24 Campus Workers Fired without Any Prior Notice

At around 6 am yesterday (1 August 2022), when about 50 contract workers of the Institute’s water-supply department completed their regular shift, they were informed by the new contractor that 24 of them have been fired with immediate effect and without any prior notice. These include workers who have served the Institute for as long as 26 years, and over multiple generations in their families. The fired group spans all ages and nature of work (skilled, semi-skilled, unskilled). 

 

The water-supply department consisted of separate contracts and workforce for tubewell (for fresh water) and sump well (for sewage) departments. However, according to the workers, a new tender has merged the two departments and thereby, the cumulative strength of hired workers has been reduced from 49 to 31. Of these 31, six new employees have been brought in by the contractor, and so only 25 old workers have been retained.

 

The campus’ water supply and sewage infrastructure consists of 64 sump-wells (and STPs) and 53 tubewells (and booster pumps). Each of these pumps needs to be manually operated by a contract worker. In the absence of the worker, the machines are at risk of malfunctioning. Due to reduced strength under the new contract, the number of machines per worker would increase from 2-3 to 4-5. The workers fear that increased workload and, thereby, increased chance of error would give the contractor an excuse to fire them. A worker recounted an incident where a colleague of his was suspended for 15 days owing to a pump malfunction. 

 

To seek respite, the workers contacted the DoIP (Dean of Infrastructure & Planning). But they were told that they are contractor employees and, hence, must take up the issue directly with the contractor and IWD (Institute Works Department).  

 

Unsatisfied with the response of the DoIP, more than 100 workers gathered outside the Institute Works Department (IWD) and demanded the reinstatement of all the fired workers. The Senior Engineer at IWD told the workers that it is beyond his purview to increase the number of contract workers hired. However, he said that he had talked to the Deputy Director and the Deputy Director had assured him that all fired workers would be given employment in other departments in the campus. When the workers asked for a deadline for re-employment, the Engineer refused to commit to any date. 

 

The workers feel disillusioned with the IWD and administration’s response to their concerns. Most of these fired workers are sole earners in their family and are facing subsistence issues.