DU ad-hoc teachers being ‘denied’ maternity leave

Thousands of women ad-hoc teachers of Delhi University (DU) are allegedly being denied “basic maternity leave” and the University Grants Commission (UGC) and DU administration do not seem to have taken any steps to address their woes. Even the incumbent Ministry of Human Resource Development under Prakash Javadekar has not been of much help.

The sufferings of DU’s adhoc teachers are endless, but when it comes to the women faculty, the situation is worse, as almost 2,500-3,000 women teachers are allegedly not being given the basic maternity leave.

At present, over 4,500 teachers are working as adhoc faculty in different colleges of DU and more than half of them are women. In the absence of permanent teaching faculty, these adhoc teachers work as the backbone of the DU, but most of the ad-hoc women teachers are still struggling to get their basic rights. Since the colleges are entitled to keep an ad hoc teacher for a maximum of four months, the contract to that effect almost always gets extended, but the ad-hoc teachers don’t get the same facilities available to the permanent faculty. Ad-hoc employees are granted only three-four casual leaves during their stay.

Shivani (name changed), who teaches as an ad-hoc teacher in a DU college, said: “I had to join teaching only three days after my delivery to avoid eviction from the job as women ad-hoc teachers are not entitled to maternity leaves in DU. Due to this provision, thousands of women teachers have been facing a lot of problems.”

However, a committee of 20 members comprising Academic Council (AC) members, Executive Council (EC) members and principals of several colleges was formed a few months ago. Last month, the committee submitted its report and suggested that adhoc teachers must be granted paid maternity leave in all DU colleges. However, the DU administration did not pay any heed to the recommendation.

Professors and governing bodies of 28 DU colleges that are funded and governed by the Delhi government, have been forcing the DU administration (V-C, ECs and ACs) to come up with the maternity leave provision for women teachers, but the DU administration does not seem to be keen to address the issue.

Accusing the DU administration of failing to provide maternity leave to women ad hoc teachers in DU, Prabhanjan Jha, governing body chairman of Aditi Mahavidyalaya, said: “The DU administration has not come up with any recourse for the sufferings of women ad-hoc teachers in DU; they are just busy passing the buck.”

“We demand that the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act 2017 that prescribes for maternity leave to all women at work, be applicable also for ad-hoc teachers of DU. We have also passed the maternity leave provision for women ad-hoc teachers in our governing body resolution,” Jha said.

The Maternity Benefit ( Amendment) Act 2017 passed in 2017 extended the quota of maximum maternity leave from 12 weeks to 26 weeks. However, ad-hoc women teachers at DU don’t enjoy the benefit.

Rajesh Jha, elected EC member, said: “The leave provision has to be in accordance with the legal structure of the DU and the V-C, as head of the DU administration, is responsible for not introducing the leave provision for women ad-hoc teachers in DU.” Jha added: “We have forwarded the governing body’s resolution of Aditi Mahavidyalaya to the DU V-C and any initiative has to come from his office.” Several ad-hoc women teachers have also blamed the Delhi University Teachers’ Association for not including their cause in its protests. Denying such charges, DUTA president Rajib Ray said: “DUTA has been taking up the cause of thousands of DU ad-hoc teachers. We have been demanding permanent appointment for them. Permanent appointment will resolve problems faced by these ad-hoc teachers.” Crackdown on local activists, eviction of tribals from forest areas, blocking tribals from accessing forest produce and general farm distress together contributed to the defeat of the Raman Singh-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Chhattisgarh, say tribal leaders and activists.

According to experts, after three consecutive terms in Chhattisgarh, disgruntled tribals and distressed farmers—the majority community—voted the BJP out from the state’s legislative Assembly. The Congress won 68 seats, 38 of which were previously held by the BJP in the state, as the Maoist hotbed of Bastar in the south and tribal dominated areas of Surguja district in north Chhattisgarh, massively rejected the BJP.

The voters’ anger was such that prominent ministers from tribal Bastar and Surguja regions—including Home Minister Ram Sewak Paikra, school education minister Kedar Kashyap, sports minister Bhaiya Lal Rajwade and forest minister Mahesh Gagda, lost their seats with huge margins.

B.P.S. Netam, a tribal leader, told The Sunday Guardian: “The disgruntlement against the Raman Singh-led BJP government in Chhattisgarh has been brewing for some time now among members of the scheduled tribes and farmers in the state, but the BJP did not pay any heed to take measures to prevent such sentiment against them.” President of the Sarv Adivasi Samaj, Netam, also a retired IAS officer, said: “The Raman Singh government failed to provide and protect the rights of tribals guaranteed under the Indian constitution. Their lands were being taken away without the gram sabha’s consent, or sometimes based on manufactured consent. Laws like the Forest Rights Act were not being implemented in letter and spirit. Also, the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution, the provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 and the issues related to land titles were totally forgotten. In such circumstances, voters from the tribal belt chose to remind the government and voted them out.”

Alok Shukla, convener of the Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan (CBA) told The Sunday Guardian: “The tribals were angry as the government was taking away their rights. Initially, the Chhattisgarh government had blocked the tribals from accessing the non-timber forest produce (NTFP). The tribals were not allowed to collect Mahua that has been part of their livelihood for ages. When the tribals came to protest against these atrocities by launching the Pathalgadi movement, they were termed Naxals.”

“Former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh termed the Pathalgadi movement a covert attempt for mass religious conversion and arrested hundreds of people, including former IAS officer Herman Kindo and a former ONGC employee, Joseph Tigga, earlier this year. This led to the anger among the tribals,” Shukla said. “If a community is unhappy with your policy, you have no right to term them Naxals and put them behind bars which is what the Raman Singh government did in Chhattisgarh. The tribals have been watching as their rights given to them under our laws and the Constitution have been completely reneged on. During the Pathalgadi movement, the BJP government even arrested almost 289 activists who were just working for the well-being of tribal citizens in this country. These actions of the government worked in favour of the Congress and the party managed to gather the historic support in the tribal belt,” Shukla added.