Omnipresent, Yet Invisible
Sahana Udupa and Sailen Routray
 |
Security Guard Outside Fatehpur Sikri Fort in UP
Photo Credit - Wikimedia Commons |
From its 18th century incarnation as a military town,
Bangalore has morphed into a hotbed of the information technology revolution in
the 21st first century. And the city has witnessed significant changes in its
social and physical landscapes.
Most contemporary reflections on the city are framed
primarily through the lens of its collapsing infrastructure, and the
paradoxical rise of glitzy commercial and residential spaces following the
economic boom of the 1990s. The political, social and economic changes
unleashed by this IT-led boom have been far reaching. New services, new social
and occupational groups and a whole new philosophy of ‘living in Bangalore’
have followed.
But is IT all that there is to Bangalore? If we set out to
create a more inclusive picture of the transformation of the services sector in
the city over the last two decades, it will not only have the much valorized IT
and ITES industry but also the ancillary services triggered by it. We call
these services ‘Information Technology Triggered Services’ (ITTS). In recent
years, there has been an explosive growth in these services including private
transport, real estate, security services, catering etc.
This story is about the private security workers who are
omnipresent, yet invisible. Till only a decade ago, affluent families flaunting
Nepali Goorkhas were sparse and scattered. The 1990s saw the rise of a new
phenomenon of ‘secure spaces.’ Offices and residential complexes began to view
private security services as both a social statement and a necessary ‘infrastructure.’
Although no official figures are available, security
services associations believe that there has been a massive growth in the
number of service providers in the recent years. The demand for the manpower in
this sector has been so high that the agencies are recruiting people at a fever
pitch, with scant or no attention paid to the training of security guards. Most
of the learning happens on the field. Security guards are given clear
instructions before they are posted on the site – they are responsible
for guarding property and people.
As opposed to popular perception, private security guards
are not a fighting force; they are part of a monitoring system. In the
possibility of an attack, they are expected only to alert the residents and
their supervisors. They “do not have the power”, to quote a manager of a
service provider, “to counterattack and fight the intruder(s).” This explains
why they do not carry any weapons- except batons. “Batons are part of their
uniform; they could be used only to catch snakes or chase dogs, but should
never be used on humans” adds the manager.
A number of social and economic issues have arisen around
the occupation of security guards in the city. For example, there is a clear
tension between Kannadiga and non-Kannadiga, especially non-South Indian
security guards. Non-South Indians are generally not found in supervisory
positions. According to many managers, agencies do not trust North Indian
guards as much as the local Kannadiga and even Tamil or Telugu guards. Many managers
use the terms ‘outsider’, ‘Oriya’ and ‘North Indian’ interchangeably. All of
them are conflated into a single category of ‘outsiders,’ and are always seen
in opposition to the Kannadiga guards.
Although the security guards are not made to sign a bond,
they are required to sign an application form that lists down all the terms and
conditions. This paper is technically not a legal document, and therefore this
‘signing away’ of their right to unionize is not technically illegal. The very
act of signing on a paper is supposed to scare away the security guards,
especially if they are fresh in the industry.
The candidates are made to declare that they are not members
of any trade union and will never join one. Although there is an association of
the owners of various security agencies in Bangalore, there is no union for the
security workers. As a manager of a security firm says, “the terms and
conditions clearly say that they (guards) should not be a member of any union.
He should clearly write that he will not join any union or go on strike. If he
does, in one week, even in the same hour, he will be out. They should not ask
any questions about the facilities, duty hours or benefits given.” Although the
central government has passed The Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act,
2005 (PSARA) to specify norms of business for the security agencies, it rarely
translates into action when migrant workers are hired for the service.
We only spoke to Oriya security guards because they seem to
be one of the largest communities in the Bangalore private security guard
population. They seem to form a more or less homogenous group; unmarried and
aged between 19 and 27. Guards thus seem to come from homes in Orissa that are
at a particular point in the household development cycle.
Whereas the terms of work seem exploitative, the actual
conditions of work are relatively better than many other sectors. Most of the
workers get paid in cash between Rs 2700-3200 per month. The agency provides
them with uniforms, the cost of which is borne by the guards.
The people we interviewed gained their jobs by contacts in
their villages. They belong to a wide variety of communities, ranging from SC,
ST, OBC, and general castes including Brahmins. There is rarely any formal mode
of recruitment for hiring migrant labourers for security related work. The only
required qualifications are elementary schooling, and the ability to speak and
understand rudimentary English and Hindi. As this is a seller’s market, the
norms for entry are not very stringent.
Most agencies employing the guards follow a policy of ‘no
work, no pay’. In a year, the guards do not have a single day of paid leave or
sick leave. The shifts vary from twelve hours daily to three eight-hour shifts
in two-day cycles.
None of the guards see a job in the security sector as very
satisfying, and want to move out of the sector as soon as they can save some
money. Most of them want to go back home and start petty businesses.
Remittances ranging from 700Rs to 2000Rs are sent home, which are either
ploughed back into agriculture as inputs or are used for subsistence
consumption during the agricultural lean season. Thus these migrants employed
as security guards in cities help supplement their agricultural income back
home, while paving the way for future generations to do the same.
A guard’s job is essentially seen as a low status job
although there is some variation in terms of the way the guards relate to their
work. Sameer, one of the guards, feels that “a guard’s job is a dog’s job” whereas
some of his friends are much less negative. Accommodation is generally provided
by the agencies and the rent is deducted from the salary at source. The rent
typically ranges from 200-400 rupees. They usually eat their meals in self-run
messes where money and labour are pooled in. These groups are organised on the
basis of region rather than caste and ethnicity, pointing to new patterns of
social bonding emerging with migration.
How do we understand the spurt in private security
services?
Bangalore’s many secure enclaves have private security
services as a key selling point. And perception of fear is related to the
availability and consumption of private security services. The very fact that
the market ‘provides’ such services can trigger security needs.
More importantly, increasing availability and consumption of
private security services is a symptom of uneven growth characterized by a
fast-growing segment of high-income groups in Bangalore.
Urban issues expert Solomon Benjamin rightly calls Bangalore
‘a divided city.’ According to a study conducted by American Express last year,
Bangalore is home to over 10,000 individual dollar millionaires and around
60,000 super-rich people who have an investable surplus of Rs 4.5 crore and Rs
50 lakh respectively. On the other hand, according to 2001 census, over 10% of
Bangalore’s population lives in slums.
Thus, there is a real fear among the urban rich about the
underclass ‘Other’, reinforced by the isolation of these apartment complexes
from their neighboring social areas almost forming ‘secure islands.’ There is
also a desire to gain ‘symbolic capital’ (things other than money or property).
In some ways this explains why there are private security guards in front of
even little offices, schools and some religious organizations.
The sudden boom in private security services reflects the
uneven growth that has divided the city economically, socio-culturally and
symbolically. The flow of migrant labourers for security work or otherwise both
results from and contributes to this divide.
Note: This article was first published in the Bengaluru-based webzine 'Citizen Matters' in 2008. It is republished here without any substantive changes.
