Today’s Highlight

Pricing House-work

The Supreme Court of India has made a critical reference to non-valuing or undervaluing the work of housewives and has called for corrective action, as noted in “How to compute housewife’s value?”

Bob’s Banter

Coaching Agitators

Bob has his sarcastic take on increasingly violent young protesters in “Classes for Student Agitators..!”

For more insightful articles by Bob, hit his website – www.bobsbanter.com

CocktailPlaza 

Also have a look at our trivia/sublime, random quotes, Indiana and recycled humour in this section – as and when we schedule them afresh – or in the archives.

Indiana

Wedding decoy

Ganga Ram of Uttar Pradesh asked a marriage broker to find him a bride. The broker showed him photos and fixed a date and collected Rs. 30,000 from Ram. After the wedding, when the bride’s veil was lifted, Ram discovered that he had actually married a man! The ‘bride’ confessed to the police that this was the 18^th time he was playing the role. The other 17 victims were too embarrassed to complain.

The CD on Laughter is loaded on this website for you to view/download.

The CD on laughter is loaded in the archives of this website for free downloading and use. Click on “laughter Plaza” on the top bar below the masthead on the home (front) page. Alert your friends who may be interested.

 Stay with us and help us to grow!

- John B. Monteiro

How To Compute Housewife’s Value?

By John B. Monteiro

                        You are pictures out of doors,

Bells in your parlours, wild-cats in your kitchens,

Saints in your injuries, devils being offended,

Players in your housewifery, and housewives in your beds.

 - William Shakespeare, English dramatic poet (1564- 1616) in Othello.

 “Appeles use to paint a good housewife upon a snayl (snail?); which intimated that she should be as slow from gadding abroad, and when she went she should carry her house upon her back; that is, she should make all sure at home.”  James Howell,   writer from Wales (1595-1666).

 If you think that these are foreign perception of women or housewives, this quotation from Thomas Munro (later Sir) in a dispatch as administrator in the Salem region (circa1792) to his madras headquarters of East India Company, on the reasons why some could not pay land tax is a pointer: “… a third tells me that he cannot afford to pay his usual rent because his wife is dead; she used to do more work than his best bullock”. Nowadays, the comparison is to a donkey or a mule – the beast of burden with empty upper storey. The ransom of young brides, dowry, is widely discussed. But, no one has stopped to think of their silent contribution, as housewives, to the success of the family and homestead. Now the Supreme Court of India has thrown a bombshell on the subject that is going to have far-reaching impact on how the housewives are going to be recognized and their quiet work valued. But, first the facts.

 Holding that the valuation of the income of the homemaker as one-third of the of the income of the earning spouse is not rational while computing compensation in cases of motor accidents claims, the Supreme Court has asked Parliament to revisit the provisions to the value the services of homemakers properly. A  Bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and  A.K. Ganguly, in separate but concurring judgments, on July 22, 2010 expressed anguish that despite a clear constitutional mandate from Article 15 (1) to eschew discrimination on grounds of sex there was a distinct gender bias against women, in the implementation, and various welfare legislation and judicial pronouncements.

 “The time has come for Parliament to have a rethink on properly assessing the value of homemaker’s and householders’ work and suitably amending the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and other related laws for giving compensation when the victim  is women and homemakers. Amendments to matrimonial laws may also be made in order to give effect to the mandate to Article 15 (1) of the Constitution,” the Bench said.

  In his Judgment, Justice Ganguly said: Women are generally engaged to homemaking, bringing up children and also in production of goods and services which are not sold in market but are consumed at the household level. Thus, the work of women mostly goes unrecognized, and they are never valued.” He said the bias against women was shockingly in the work of the census. “In the census of 2001, it appears that those who are doing household duties such as cooking, cleaning of utensils, looking after children, fetching water and firewood have been categorized as non-workers and equated with beggars, prostitutes and prisoners who according to the census, are not engaged in economically productive work.  This approach of equating women, who are homemakers, with beggars, prostitutes and prisoners as economically non-productive workers betrays a totally insensitive and callous approach to the dignity of labour so far as women are concerned, and is indicative of a strong gender bias against women.”

 Justice Ganguly said: “Though the census operation does not call for consideration in this case, but reference to the same has been made to show the strong bias shown against women and their work. We hope and trust in the on-going census operation, this will be corrected. Lack of sensitiveness and recognition of their work mainly contributes to women’s high rate of poverty and their consequential oppression in society, as well as various physical, social and psychological problems. Courts and tribunals should do well to factor in these considerations while assessing compensation for housewives who are victims of road accidents and quantifying the amount in the name of fixing ‘just compensation’.”

In this concurring judgment Justice Singhvi said: “It is highly unfair, unjust and inappropriate to compute the compensation payable to the dependants of the deceased wife/mother, who does not have regular income, by comparing her services with that of a housekeeper or servant or an employee who works for a fixed period. The gratuitous services rendered by wife/mother to the husband and children cannot be equated with the services of an employee, and no evidence or data can possibly be produced for estimating the value of such services.”

 In the instant case, appellant Arun Kumar’s wife Renu Agarwal died, aged 39, in a road accident in Uttar Pradesh. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.2,5 lakh in compensation and the Allahabad High Court confirmed this order by dismissing the appeal. The SC appeal was directed against the judgment.  The court allowed the appeal and enhanced the compensation to Rs.6 lakh with a 6 per cent interest from the date of filing of the petition till the date of payment, which should be made within three months. The court also awarded the appellant Rs.50, 000 in costs.

 The subject is open to many views. What are y6ours? Over to you.