6.6. GROWTH AND CHANGING STRUCTURE OF EMPLOYMENT

In Chapters 2 and 3, you might have studied about the planning strategies in detail. Here we will look at two developmental indicators — growth of employment and GDP. Nearly seventy years of planned development have been aimed at expansion of the economy through increase in national output and employment.

This chunk introduces the idea that economic planning in India over the last seventy years has focused on two main goals: increasing the overall economy (measured by GDP) and creating more jobs (employment). It sets the stage for understanding the relationship between economic growth and job creation in India.

Think of a school that wants to improve its overall performance. The school aims to increase the number of students (representing employment) while also striving to get higher grades (representing GDP). Just as students' performance needs encouragement and resources, so does the workforce in a country to achieve economic growth.

During the period 1950–2010, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of India grew positively and was higher than the employment growth. However, there was always fluctuation in the growth of GDP. During this period, employment grew at the rate of not more than 2 per cent.

This section highlights a crucial issue: while the GDP has been growing, employment growth has lagged behind, averaging only about 2% yearly. This indicates a troubling trend where the economy can grow without necessarily creating more jobs. The fluctuations in GDP suggest that the growth isn't steady or consistent, which can impact overall job creation.

Imagine a bakery that is making more cakes (GDP), but because it's investing in machines instead of hiring more bakers, the number of staff stays the same (employment growth). The bakery’s profits might rise, but fewer people are getting jobs in the process.

Chart 6.3 also points at another disheartening development in the late 1990s: employment growth started declining and reached the level of growth that India had in the early stages of planning. During these years, we also find a widening gap between the growth of GDP and employment. This means that in the Indian economy, without generating employment, we have been able to produce more goods and services. Scholars refer to this phenomenon as jobless growth.

The text notes a significant concern during the late 1990s when employment growth began to decline, mirroring earlier, less productive times. This widening gap between GDP growth and job creation suggests that while the economy is increasing its output, it is not translating that growth into employment opportunities. The term 'jobless growth' reflects this paradox.

If a restaurant expands its menu and serves more meals (represents GDP growth) but does not hire more staff to serve customers, it experiences 'jobless growth.' The restaurant might be busier but is not providing new jobs for people looking to work.

From this we will also be able to understand what types of employment are generated in our country. Let us look at two indicators that we have seen in the preceding sections — employment of people in various industries and their status. We know that India is an agrarian nation; a major section of population lives in rural areas and is dependent on agriculture as their main livelihood.

This chunk sets the groundwork for analyzing the types of jobs available in India, focusing on how many people work in different sectors and their employment status. Recognizing that India has a significant rural population heavily reliant on agriculture allows for a deeper understanding of the employment landscape.

Consider a farmer who relies entirely on crops for income. If the demand for those crops decreases and the farmer doesn't diversify into other types of work, he remains vulnerable. Similarly, a country that relies on one sector, like agriculture, can find its employment levels unstable.

Distribution of workforce by industrial sectors shows substantial shift from farm work to non-farm work. In 1972-73, about 74 per cent of workforce was engaged in primary sector and in 2011-12, this proportion has declined to about 50 per cent. Secondary and service sectors are showing promising future for the Indian workforce.

This section discusses a significant change in employment patterns: a reduction in the proportion of workers engaged in agriculture (from 74% to 50%) from 1972 to 2012. The growth of the secondary (manufacturing) and service sectors suggests a diversifying economy and the creation of new types of jobs.

Think about someone transitioning from farming to working in a factory. As the economy shifts from agricultural dependence to industrial or service sectors, workers like this find new opportunities, much like how a student explores various career options after high school.

Over the last five decades (1972-2018), people have moved from self-employment and regular salaried employment to casual wage work. Yet self-employment continues to be the major employment provider.

This portion highlights the trend of workers shifting towards casual wage jobs instead of secure, salaried employment. Although self-employment remains the largest source of jobs in India, the rise in casual work indicates growing instability in job security and income.

Imagine a skilled carpenter who used to work for a single company. If the company hires him as a freelancer with no job security, his work becomes 'casual.' Although he can work for himself, he now faces uncertainties about income, akin to how older children may find temporary jobs versus steady employment.

Scholars call the process of moving from self-employment and regular salaried employment to casual wage work noticed during 1972-94 as casualisation of workforce.

The text explains that the transition towards more casual work is labeled as 'casualisation,' which implies that workers are increasingly engaged in less stable job types. This trend presents challenges as casual workers often lack benefits and job security.

Think of someone who has always worked full-time with benefits, like healthcare, suddenly being offered freelance work without benefits. Although they may earn more per hour, they lose the stability that comes with a regular job; this mirrors the anxiety felt by many casual wage workers.

--