A sum of Rs 1,000, no strings attached, dropping into their spare bank account every month can mean different things to different women grappling with financial distress every single day.
Valarmathi, a domestic worker in Tiruvannamalai, is the only reliable earner in her family. Her husband is an alcoholic so Rs 10,000 she earns working three homes is spent entirely on running her home and feeding her family of five, three of them small children. So, the Rs 1,000, she says, offers her the little buffer that helps her family “survive another day”.
In Viji’s home in Semmancherry in Chennai, the Rs 1000 seems to disappear even before it is credited. She and her family of four have been struggling to get through the day ever since her husband armtwisted her to leave her nursing job. The family needs at least a bag and a half of 25-kg rice at Rs 1,900.
In Chengalpattu, Rekha and her sisters said the Rs 1,000 helps with their mother’s treatment of an injury incurred at work. The extra money gives them a small but necessary cushion. In a village near Thoothukudi, it allows Muthammal, 34, to pay her debt collector because it arrives promptly by 8 am on the 15th of every month.
Tamil Nadu’s KMUT, makes for an interesting case study for unconditional cash transfers to women, an idea that has caught on widely in India over the last few years and especially in the months and days leading up to elections. For one, it positions the money as urimai, a right and not a dole as other such schemes across India do. This links to the self respect movement that underlined the early Dravidian movement. It is also the first and only transfer aimed at partially recompensing women for carework.
It also sparks many debates, grounded in feminism, development economics and of course politics. That it should not give the state government the clutch to take their feet off the pedal on development. That it bolsters the idea of only women being responsible for carework or of not encouraging them to take on paid work. And that it is nowhere close to paying for what carework delivers.
Prabha Kotiswaran, professor of law at Kings College London (KCL), however, views these transfers as a pragmatic redistributive measure within existing inequalities and constraints of hetero-patriarchal marriage – such as limited inheritance rights and lack of access to marital property – that can recognise unpaid work, strengthen women’s bargaining power within households, and enable greater control over their time and labour.
Varna Sri Raman and Aishwarya Govindarajan examine in a deeply argued article in the backdrop of the state elections in Tamil Nadu.
Read the story here.