In its campaign in the 1970s to organise poorly paid homebased bidi workers in Gujarat, mostly women from poor and marginalised homes, SEWA activists went to meet the labour commissioner. He maintained that they are not workers. “They just do it to pass their time hence the employer-employee relationship is not applicable.”
That is how home-based work for women is seen even today – ‘time pass’ squeezed into the cycle of cooking, cleaning, caring for the young and elderly. Even when it holds up an entire household or a big part of it, it is not dignified as employment and the earnings as income. And even when the homebased work requires tremendous artisanal expertise.
Embroidery and empowerment came to be linked when in the late 1970s, SEWA led the movement to support women’s crafts skills across Patan, Banaskantha and Kutch in Gujarat and Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh. Aari, rabari, chindi, bandhni, soi bharat, mutva and of course chikankari. But close to 50 years after these efforts began, it is time to assess exactly what these initiatives have done to empower women.
Researcher Garima Agarwal spent eight months in Katra Bazaar in Kakori, just off Lucknow, between 2020 and 2021 following the lives and labour of 15 households where the women were engaged in chikankari work. This is important and valuable work – at least 2.5 lakh people depend directly on chikankaari, and the industry is valued at over Rs 4,000 crore annually, generating at least Rs 200 crore in indirect export revenue. The UP government proudly cites it as a model of women’s economic inclusion – a craft that brings employment to women’s doorsteps without requiring them to leave home.
Garima’s investigations found that despite the long hours of labour-intensive work, women are underpaid, and their income dismissed as “pocket money”. And the very features that make the craft “suitable” for women—its home-based nature, its flexibility, its piece-rate structure—are what trap them in low-paid, invisible work.
“The “empowerment through craft” narrative, I found, hides the deeper structural problems that shape women’s work by celebrating income without choice, agency or control. What matters is who controls production, who sets prices, and who has the option to walk away,” Garima says.
In Kakori, over 80% of women are involved in the chikankaari industry. So Garima’s findings are strongly indicative of how women in the crafts sector are treated. Economic participation, she found, has neither shifted their social position nor integrated them meaningfully into markets. And their dependence on middlemen means no visibility, no control over finished products, and no pricing power. The home is both the workplace and the boundary, she concludes.
Read the story here.