The Burden of Terminology

Promise after promise. Local governments in Jammu and Kashmir promise more often only to let them vanish in thin air with time. This time the case is of the temporary workforce of Jammu and Kashmir. This issue has been lingering for three decades. In his answer to a question raised on the issue on 11.03.2025, Chief Minister of J&K, Omar Abdullah, in the legislative assembly, again promised to work for the regularization of this temporary workforce and ensured all formalities will be completed within the next six months and the proposal in this direction will be tabled in the next budget session.

The workforce globally is broadly categorized into two groups: Substantive (Permanent) and Non-Substantive (Temporary). However, in Kashmir—and India more broadly—the government has institutionalized a fragmented classification of temporary workers under terms like Dailywager, Adhoc, Casual, Contractual, Seasonal, Hourly-Based, and Need-Based etc. These terms, which have no place in standard global labor frameworks, have been deliberately crafted to manage workforce hierarchies while avoiding long-term financial commitments.

A bureaucratic invention

The origins of these terminologies can be traced back to British rule, where casual and daily wage labor was used for temporary, seasonal, or project-based employment, particularly in infrastructure projects. However, post-independence, Indian governments, including the administration in Jammu & Kashmir, expanded these classifications to keep a large workforce in precarious employment conditions without granting them permanent status.

Over the decades, these categories were further fragmented into contractual, consolidated, need-based, and adhoc workers, each carrying different pay scales and service conditions, yet all remaining outside the ambit of job security and benefits. The classification was not just an administrative convenience; it became a systemic tool for denying labor rights while keeping institutions running with a cheap and easily replaceable workforce.

Why this fragmentation?

One of the main reasons behind the widespread use of these labels is the government's reluctance to create substantive positions. By employing people under different non-permanent categories, authorities have been able to:

1. Avoid Regularization

These terminologies provide a legal and bureaucratic excuse to keep workers outside the scope of permanent employment benefits like pension, promotions, and structured pay scales.

2. Delay Financial Commitments

Since these workers are technically not permanent, the government avoids long-term financial liabilities such as gratuity, provident funds, and post-retirement benefits.

3. Exploit Labor Without Accountability

These classifications allow institutions to hire people as per need and dismiss them without legal hurdles, as they do not fall under standard labor protections.

4. Avoid Legal Scrutiny

Another intention the bureaucracy hide by framing these labels is the legal scrutiny. The purposely frame-down rules, criteria and conditions that snatch the legal protection of job security and other service benefits

In Jammu and Kashmir,  this terminology is particularly dominant in departments such as Power Development Department (PDD), Roads & Buildings (R&B), Public Health Engineering (PHE), Higher Education, and Health. Despite years of service—sometimes spanning decades—these workers remain trapped in an administrative maze that denies them dignity, fair wages, and future security.

Global best practices

Unlike Kashmir and India, most labor frameworks around the world operate within a much simpler structure:

1. Substantive Employment (Permanent Workers) guarantees employees with long-term job security, structured career progression, and social security benefits.

2. Non-Substantive Employment (Temporary Workers) includes fixed-term contracts, seasonal jobs, gig workers, and probationary employees, but still with well-defined protections.

This binary classification ensures clarity, transparency, and fair treatment of workers. However, in Kashmir, the lack of a uniform employment policy has resulted in chaos where workers perform identical tasks but receive different wages and legal recognition based on arbitrary labels.

Need for reform

If Jammu & Kashmir truly aims to build a fair and productive workforce, the government must abandon the maze of Dailywager, Adhoc, Casual, and Need-Based terminologies. Instead, a more transparent system aligned with global standards—where workers are either substantive (permanent) or non-substantive (temporary with clear contractual terms)—should be implemented.

Labor is the backbone of any economy, and governance should not thrive on the insecurity of its workforce. It is time for policymakers to step up and address this systemic injustice with long-overdue reforms.

Dr. Ashraf Zainabi, Teacher and Researcher