top of page

By:

C.S. Krishnamurthy

21 June 2025 at 2:15:51 pm

The Homemaker’s Worth

AI generated image One Sunday morning, I watched a neighbour rushing around his apartment in mild panic. His wife had gone to attend a family function for just three days. Suddenly, breakfast had become a challenge, medicines for his ageing mother were forgotten, school assignments remained unsigned, and the laundry basket resembled a small mountain. With a sheepish smile, he confessed, “I never realised how many things she handles.” His experience is hardly unique. Most families function so...

The Homemaker’s Worth

AI generated image One Sunday morning, I watched a neighbour rushing around his apartment in mild panic. His wife had gone to attend a family function for just three days. Suddenly, breakfast had become a challenge, medicines for his ageing mother were forgotten, school assignments remained unsigned, and the laundry basket resembled a small mountain. With a sheepish smile, he confessed, “I never realised how many things she handles.” His experience is hardly unique. Most families function so smoothly that we rarely pause to ask a few uncomfortable questions. Who keeps the invisible wheels turning? Who would manage the meals, schedules, emotional crises, school meetings, medical appointments, budgeting, caregiving, and countless unnoticed tasks that stitch together the fabric of family life? More importantly, what would be the economic cost of replacing every one of those functions? Nation Builders It is in this context, the recent verdict of the Supreme Court, delivered by Justices Sanjay Karol and N.K. Singh, is more than a legal pronouncement, and invites a larger conversation. Describing homemakers as “nation builders,” the Court has directed that the loss of domestic care in motor accident compensation cases be assigned a minimum value of Rs.30,000 per month, subject to revision every three years. Significantly, this amount is separate from other heads of compensation and recognises the distinct value of unpaid caregiving. Why is work considered valuable only when a salary slip accompanies it? Why do national accounts meticulously record the production of goods but often ignore the production of human capability? Can an economy truly measure its wealth while overlooking the labour that nurtures its future workforce? Modern economies resemble magnificent skyscrapers. People admire the shining exterior, but seldom notice the foundation veiled beneath the earth. Homemakers are those foundations. For generations, domestic work has occupied a strange blind spot, and have been viewed merely as family obligations rather than productive activity. Yet the household itself depends on this labour. The Supreme Court rightly observed the irony of describing a homemaker as a “dependent” when the entire family is often dependent upon the homemaker. Drawing upon earlier judgments and even the Supreme Court’s 2023 Handbook on combating gender stereotypes, the Bench preferred the term “homemaker” over “housewife” as the latter often carries the outdated assumption that women who remain at home contribute little economically. “Homemaker” recognises the enormous unpaid labour and monetary savings generated within households. Economists have long recognised this truth. Nobel laureate Gary Becker described households as productive units that create human capital. Doctors, engineers, entrepreneurs and public servants do not emerge fully formed. They are moulded over years through discipline, affection, sacrifice and care. The first classroom is usually the home, and the homemaker its chief educator. Studies estimate that women's unpaid caregiving contributes between 15 and 17 per cent of India's GDP. Yet much of this labour remains absent from conventional economic statistics. It is rather like admiring the fruit of a tree while refusing to acknowledge its roots. Beyond Numbers Of course, the contribution of a homemaker cannot truly be measured in rupees and paise. Can affection be monetised? Can emotional support during illness be assigned a market price? Can the countless acts of kindness that sustain family life be translated into accounting entries? Probably not. Yet courts dealing with compensation claims must assign some pecuniary value. The Supreme Court itself acknowledged that no figure can adequately compensate for the loss of domestic care. The prescribed amount of Rs.30,000 per month is therefore a symbolic minimum, a stand-in rather than a perfect valuation. The judgment arose from a tragic accident in Haryana dating back to 2001, but its implications stretch far beyond one family. It marks another milestone in the evolving judicial recognition of unpaid labour, building upon earlier decisions such as Lata Wadhwa, Arun Kumar Agrawal, Kirti, and the 2024 ruling which held that a homemaker's deemed income should not be lower than minimum wages. Perhaps the greatest contribution of this judgment lies in its symbolism. Nation-building does not occur only in Parliament, corporate boardrooms or laboratories. It also unfolds in kitchens, at dining tables and during late-night conversations between anxious parents and growing children. A family resembles an orchestra. The audience applauds the performers under the spotlight, but someone must tune the instruments and coordinate the music. Homemakers have long performed this role quietly, without applause and often without acknowledgement. After all, nations are built not merely by those who earn a living, but equally by those who shape the lives of those who do. (The writer is a retired banker and author. Views personal.)

Why is Mamata Seeing Ghost of Bangladesh?

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

Why is Mamata Seeing Ghost of Bangladesh?

Mamata is seeing a ghost of Bangladesh behind the massive outrage and waves of protest over rape and murder of the trainee doctor. And the reasons are many.

It’s been over a fortnight. Yet with each passing day the voice of protest is getting louder and stronger. From the streets of Kolkata it’s pouring into roads of hinterland. The cry for justice for a rape victim has consolidated into a wail of demands to set a lot of wrongdoings right. Here in lies the fear and trepidation. Wasn’t the issue that brought the youth of Bangladesh out on the thoroughfares a simple, innocent one of quota reform?

The chief minister of Bengal, known for understanding the pulse of people better than many, was quick to read the signages floating in the political horizon.

The most obvious reason for her to be tensed is that both the regime change in Bangladesh and the mass protest in Bengal, were student-driven to begin with. The two incidents---end of 15 year old Sheikh Hasina government and turbulence in West Bengal, over the heinous crime, falling back to back, the first on August 5th and the latter from August 9th onwards, give natural scope for comparisons. More so, because in both the cases the movement strayed beyond an affected constituency to include aggrieved people at large, cutting across socio-economic demography. If the quota reform protest started by students in Bangladesh became a mass uprising against an autocratic regime, the campaign demanding justice for the rape victim and overall safety and security of women in Mamata Banerjee’s Bengal soon snowballed into a movement of no-confidence against the government. Slogans--”Mamata must resign” also got floated in social media much in line with the call for ouster of Sheikh Hasina. In fact “Resignation of Hasina” became the single point agenda into which all other fringe demands coalesced.

Incidentally, even before people started drawing parallels, that there could be a thread of commonality in the way the upheaval in Bangladesh and Bengal played out, Mamata was quick to point out that the Opposition were trying to pull off a Bangladesh by politicizing the tragic incident: “A coordinated approach has been executed by the BJP and the CPIM with support from the Centre to defame Bengal and exploit the situation....They want to make a Bangladesh here. They are taking cues from student unrest in Bangladesh and are attempting to capture similarly. I have no longing for the chair. I came here to serve people.”

Not only Mamata, her political lieutenants are consistently equating the turmoil in Bengal with the mayhem in Bangladesh. Cabinet minister for North Bengal development Udayan Guha threatened to take stern action against those, who would be trying to exploit the situation by emulating a Bangladesh like movement. “ Even after the hospital was vandalised, the police did not open fire on anyone. The police will not allow a Bangladesh type situation. We will not allow Bengal to turn into Bangladesh, Guha thundered.

Is the government’s fear unfounded?

Apart from the similarities on ground zero, as to how and where the future course of events are heading to, there are ample reasons for Bengal to mull on-- as to what led to a Bangladesh like boiling point. To begin with, it’ll be appropriate to talk of Bangladesh and the prevailing situation, that made the students’ protest become big in magnitude. The students were out on the streets because of a high reservation in public jobs. Unemployment and stagnant job market in private sector coupled with a high rate of inflation drove the educated youth to rebel against the government.

But soon the students found enormous number of sympathisers, who were equally at the receiving end. According to Bangladesh citizens, the last two terms of the Sheikh Hasina government were a mockery of democracy. Even elections would be compromised. As Hasina grew from strength to strength, she politicized institutions. The rank and file of police owed allegiance to the ruling dispensation. Extortion, harrassment and raids by police and people in power became rampant. An atmosphere of fear and repression reigned and people got restless to overthrow the government.

Politicization of institutions has been happening in Mamata government too. Allegations are quite strong that police in Bengal functions at the beck and call of political bosses. The lapses and alleged loopholes on the part of police in handling the rape and murder of the young doctor have yet again revealed a sense of confused or misplaced loyalty.

But above everything else both Hasina and Mamata governments allegedly seem to have twined in accepting corruption as a way of life. In Bangladesh jobs of primary and secondary teachers got sold at premium, Rs 10-12 lakh in the Hasina regime. Even police had to pay up for prized postings and transfers. In Bengal busting of the teacher’s recruitment scam has revealed how unsuccessful and ineligible candidates got government jobs in schools in exchange of bribes.

Similarities are multiple and inescapable. Mamata has good reasons to be apprehensive. It’s not only she, who can see and connect the dots. People, out on the streets, clamoring for justice, can see a providential pattern somewhere in the unfolding of future events in these two places-- Bangladesh and Bengal. True, they share more than 2,217 odd km of border. They share the same umbilical cord, other than language, culture, ethos, icons. Even emotions are the same. So she cannot take any risk.

(The writer is a senior jounalist based in Kolkata. Views personal)

Comments

bottom of page