the programme faces grave threats of being undermined as one of the chief safeguards against lack of access to wage based employment in rural West Bengal.

The average wage rate per day per person of ₹181.79 falls short of the minimum wage of ₹191 in the state which can be attributed to the erroneous working out of the SOR (Schedule of Rates) or to fudging of muster rolls.

Concerning inclusivity of the programme, the percentage of specially abled persons receiving work (0.8%) is less than half of their representation in the population (2.14%) derived from SECC, 2011.

With only 68.09% of total funds released by the Central Government been utilised, till 10^th February, 2020 there is a considerable scope for the immediate release of the resources to increase the person days of the state on an urgent basis and to immediately pay delayed wages. Further, with 41.1% and 3.17% of the resources been spent on materials and administrative expenses respectively, the cost escalation on materials of the programme as compared to previous financial years have been significant. This has resulted in an increase in the average cost per person per day figure, while the total person days in the state has decreased. The emphasis seems to be on increasing material costs and administrative cost rather than person days.

The Findings from The Survey: 

The recurrent issue of denial of work to job card holders across districts got highlighted during the proceedings of the complaints camp with less than 25% of the respondents receiving any work in the financial year 2019-20. Withholding of job cards, refusal to accept applications for new job cards and repeated verbal communication by the panchayat on unavailability of work under the legislation prove to be major stumbling blocks for rural West Bengal to benefit from MGNREGA, 2005.

With close to 60% (59.22%) of the respondents not receiving work within 15 days of applying and around 85% (85.44%) of them not receiving unemployment allowance(s), one of the most enabling provisions of the legislation are being violated with impunity by the implementing authorities. Receiving work within the stipulated time period and disbursal of unemployment benefits ensure the sovereign guarantee of wages to a rural household, especially those from disadvantaged social backgrounds seeking a wage based employment bereft of exploitation. Such provisions are critical for rural households, specifically during the lean agriculture season and for families practicing subsistence farming to have access to a source of wage based employment without out-migration.

Even the provision of payment of wages within 15 days of working in the programme and being eligible to receive a compensation in case of delayed payments, are seldom honoured with a staggering 94.17% of the respondents reporting delayed payments. Further, 97.1% of those respondents denied receiving any compensation for such delays in payments.  

Fraudulent practices are said to be rampant in parts of rural West Bengal and specific objective questions were addressed to the respondents to gauge the nature of such practices being institutionalised by a section of the implementing agencies. The recorded responses point to serious violations of the basic standard operating procedures mandated in implementation of the scheme. 37.86% of the respondents do not have job cards in their possession. 66.9% of the respondents reported that muster rolls do not remain present on the job sites, with nearly 83.49% of the respondents stating that mandatory entries are not recorded in their respective job cards. 57.28% of the respondents reported knowledge of use of machines in the sanctioned projects which amounts to a gross violation of one of the key provisions of the legislation.

71.84% of the respondents reported having knowledge of fake projects being sanctioned under the programme, point to the endemic practice of forging papers to declare unfinished projects as completed ones, across the state. 

Work site facilities continue to be neglected by the implementing agencies with only 46.6% of the respondents reporting the availability of a drinking water facility in the vicinity of the work site. The negative responses recorded are far higher concerning the presence of a shed, a first-aid box and a crèche facility which have been found to be 94.17%, 90.29% and 91.26% respectively. The basic provisions of an access to drinking water and a shed are critical for the well-being of workers working under tropical climatic conditions. Presence of a first-aid kit ensures immediate medical attention to work site injuries, which happens to be one of the basic rights of a worker in case of being involved in an accident during working hours. There should be a continuous effort on the part of the implementing agencies to improve the access to such facilities.

The provision of deputing a person to look after children of women workers at the work site (akin to a crèche facility), serves two vital interests. On one hand it enables women, burdened with care work to seek wage labour under the programme and on the other, it provided an opportunity for senior women citizens and/or specially abled women to work.

There has been a sustained demand from women to provide them with an alternative to earth work, reflected in the affirmative responses of 76.69% respondents, while only 17.48% women have been offered one. The figures clearly portray a demand supply gap in the access to alternative avenues for women, which expects immediate attention of the implementing agencies.

Complaints registered at the Camp:

District	Major Complaint(s)
North 24 Parganas	·      Denial of work
South 24 Parganas	·      Denial of work ·      Inordinate delay in wage payments
Howrah	·      Denial of work ·      Refusal to issue job cards
Hooghly	·      Denial of work ·      Refusal to issue job cards ·      Job cards not returned by supervisors
Nadia	·      Denial of work ·      Inordinate delay in wage payments
Paschim Medinipur	·      Denial of work ·      Inordinate delay in wage payments
East Burdwan	·      Denial of work ·      Inordinate delay in wage payments ·      Veiled threats to under report instances of corrupt practices
Bankura	·      Denial of work
Purulia	·      Denial of work ·      Refusal to issue job cards
Malda	·      Denial of work
Murshidabad	·      Denial of work ·      Inordinate delay in wage payments ·      Workers forced to part with a portion of wages
Alipurduar	·      Delay in wage payment

The most common complaint has been the refusal to provide work under the programme, followed by inordinate delay in payment of wages along with refusal to issue new job cards. In the districts of Howrah and Hooghly, most of the workers have complained about their job cards being refused to be returned to them along with the repeated denial of the panchayat office to process applications for new job cards. Delay in wage payments and denial of work for more than two years happen to be the chief complaints from the districts of Nadia and Paschim Medinipur. The district of East Burdwan recorded complaints from workers being denied work for varying periods of time with work being offered on job card of other workers. Some have even been threatened on protesting against the latter practice. Reportedly, the panchayat as well as the Block Development Office have conveyed a general stoppage of work under the programme to the eligible households.

Denial of work featured prominently amongst the complaints recorded from the districts of Bankura, Purulia, Malda and Murshidabad. The district of Murshidabad saw the maximum number of complaints being recorded for denial of work, with the period stretching even up to the last five years. Complainants have also reported a general trend of the panchayat officials to offer work only to their kith and kin.

The worrying patterns of the complaints suggest a widespread refusal of the implementing agencies either to provide work or to issue new job cards on demand. Such gross violations of the guaranteed right to seek wage based employment for a period of 100 days in every financial year, amount to denial of rights to people from rural areas to seek work in the programme. Delay in wage payments and denial of unemployment benefits further aggravate the situation of rural households seeking employment under MGNREGA, 2005.

Some serious violation of the provisions of the legislation have been discussed below:

Case Study 1:

Mrs. Mamata Haldar, residing in Sahajadpur panchayat of the Sanmatinagar block in the district of Murshidabad has not received work for more than 5 years. Some women from her village have worked in the current financial year but did not receive their wages till date. MGNREGA workers have to compulsorily pay a part of their wages to the panchayat. There is a general trend of the panchayat officials to provide work only to the relatives of the officials and/ elected representatives. The shelf of projects is not discussed in the Gram Sansad meetings. Information concerning sanctioned projects and villagers receiving work are not shared in the Gram Sansad meetings as well. The complainant has further reported that eligible households are not allowed to apply for work in writing.

Case Study 2:

Mrs. Bishakha Lala, residing in Deswalipara panchayat of the Lalgola block in the district of Murshidabad has not received work for more than 2 years. Panchayat officials demand money to process applications for Job Cards. Many workers from her village have not been able to get back their job cards after depositing them with the panchayat officials. MGNREGA workers have to compulsorily pay a part of their wages to the panchayat. The complainant also reported that the panchayat turns away the work seekers on the pretext of limited availability of land for MGNREGA work(s).

Case Study 3:

Mrs. Jayanti Halder, of a female headed household resides in Kumrapara panchayat of the Mathurapur-2 block in the district of South 24 Parganas has not been receiving work after the death of her husband. Mrs. Halder has been receiving work on the pretext that there are certain irregularities (not specified by the concerned officials) in the death certificate of Mr. Halder, her husband.

The woman has no viable income source and the household used to depend on NREGA work, even when Mr. Halder used to work as a daily wage labourer. The concerned issue has immensely affected her ability to meet the daily household expenses. Instead of supporting the efforts of a widow to seek work under the programme, the officials have repeatedly denied her work on such frivolous issues. She has raised her concerns in the offices of the respective panchayat and Block Development Officer but the grievances have not been addressed.    

Case Study 4:

Mrs. Mungli Soren, residing in Khanpur panchayat of the Kalna-1block in the district of East Burdwan has not received work since December, 2017. Even after submitting applications, the woman from the Scheduled Tribe community was not able to find her name on the muster rolls.

She reported a practice of the panchayat officials to offer work on the job cards of other workers. On complaining against this practice, she was singled out by the erring officials and her demand for work has not been accepted. The complainant also reported threats from political groups to refrain from attending the complaints camp.

Similar harassment has been meted out to other member of her community as well but fearing retaliatory actions from local strongmen, they decided against attending the complaints camp. The institutionalisation of such practices, possess grave threat not only to the implementation of welfare schemes but also to the general sense of security to people from marginalised communities.   

Conclusion:

The report presents a glimpse into the broad narratives of systemic violation of the provisions of MGNREGA, 2005 across the state, with quantitative figures representing the recorded responses of workers to specific questionnaire.

The report seeks to provide the implementing agencies with a snapshot of the experiences of the rural areas of West Bengal which we believe will aid them in identifying possible corrective course of action(s) in the near future. It highlights the growing need of the respective district administrations to monitor the programme closely for such blatant violations of empowering provisions of the legislation, which amounts to a violation of the rights of the people, perpetrated by the very state which promised them an enabling environment to seek wage based employment in rural areas.