Around 19,200 jobs in airlines, airports, ground handling and air cargo sector were lost in recent years, said the Union Civil Aviation Ministry in response to a question on jobs loss in the private sector.

In answer to a question by MP Dibyendu Adhikari regarding job loss in private sector companies in carrier service and airport operation and maintenance Minister V K Singh spoke about the decline of employees since 2020.

Specifically, he said airline employees in India declined from around 74,800 people on March 31, 2020 to around 65,600 people on December 31, 2021. In the same period, airport sector employees declined from around 73,400 people to around 65,700 people and ground handling sector employees declined from around 30,800 people to around 27,600 people. Only, air cargo sector employees increased from around 9,600 people on March 31, 2020 to around 10,500 people on December 31, 2021.

“The job loss is around 10 percent of the total jobs (around 1.9 lakh) in these sectors. The Government has held discussions with industry participants and stakeholders to address the challenges,” said Singh.

According to the Minister, air traffic during 2020-21 witnessed a massive fall of 66 percent over the previous year due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The global pandemic severely affected the revenue streams of businesses including the aviation sector. Singh said that while the government does not establish or regulate airfares under normal circumstances, it introduced upper and lower limit fare bands as a special measure to address the unprecedented circumstances.

“The fare bands serve the dual purpose of protecting the interests of the travelers as well as of the airlines,” he said.

Airline operations were suspended across India in March 2020. Domestic travel was allowed in May 2020 with various protocols for safe air travel. From October 18, 2021 these restrictions were also lifted. Singh said that the vaccination drive in India will hereon allow the revival of air traffic in 2021-22, opening of international flight from March 27, 2022, establishment of new airports, expansion of existing airports and airlines etc. Further, he said the growth of the Indian aviation sector is likely to result in an increase of jobs opportunities in the sector.

This estimated creation of jobs is anticipated in earnest as the Centre was unable to answer similar questions about unemployment on Thursday.

MSME unemployment during Covid-19

Aside from the aviation sector queries, another MP Malook Nagar asked the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Ministry about the number of jobs lost due to coronavirus. To this, Union Minister Bhanu Pratap Singh Verma said that the department does not maintain data on temporary or permanent job loss because MSMEs are present in both formal and informal sectors.

Instead, he said the number of persons employed in MSMEs registered on the Udyam portal during 2020-21 and 2021-22 are 2.78 cr people and 3.52 cr people respectively. The highest registrations were in Maharashtra with 45.68 lakh people in 2020-21 and 45.46 lakh people in 2021-22.

In Uttar Pradesh, there were 21.06 lakh registrations in 2020-21 and 28.35 lakh registrations in 2021-22. In Bijnor, there were 10,957 registrations in the first year and 27,037 registrations in the next year. Similarly, Muzaffarnagar showed a similar surge in registrations from 24,389 people in 2020-21 to 34,223 people in 2021-22. Meerut listed 83,367 registrations and 79,643 registrations in 2020-21 and 2021-22 respectively.

Employment schemes in Maharashtra

Specific to the state, MP Sunil Baburao Mendhe asked about the number of people who applied under the Prime Minister’s Employment Generation Programme (PMEGP) during the last three years. Verma presented state-level data that showed a declining trend of applicants from 42,778 registrations in 2018-19 to 28,114 registrations in the next year.

By 2020-21, there were only 27,741 registrations received. Accordingly, it benefitted 5,642 units in 2018-19, then 4,406 units in 2019-20 and 3,104 units in 2020-21. This is in contrast to the national trend that increased from 3.89 lakh registrations (2018-19) to 4.45 lakh registrations (2019-20) to 4.82 lakh registrations (2020-21).

Even in terms of estimated employment generated, 45,136 jobs were created in the first year with a money margin of subsidy of ₹ 15,271.98 lakh, then 35,248 jobs created in the next year with ₹ 11,219.44 lakh and finally 24,832 jobs with ₹ 8,844.3 lakh. Similarly, the PMEGP benefitted 7 self-help groups (SHGs) in 2018-19. In the following year, it benefitted only 3 SHGs that declined to 2 SHGs in 2020-21. Benefits to registered institutions and charitable trusts improved with 3 projects/ units and 2 projects/units respectively in 2020-21.

Related:

India’s workforce demands fiscal support following the second wave of Covid-19!
No death due to manual scavenging: Social Justice Minister Athawale
UNICEF and parents worry about India’s future generations in the aftermath of Covid-19
Impressive gov’t employment scheme data does not reflect true depth of job crisis

The post MPs takes GoI to task on unemployment appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On June 18 when Prime Minister Modi announced the opening of commercial coal mining for private sector through auctions, there were some states who were unhappy with the decision; Jharkhand being one of them. Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren has approached the Supreme Court against this decision since this is a huge policy decision and the Centre acted without taking state governments into confidence. PM Modi announced the auction of 41 blocks, expected to attract Rs. 33,000 crore in investments, 20 of which are in Jharkhand and rest of them are in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Maharashtra.

The Hindustan Times reported that Soren said, “Mining has always been a contentious issue in the state. After a long time, a new process is being adopted, which will reinstate the system out of which we came out. Even in the existing system, the locals, landowners could not get their rightful entitlements. There are several issues related to land and displacement in the state”. He further said that the Centre has taken this decision in haste without doing an assessment of adverse social and environmental impact.

“It seems the Centre is doing this in haste. It is difficult to understand as the entire world is under lockdown. The Centre is expecting foreign investment, but there are several issues including curbs on foreign travel now. Currently, the demand is also low as many industries are shut. So, I don’t find this process of any help now,” Soren added.

In a press conference, BJP, which is in opposition in Jharkhand asked the Soren government to frame policies for sustainable mining to create livelihood opportunities for migrant labourers instead of blocking Centre’s decision.

Criticisms

When the decision came, it was criticized by Jharkhand Mahasabha stating that  it simply overlooks the staggering impact on the lives of landowners, people living nearby and the environment

A large proportion of Jharkhandis, especially Adivasis, depend on agriculture and forest-based livelihoods. Jharkhand, as one of the richest mineral states, stands witness to the fact that rampant mining, especially in corporate interests, does not improve well being of the people. Needless to say, mining, especially of coal, has significant environmental and human costs. Opening the state for domestic and foreign corporate mining entities will further destroy the livelihoods and environment. Mining companies, supported by the government, flout laws that aim to check environmental degradation, left, right and centre. Hundreds of unreclaimed spent-mines, across the state, stand witness to this.

The debate on any form of mining needs to start from the question whether people of the area want mining to happen or not, no government should, in a democracy have the unilateral power to take such a decision. If the people and Gram Sabhas want mining, cooperatives of landowners or Gram Sabhas can be supported by the government with capital and technological help to undertake mining and allied activities on their own. Gram Sabhas have effectively demonstrated their ability to manage forest and forest-based products. The Mahasabha firmly believes in community ownership of natural resources. Also, agricultural land and forests should not be used for any kind of mining.

Trade Unions oppose move

Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, Hind Mazdoor Sabha, Indian National Trade Union Congress (INTUC), All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) and Central Trade Union (CTU) opposed the move and demanded that auction of coal blocks to private players be stopped. In response, Coal India Limited (CIL) Chairman Pramod Agarwal said that CIL will continue to be country’s leading coal producer even after the sector is opened up for private sector. CIL trade unions have announced a 3-day strike from July 2 onwards protesting Centre’s decision.

Chhattisgarh letter to Centre

Even Chhattisgarh government wrote a letter to Union Minister of Environment Forest and Climate Change, Prakash Javadekar. In his letter, Chhattisgarh Forest minister Mohammad Akbar asked the Centre not to allow auction of coal blocks which fall under Hasdeo Arand, Lemru elephant reserve and the Mand river catchment area which are biodiversity-rich forests, which account for 5 out of 9 coal blocks to be auctioned in the state.

Related:

Commercial Mining, not a boon but a curse: Jharkhand & Central India 
Auction for Mining in 20 Coal Blocks given go ahead, protests break out: Jharkand

The post Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh oppose Centre’s move allowing commercial coal mining appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The narrative around the DBT is easy to sell as the ruling government claims to have transferred benefits with reduced corruption in many of the centrally sponsored schemes. But is the same model applicable in the field of education? At least the research disagrees with this logic. A study conducted in 2018 in East Delhi with 800 households in low-income neighbourhoods finds no or negative impact of such transfers/vouchers in the learning level of the students. The results of the study are consistent with the studies conducted prior to this study. Suggestion by the author is feeble as it ignores the socio-political realities surrounding the education system. The problem of our primary schooling is because of the different type of schools for children from different types of backgrounds, thus differentiating childhood based on their socio-economic backgrounds.  

Geeta Gandhi repeats the gross mistake of not keeping the child at the centre of education policy and misses out on the importance of equity, accessibility, quality and affordability to let children have equal opportunity. She fails to mention and so does NEP, that the only model which has succeeded in achieving universalisation of primary education around the world is the Common School System which is run, funded and regulated by government and in India is a 1968 Kothari Commission recommendation. Geeta Gandhi thinks government cannot play all the roles of policy maker, operator, assessor and regulator of schools. However, it is the same government which runs good quality Kendriya and Navodaya Vidyalayas and world class higher educational institutions like IITs, IIMs, AIIMSs, IISERs and various NLUs. Hence by advancing a flawed logic she is trying to belittle the public schools.Around 65 percent children still attend public schools and to propose a solution which only focuses on the population which is ready to make a shift to private schools will be naive at multiple levels. Deeper look at her suggestion also raises fundamental questions about the author’s interest in pushing the interest of the private schools and catering to the interest of only privileged children. In fact, the private schools can be directly held responsible for the deterioration in quality of government schools as slowly the children of ruling elites made a switch from government to private schools. Another important piece of information missing from Geeta Gandhi’s article and NEP is the 2015 Allahabad High Court judgement of Justice Sudhir Agrawal which sought to make it mandatory for everyone receiving a government salary to send their children to government schools. Implementation of this judgement, to which the Uttar Pradesh government has turned a blind eye so far, could be a step in the direction of moving towards common school system and an effective remedy to the learning crisis that Geeta Gandhi is alluding to in her article. But this will wean away significant section of her clients.

Except for some elite urban schools, most private schools, especially in rural areas, are known to run mass copying rackets. Students can pass their Board examinations in exchange for a certain sum of money which is divided between the school management and the education department officials. The NEP too ignores this widespread phenomenon, especially in north India, and avoids making any suggestion for elimination of this aberration.

Geeta Gandhi is an advocate of DBT. Then why is her school not admitting children under section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education Act 2009 which offers at least 25% seats for free education from classes I to VIII to children of disadvantaged groups and weaker sections with their fees to be paid by the government directly to the school? Segregation in the current schooling system is conspicuous. To deal with same, abovementioned section was provided for in the RTE Act at the entry-level. Even a simple Google search on violation of the RTE Act brings it to the notice that her own school has not been admitting children under this provision. CMS has admitted 13 children because of a court order in 2015-16 and two on its own in 2018-19 out of 31, 55, 296 and 270 admissions ordered by the basic education department in 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, respectively, implying a compliance of only 2.3% of the admission orders. And these number of admissions ordered are nowhere near the standard 25% prescribed by the law. Curiously Geeta Gandhi talks about unaccountability of the public schools in her article! If CMS would have honoured all the abovementioned admissions it would have gained Rs. 35,20,800 as direct transfer from the government in the academic year 2018-19 towards the fees of these children. Hence it is clear that it is not really the DBT that CMS is interested in. It simply doesn’t want underprivileged children to sit beside the children from elite class. It is crass discrimination against the poor.

There are other egregious examples of unaccountability behaviour of CMS. Some of its branches are being run illegally without certificates of land from revenue department and no objection certificates from education department on encroached lands. There are pending demolition orders against its Indira Nagar and Mahanagar branches and a court case pending against its Jopling Road branch for the last over 25 years. CMS was running an illegal bank from its Chowk branch offering 12-13% interest on deposits. While the public schools may be laggards when it comes to quality of teaching-learning, competitive schools like CMS create undue pressure on students leading to suicides at times. Asmi Yadav of class IX of Gomti Nagar  branch committed suicide on 12 February 2019 because of unreasonable academic demands of CMS. One reason for abrasive competitiveness in private schools is the infiltration of these schools by coaching institutions and CMS is no exception to this. The NEP doesn’t offer any convincing solution to the menace of coaching institutions.

There is probably no government school which is run with so many violations of rules and laws as CMS branches.

India spends only 4.6% of its Gross Domestic Product on education whereas Kothari Commission recommendation and a global standard spent by other countries is 6%. To argue to not increase India’s expenditure on education is a prescription to deny large number of underprivileged children especially from rural areas any decent quality of education or any education at all. By quoting average figures of pupil-teacher ratio or the expenditure per pupil Geeta Gandhi is masking the large number of schools where a single teacher may be handling more than one class simultaneously in her classroom in complete violation of norms of pupil-teacher ratio under the RTE Act.

Geeta Gandhi Kingdom’s attempt to defend the indefensible in the garb of an academic have come a cropper. She cannot be in London and Lucknow at the same time, ideologically speaking.
 

The post Private Interest Masquerading as Policy Critique: NEP appeared first on SabrangIndia.