Livelihood Impact of Covid-19: Insights from Migrant Workers in India

Livelihood Impact of Covid-19: Insights from Migrant Workers in India

¹Chris Bastian Tom*, ²Meghna Dutta

¹Research Scholar, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Patna, Bihta, Patna- 801106 (Bihar)

²Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Patna, Bihta, Patna- 801106 (Bihar).

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000341

Received: 24 August 2025; Accepted: 30 August 2025; Published: 10 September 2025

ABSTRACT

This paper tries to analyse the impact that COVID-19 had on the lives and livelihoods of migrant workers. The pandemic and the subsequent lockdowns had thrown migrants into an existential crisis. It tries to understand how abandoned by all the stakeholders including employers, contractors, state and society, the migrants survived through the pandemic. Based on primary data collected from inter-state migrant workers in the state of Kerala, India we also study the emergent changes in the post-lockdown work environment of various sectors in terms of wages and working conditions. We observed substantial reductions in the wages of migrant workers in some sectors along with deterioration in their living conditions. There is significant variation in the situation of migrants depending on their skill level, nature of occupation and the sector in which they are employed. The study argues that the pandemic and its aftermath have made migrant workers poorer and more vulnerable to exploitation.

Keywords: Labour migration, wages, unemployment, India

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted every aspect of human life throughout the globe. India is among the countries that were hit hard by the pandemic (Alam and Zaini, 2021) prompting the Government of India to impose one of the strictest lockdown in the country from March 25 to May 03, 2020 (Dhar et al. 2022). As a result of this, every sector of the economy and every segment of the society were affected, with the impact on the marginalised section being much more profound. Inter-state migrant workers who constitute a significant section of the Indian population became the most hapless victims of the pandemic and its aftermath. According to the Census of India (2011) there are 455.8 million internal migrants in India, which accounts for 37% of India’s total population. Of them 12% are inter-state migrants and 76% have migrated within their states to seek employment. This group of inter-state migrant workers comprise the focus of this study. This internal labour migration generally originates from the populous and poorest states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Odisha, West Bengal and Jharkhand to the comparatively industrialised and wealthy states like Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Kerala (Chakraborty et al. 2020). Interstate migrant workers make significant contributions to the country’s economic growth being majorly employed in sectors like the construction industry, timber industry, agriculture, hotel industry and in other informal services as plumbers, waiters, drivers, domestic help etc. and form the backbone of India’s informal economy. Despite their tremendous contributions they remain invisible, neglected (Naregal, 2021) and outside the purview of government’s social security and welfare schemes which further exacerbates their vulnerability. The extreme helplessness and marginalization of these migrant workers came into sharp focus during the COVID-19 crisis. Since the first COVID-19 case was reported, the Government of India had swiftly put restrictive measures in place; however, the implementation lacked planning and coordination. On 24 March, 2020 a complete lockdown for 21 days was declared which later extended into months. This sudden announcement of a complete lockdown paralysed every aspect of human life throughout the country. With every means of transportation halted, migrant workers were stranded in their host states. Without jobs and income, survival in their destination states became difficult. Landlords evicted migrant agricultural workers from their rented residential facilities, employers asked migrant factory workers to vacate their employer provided residences (Yadav and Priya 2020) leaving them with no other way but to take the arduous task of walking thousands of kilometres by foot to reach their homes (Dandekar and Ghai, 2020). In their attempts to return home, this enormous army of labourers in India was reduced to being the target of suspicion, burdens, and, in many instances, beatings. Migrants were accused of being spreading the pandemic (Kumar and Choudhary 2021), were herded into camps, treated as less than humans, and left alone. Malnutrition, suicide, exhaustion, car and train accidents, police violence, and inadequate medical care were among the factors that led to migrant deaths during these long and arduous journeys (Yadav and Priya 2020). Even after reaching their home states, migrants had to endure terrible experiences. There were incidents in which the returning migrants were sprayed with disinfectants. (“Migrant workers sprayed”, 2020). Nevertheless, there is currently a dearth of data highlighting the experiences of migrant workers in India during the pandemic. In this context it is important to study the impacts that Covid-19 and the subsequent events had on the lives of migrant workers. To this extent, we aim to map the effects of COVID-19 and its aftermath on the lives of migrant workers in Kerala and analyse their experiences during the pandemic and thereafter. This study looks at how lockdowns affected the livelihoods of migrant workers and analyses the impact through the hardships and struggles they faced during the lockdown. It also documents the diverse strategies employed by the migrants for survival during the period between their return migration to home state and coming back to Kerala. It will also look into the post-lock down working scenario for migrant workers in various sectors in terms of change in wages and working conditions.

The rest of the paper is organized to describe the literature review in section 2, the study area and the sample is described in section 3. Section 4 presents the most important findings of the study, section 5 presents the discussion and section 6 concludes.

LITERATURE REVIEW

There are only a very few studies which try to analyse the effects of COVID-19, subsequent lockdown and the ensuing socio-economic turmoil in the lives of inter-state migrant workers in India. Yadav and Priya (2020) points out that COVID-19 lockdown has adversely affected the livelihoods of inter-state migrant workers. A significant section of the migrants lost their jobs and the employers did not even pay their due wages (Yadav and Priya 2020). They point out that the landlords did not exempt them from rent and evicted the migrants from their residences without giving them enough time. Kumar and Choudhary (2021) point out the human rights violations against migrant workers that occurred during the lockdown period. Denied of basic needs like food and shelter left migrants in a condition of despair and destitution. Existential crises faced at the destination, fear of being infected by COVID-19 and concerns regarding family back home forced migrants to take a long and arduous journey to their home (Kumar and Choudhary 2021). Duggal et al (2021) have analysed the lived experiences of thirteen men migrant workers during the Covid-19 pandemic through phenomenological perspective. They were the sole support for large families at home and lost their jobs over night, not knowing what would come next. The pandemic’s financial toll had multiple effects on migrant labour (Duggal et al 2021). Besides their own survival they were also worried about the situation of their families back home. For many of them, financing their return home required borrowing money. Some of them even have to mortgage their meagre belongings to get back home (Duggal et al 2021). Numerous migrant workers were had to walk hundreds of kilometres. Some even suffered and died while travelling (Alam and Zaini 2021). Abdul et al. (2021) have tried to analyse the impact of COVID-19 on women migrant workers in India. The study found out that women migrant workers experienced considerable loss of livelihood which resulted in debt and poverty. There are studies which tried to analyse the mental health issues faced by inter-state migrant workers in the COVID-19 pandemic context (Choudhary 2020 and Kumar et al 2020).  Public health measures like obligatory quarantine or isolation in the government’s temporary shelters upon return to their home states and social segregation, in addition to the troubles brought on by the pandemic, exacerbated the feeling of loneliness and depression among the migrant workers (Choudhary 2020). Barman (2020) has conducted an empirical study on the experiences of migrant workers from Kooch Behar district in west Bengal who had returned to their homes from Kerala during the lockdown period. The study points out to the pathetic situation migrants faced during the quarantine period in the destination place. They were denied of adequate food and other basic facilities. Migrants reached home after exhausting most of their savings. Most of the them struggled to get employment after returning. Author also notes how MNERGA become a contesting space between the return migrants and the already registered workers. Priyadarsini and Choudhary (2020) have analysed the experiences of the inter-state migrants who returned to their home in Bihar during the COVID-19 crisis. They draw attention to the fact that the returning migrants had to deal with hostile responses at the state boundary and even in their own villages. Some migrants who have returned to the Purulia region of West Bengal slept under trees, inside trucks or buses, or in makeshift shelters during their quarantine period outside the village boundaries (Chakma, 2020). Law enforcement agencies behaved to migrants in a very dehumanising way (Kumar and Choudhary 2021). Those who returned to their home towns were mistreated by the police and the villagers because they were viewed as potential carriers of the disease (Suresh et al 2020). Duggal et al (2021) points out that the returned migrants faced numerous pressures, including not being able to provide for their families and having to deal with the negative personal and societal effects of unemployment.

There is dearth of studies which tries to analyse the post-COVID working conditions of the migrants who have returned to their work place. This study will try to address this research gap by comparing the pre-COVID and post-COVID working environment in the context of migrant labour. Most of the existing studies are based on literature reviews which lacks empirical data.

The Study Area

This study is based on primary data collected from three municipalities- Perumbavoor, Kalamassery and Thrikakara in Ernakulam district and one panchayat- Adimali from Idukki district in Kerala. These three municipalities in Ernakulum district are the most industrialized areas in Kerala. So, large numbers of inter-state migrants are attracted to these areas. Adimali panchayat is known for its plantation sector. We selected this panchayat for studying the condition of migrants engaged in plantation work. Using quota sampling, data was collected through structured questionnaire from those migrants who were in Kerala when the COVID-19 lockdown was declared in March 24, 2020. 300 migrants working across 10 important industries – construction, plywood, bricks klin, domestic work, plantation work, tiles work, bakery, hotel, latex processing and fish processing, comprises the final sample. Six focus group discussions were also conducted with each focus group consisting of seven migrants.

Socio-Demographic Profile

Even though the migrant population of Kerala hails from almost all the eastern and northern states of India (table 1), majority hails from the three states of West Bengal (26%), Bihar (23.6%) and Assam (20.6%).

Table 1: Distribution of migrants based on their home states, 2022

Source: Survey data

When it comes to their age profile, about 40% migrants are in the age group of 20-25 years, 33% migrants are in between 25-30 years, 17% of them are in 30-40 age group while about 21 (9%) are 40 years or above. Only 1% are in the15-20 years age group. This is indicative of the predominance of younger population among the migrants.

Fig 1: Distribution of migrants by age groups, 2022.

Source: Survey data

Of the total respondents, 85% are male and only 15% are female. Even though the inter-state migrant worker group in India is male dominated, in domestic work, most of the workers are females. Sizeable number female migrants are also employed in the sectors of fish processing and plantation.

Table 2: Distribution of migrants by various caste categories, 2022

Source: Survey data

A caste wise disaggregation shows that 42% of the migrants are from SC category.  About 32% belongs to the OBC category while ST and Other category comprise 23% and 93% of the migrants respectively (table 2). It is a clear indication that the most oppressed section of the society, who fail to find employment in their own state and lacks productive assets constitute the bulk of the inter-state migrant workers. This is also evident from the fact that of the total respondents, about 143 (47.66%) migrated within the last 2-3 years, 38.66% migrated within 3-5 years and only 41 13.66% migrated more than 5 years ago. 51% of the migrants did not possess any land. This shows that vast majority of the migrant workers from Bihar are landless, 34% have less than one acre of land, 11% possesses between 1 to 2 acres of land and just 3% have more than 2 acres of land (table 3).

Table 3: Proportion of migrant workers by extent of land ownership, 2022

Source: Survey data

When it comes to education level, about 51% migrants have only primary school education, 54 (18%) have high school education and 23 (8%) have secondary school education. Only 2 (0.66%) among them are graduated and 69 were never educated.

Fig 2: Proportion of migrant workers by their level of education, 2022

Source: Survey data

Impact of Covid-19 On Migrant Workers

Among the total respondents, about 262 (87%) had lost their jobs during the COVID-19 lockdown. This underscores the magnitude of job loss among migrant workers during the lock down. About 217 (72%) migrant workers did not receive any assistance from their employer, compared to 83 (28%) who did receive assistance in some form (fig 3). Out of the workers who received help from their employers, 43% received financial assistance, and 24% got help from their employers in paying rent. The food expenses of 22% migrants were taken care of by their employers, and 11% had received some other form of help from their employers for example in arranging transportation facility for returning to their home states and paying for the transportation expenses for them.

Fig 3: Distribution of type of help received by migrants

Source: Survey data

Between March and November 2020, 91% of the migrants returned home and only 9% remained back in Kerala, that is, an overwhelming majority of the migrants returned back to their home within six months of declaration of the first phase of lockdown in India. Out of the 272 migrants who returned home, about 38% received their full pending wages before returning back to their homes, while the majority of 62% did not. This highlights the migrants’ miserable situation, as they were denied their due wages and were thus forced to return home in absence of income.

Fig 4: Proportion of migrants who got full wages before return migration

Source: Survey data

Out of the 272 return migrants, 161 (59%) travelled back by trains, 109 (40%) by road, and only 2 (0.73%) travelled by air. Out of the 272 return migrants, only 8 (3%) returned one month after lock down, 39% migrants returned within one to two months, 35% returned within two to four months, 14% migrants returned within four to six months while 9% returned back about six months after lock down was imposed (table 4). Among the respondents, 55% received help from local self-governments, while 45% did not. This demonstrates the important role local self-governments played in easing the migrants’ suffering during the lock down.

Table 4: Duration between lockdown and return migration

Source: Survey data

When the lock down was phased out, out of the 272 migrants who had returned back to Kerala, 1% came back within three months of their return migration, 3% returned within 3-6 months, 18% arrived within 6-12 months, 37% came back within 12–18 months, 35% came back within 18–24 months, and 6% returned after 2 years (fig 5). This underlines that the majority of the migrants came back for work in Kerala after one month of their return migration when the COVID-19 restrictions were significantly loosened.

Fig 5: Duration between return migration and coming back to Kerala

Source: Survey data

During the intervening period, between returning to their state due to lockdown and coming back to Kerala, 19% of the respondents went to other places for jobs, 33% worked as farm labourers in their own villages, 11% were engaged in self-employment, 5% depended on MNERGA work, 9% worked in their family field, and 24% remained unemployed throughout the period (table 8). This points out to the precarious condition of the migrant workers. Even at the peak time of the pandemic, majority of the migrants had to work for a living. 19% of them migrated to other states for jobs during this intervening period when COVID-19 threat loomed large. They tried to get employment in states where COVID-19 restrictions were comparatively relaxed. Nonetheless, they took huge risks on their lives by migrating in the critical period of the pandemic but for them it was a choice between unemployment-led starvation and destitution and contracting an unknown illness. This further emphasises the level of subsistence income that the workers earn even after migration. Their earnings are not sufficient to generate savings to help tide over any shock.

Table 5: Activities undertaken during the intervening period

Source: Survey data

After coming back to Kerala, 57% migrants re-joined their previous employer, while 43% worked for a new employer. Of the returning workers, 21% changed their occupation and joined a new trade, while 79.1% continued to work in their previous occupation either with their old employer or with new employer. Among those who took to the same occupation, 37% said that there was a change in the wages they received, while for 63% the wages received remained the same. In the sectors of construction (job of helper), plywood (job of helper), plywood (skilled job), bricks (job of helper), latex factory (skilled and non-skilled job) and tiles factory (skilled and non-skilled job), the wages remained the same as their pre-COVID levels. Skilled workers in the construction sector got a 20% increase in their salary compared to pre-COVID time. Skilled workers in brick kiln received about 5.3% higher wages post-COVID. Migrants working as helpers in hotel sector suffered disproportionately more with a 9.1% dip in their wages, while for skilled workers in hotel sector wages fell by about 10.5%.  Since the hospitality sector was affected more and the impact continued much longer even after the stringent lockdown restrictions were lifted, the fall in wages and salaries in this sector is understandable. However, it is interesting to note that some of the other sectors suffered even bigger wage cuts than hospitality. For example, migrants working in plantation sector suffered an even higher fall in their wages by about 28.2%; those engaged in domestic work had their wages cut by 21.4%. Skilled workers in bakeries endured a 26.7% decrease in their wages and those working as helpers in bakery suffered a 25% reduction in their wages.

Table 6: Percentage change in wages in different sectors between pre and post COVID levels

Source: survey data

Only 78.7% of the 69 migrants returned to their home states during the second wave of COVID-19 and subsequent lockdown from April to June 2021, while 91% remained back in Kerala. This shows that the impact of the second wave of COVID-19 was comparatively less severe on the migrant workers when compared to the first wave.

A DISCUSSION ON THE FINDINGS

The Phase of Lockdown

Our data demonstrates the severe hardship that migrants endured during Covid-19 and its aftermath. The overwhelming majority of the migrants that we had interviewed, had lost their livelihoods and did not receive any help from their employers. During the focus group discussions, Aman a migrant worker from Bihar said,

“When the government suddenly declared lockdown, we got into a very difficult situation. We did not expect it and hoped that it would be a temporary measure and the lockdown would be lifted very soon. But when we learned that the lockdown would last for a long time, we lost all our hope.”

The sudden lockdown caused panic and chaos. Shubham, a migrant from Odisha who used to work in a brick kiln in Thrikakara said:

“The day after the lockdown was declared; the employer came to our quarters and told us to vacate it within two days. He said that he is going to shut the factory down until the lockdown is lifted. When we asked him what will we do and where will we go? He only said that because of the pandemic, he had no choice but to shut down the factory and advised us to go back to our home or find jobs elsewhere. He did not even give us our pending wages for the previous two months”.

This is not an isolated incident; several other migrants shared similar experiences. The way employers abandoned the migrant workers under them has been astounding. Only very few workers received help from their employer and the help too was meagre. A worker from a plywood factory in Perumbavoor said:

“We were 48 workers in the factory. When the factory was closed, we asked some help from the employer. He gave Rs. 2000 to each of us and asked us to vacate the residential facility”.

The situation was quite different in the plantation sector. Like other sectors where migrants were employed, lockdown did not create much disruption in the plantation sector. A plantation worker from Adimali panchayat area recounted

“Our work was largely unaffected by lockdown. In the first week of the lockdown, we remained in our rooms. In the following week, half of us began working on alternate days. Within three months, work went on normally. However, we only received half of our regular pay during those three months.”

The lockdown experience of migrant workers differed based on their nature and sector of occupation. The most affected of the migrant population was the ‘footloose’ or daily wage workers in the construction sector, who were not affiliated with any employer or contractor. One such construction worker from Perumbavoor said:

“When lockdown was declared, everything turned upside down for us. Normally in the morning we will arrive in the town square, and those who require work will pick us up from there. During the lockdown, it became impossible to assemble in the town square, and every construction activity was stopped. We sat in our rooms. In the first month, we somehow survived using our savings. But the savings soon ran out and we could not pay rent to the landlord, so he asked us to vacate the rooms. It was a very difficult time.”

Survival soon became an important question for these workers. Migrants who were working under the direct contract of big companies were somewhat better. A worker from a latex factory in Thrikakara said:

“During the lockdown for the first three weeks, the company was fully shut down. During these times, the company provided us with half of our usual salary. Accommodation and food were also provided by the company as usual. After three weeks, the company became fully functional with special permission from authorities. When the lockdown was lifted, the company arranged a bus for the workers who wanted to go home”.

However, this is only a one-off case that we came across.

The most significant help for migrant workers came from local self-governments. The majority of the migrant workers that we interviewed for this study received some form of assistance from local self-governments. Previous studies have also pointed out the role played by local self-governments in ameliorating the agony of migrants in Kerala during the lockdown period (Peter et al., 2020). During our focus group discussions too, several migrants talked about how the community kitchens organised by local self-governments at the ward level had saved them from starvation. A worker from Kalamassey said:

“During the lockdown, three times in a day, people from the municipality visited our residence and gave us food packets. It was enormously helpful for us.”

It shows how decentralised approach to welfare implementation can help reach those who really need the benefits, better than a national level or centralized way of implementation. However, anti-migrant feelings were also rising among the natives. A plantation worker from Adimali said:

“People were very hostile towards us. They asked us to go to our homes and not to spread the disease. One shopkeeper from whom we used to purchase vegetables regularly even refused to give us anything. In the night, some people threw stones at our residences”. Besides the difficulties created by lockdown, migrants also had to face hostile actions of the local residents. The migrants too gathered in spontaneous protests in several parts of the state. Peter et al., (2020) noted that a large number of migrants protested in Paipad town in Kottayam district, seeking assistance from the authorities to go home[1]. The migrant workers in Perumbavoor, in the district of Ernakulam, protested the subpar food that was served to them during the lockdown period (ibid.).

A migrant from Perumbavoor who took part in one such protest said:

“We suffered a lot. For us, protest was the last resort. We lost our livelihood and had exhausted all our savings. The food that we received from municipality was so bad that several of us became sick. Nobody was ready to help us. People looked on us with suspicion and hate as though we were demons. We desperately wanted to go home but there was no public transport and we did not have any money left. And there was the fear of Covid-19. Nobody gave any instructions or help to us in order to keep us safe from this disease. We thought that we will die here like dogs. Nobody was giving attention to our pleas. So, we decided to raise our voice. We had nothing to lose.”

The overwhelming majority of the migrants who were interviewed for this study returned home within December 2020. This corroborates with the massive scale of return migration that was reported during the Covid crisis. The vast majority of them went home within 1-4 months after the declaration of lockdown. Majority of the migrants depended on the special Shramik[2] train service, while a substantial segment of them relied on road travel. Some of them took a very dangerous and arduous journey. A migrant worker who cycled from Thrikakara to his village in Jharkhand said:

“When government suddenly declared lockdown we got trapped. We had no other way but to go back to our homes. But there was no transport. So I along with my two friends brought three cycles and started our journey to home. We did not want to die here due to starvation. It was better to die on the road. It was a very terrible journey. On the way we faced harassment from police and people. En route our cycles broke down, so we abandoned it and rest of the distance we decided to walk. Fortunately, we received a lift from a goods truck which was going to Ranchi.”

A lot of migrants depended on private buses to reach their home states and they had to pay lot of money for this. This points out the hardships and brutal harassments the poor migrants faced in the suddenly implemented lockdown with no government help. Returning to their home did not put an end to the bitter experiences the migrant workers faced.  A migrant worker from Perumbavoor who reached his village in Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) through Shramik train said:

“When I reached my state, I thought that all my hardship has finally ended. However, the U.P. police quarantined us in a dirty room for three days. Only on the third day did we get something to eat. My suffering back in Kerala was nothing when compared to this.”

Many migrant workers recounted similar agonising situations they encountered once they arrived back to their home states. Even their own neighbours in village saw them with fear and suspicion. Some even recollected experiences of discrimination within their own households.

The Post-pandemic Phase

The overwhelming majority of the migrants returned back to Kerala within 6–24 months.  It proves they spent a significant amount of time in between return migration and coming back to Kerala. A sizable number of migrants were employed as agricultural labourers in their villages. A respondent said:

“I never liked to work as a farm labourer. The landlord treats us very badly. My father and grandfather used to do this work. One of the reasons that I migrated to Kerala was to escape from this exploitation. But because of the Covid-19, I had no other option but to work as a farm labourer in order to support my family.”

This indicates how the Covid-19 crisis had thrown the migrants back into the yoke of semi-feudal oppression, which they once tried to overcome through migration. Many of the workers migrated to other places during this intervening period between their return migration and coming back to Kerala. They chose states and enterprises where lock down restrictions were somewhat relaxed. A migrant worker from Madhya Pradesh said:

“After coming back from Kerala, I remained unemployed for 3 months.  I did not have much savings left, so it became very difficult for our family to survive. There was no job opportunity in my village and surrounding areas. I met a contractor and requested him for work. He said that there is job opportunity in Mumbai but I have to work for very low wages. I agreed to it. In Mumbai, I did road construction work. The salary was very meagre. However, I had no other option but to work. That job had saved my family from starvation.” There were workers who migrated to three different states during this intervening period. A major section of the migrants remained self-employed during this time. The majority of them started small shops selling vegetables adjacent to their homes, and others tried to find employment through MGNERGA. But most of them who registered under MNERGA got only a few days of employment. They also did not get wages on time. An even bigger segment of the migrants remained unemployed. For example, a migrant worker from Odisha said:

“For one year after coming back from Kerala, I remained at home without doing any work. I tried to work in my locality, but no jobs were available because of the pandemic. During this period, my family survived through the money my wife earned by doing domestic work at other’s homes. Finally, a contractor from my locality helped me to migrate back to Kerala.”

The majority of the migrants who returned to Kerala joined back their previous employers. Most of them said that they were contacted by their employer asking to come back. A migrant who works in a hotel in Thrikakara said:

“I left Kerala three months after the lockdown. After four months, the employer called me and said that Covid-19 restrictions are being gradually lifted in Kerala and he plans to reopen the hotel. He requested me to come back. However, I was reluctant because of the pandemic and he had not given me wages for three months before I came back. He assured me that he would pay all the dues and offered me two months of advance payment”.

This points to two things, first, the employers were very eager to get back their workers so as to resume work. Second, in most cases, the contacts between the employers and migrants/migrant-contractors persisted even over the lockdown. In spite of this, a substantial segment of the workers joined back work under new employers post the lockdown phase. We observed an important pattern in this change of occupation. For example, some migrants who previously worked in hotels and bakeries became construction helpers. Even those migrants who were previously engaged in skilled work were now forced to become construction helpers with harsher working conditions and lesser wages. As a migrant worker from Kalamaserry recounted:

“I used to work in a Bakery in Thirualla in Pathanamthitta district. The Bakery was closed during lock down. I went back to Bihar. Six months after when lock down restrictions were lifted the bakery was reopened and I was called back by the employer. I worked there for one month. Then the owner said to me that the bakery is in loss so he has to lay off some workers and I was one among them. It was a very difficult situation. I contacted one of my friends who was working in construction sector and requested him to give me a job. That’s how I got this job. The bakery work was much comfortable when compared to this. But I had to do this job for the survival of my family. I had no other choice.”

The post-pandemic or post-lockdown work atmosphere in various industries in Kerala is still evolving and progressing. However, till the time of our survey we found that, compared to pre-pandemic wages, the post-pandemic wages have declined in most of the sectors in which migrants are employed. In some sectors wages increased while in other sectors it remained constant. The migrants working in the hotels and bakeries were the hardest hit. They suffered substantial reduction in their wages, reflecting the crisis these industries faced during the lockdown and thereafter. A migrant from Madhya Pradesh working in a bakery in Perumbavoor said:

“I have been working in this bakery as a chef for the past five years. Before the pandemic, I used to get Rs. 1500 a day very regularly. Now my salary has been reduced to Rs. 1100 a day, and I am not even getting it regularly. Now wages are being delayed by two to three months, and in spite of this, the workload has increased because the number of staff has been reduced. The owner says that he has no other option since the bakery is in financial trouble. I explored the scope of moving to another bakery, but most of the bakeries were going through the same phase. The situation of bakery helpers (unskilled) is more pathetic than ours. Their wages have been halved, and most of them have been fired from work.”

Migrants engaged in plantation work also suffered a dip in their wages. Even though most of the plantation workers sustained their jobs even during the lockdown period, their salary was halved during this period. Even after reopening, the wages for most of these informal jobs did not reach the pre-pandemic level. Migrant women who were working as domestic help were also affected by a substantial reduction in their wages. A migrant woman from Odisha who works in Thrikakara said:

“I have been working as a house maid for 10 years in various houses in Ernakulam. Before pandemic I used to get Rs.700 a day. Now I am getting only Rs.550 a day. Jobs for domestic help was also reduced significantly because of the financial problems the house owners faced and those who are hiring maids are offering lesser wages.”

However, a few sectors also received increased wages compared to the pre-pandemic levels. Skilled construction workers or masons (locally known as Mistiris) received an increased salary. They are engaged in specialised construction works and often act as the leader of the workers’ group in specific work sites. They are usually mature migrants with ample years of experience. One such mistiri who works in Perumbavoor said:

We now have a good demand among contractors and employers. The main reason is that more construction work is happening now when compared to the pre-pandemic period. Many of the construction projects and plans that had been stalled for more than a year have now been restarted. This is a kind of construction boom.

However, the wages of unskilled construction workers who form the bulk of the migrant workforce in Kerala didn’t seem to have any positive effect of this “boom”. Similarly, there is a slight increase in the wages of skilled workers engaged in brick kilns but, wages for the unskilled brick kiln workers did not see any rise. In the plywood industries, which employ a large number of migrant labourers too, the wages remained the same both for skilled and unskilled workers when compared to pre-pandemic levels.

As far as working conditions are concerned, post the lockdown, it has deteriorated. A migrant working in a plywood factory in Perumbavoor said:

“Now the work has become harsher and harder. Before pandemic, we had to work a maximum of nine hours a day. If we worked extra time we used to get additional payment. But now we have to work 10-11 hours a day. Even if we work extra hours, we are not compensated for it. Previously we had a one-hour lunch break but now we are getting only half an hour for lunch.”

This is a testimony of the deteriorating working conditions for the migrants and is reported across all sectors where migrants are employed. A migrant who works in a brick kiln in Thrikakara said that now they are forced to make double the amount of bricks daily than before. He also added that if they did not meet the target, their wages are deducted. Migrant workers in the latex factory and fish processing units are also being forced to work longer hours. The deteriorating condition of machinery and infrastructure in factories are also adding to the suffering of the workers. A migrant working in a plywood factory in Perumbavoor said that 27 workers from their factory have been injured within 3 months because of the malfunctioning machines. He added that they are being forced to work on old machines which have been seriously damaged because of the lack of maintenance during the lockdown. Thus, the economic fallout of the epidemic seems to be borne disproportionately more by the workers who are at the receiving end of the spectrum. They are forced to shoulder the responsibility of increasing profits of their firms to make good the loss suffered during the pandemic without any regard to labour rights and decent work norms.

The living conditions of the migrant workers has also worsened. A migrant working in a tiles factory in Kalamasserry said:

“The residential facility for us has become very pathetic. Previously, three people used to live in a single room but now seven people have to adjust to a single room. The quality of the food has also deteriorated.”

A migrant from Thrikakara who is not attached to any contractor said that he struggles hard to survive every day because the prices of commodities have gone so much but his wages remain the same. He added that he has now developed a habit of skipping dinner so that he can save some money. This indicates the enormity of the crisis faced by these workers in the post-pandemic job market. It also proves that merely opening up the economy could not solve the problems, in fact it has created more challenges and has left the workers at the mercy of their possibly equally affected employer and the caprices of the market.

Interestingly, the second wave of the pandemic and the ensuing lockdowns did not affect the migrant workers much compared to the first wave. The number of migrants who were in Kerala was very small since most of the migrants who went home during the first wave did not come back at that point in time. Among those migrants present here, only a very tiny minority went home during the second wave. Since the lockdown restrictions were not as strict as the ones in place for the first wave, work was available for the migrants. So, most of them preferred to stay back in Kerala. The employers also wanted their workers to stay, and this time they provided help to the workers. A migrant working in a bricks factory in Thrikakara said:

“During the second wave, we did not face much problem. The factory operated every day and work went smoothly. Employer provided us with mask, sanitiser and other pre-cautionary measures. He was careful regarding our health because if any of us contracted Covid-19, he had to close the factory. Still some of our colleagues wanted to go home because of the memory of previous wave. But the employer assured us to provide all protection”.

CONCLUSION

This study has attempted to analyse how Covid-19 has affected the lives and livelihoods of interstate migrant workers in Kerala. We have seen that the pandemic and its aftermath have dealt a huge blow to migrant workers. They have endured enormous hardships like losing jobs, being stranded in the destination for months without any means to go back home, suffering starvation, the hostile attitude of natives, and so on. In that time of crisis, migrant workers became “invisible citizens,” who had been abandoned by all the stakeholders, including employers, contractors, the state, and society. The hardships they confronted during their arduous journey home were terrible. This study also tried to map the various strategies employed by migrants to survive the period between return migration and coming back to Kerala. After coming back to Kerala, their working environment has drastically changed, even though it varies in different sectors. Migrant workers from some sectors suffered a substantial reduction in their wages. Their working conditions have also deteriorated significantly. The pandemic and its aftermath have made migrant workers more vulnerable and poorer. It is time for the government and society to empathise with migrants’ plight and correct previous mistakes with policies and actions that can improve migrants’ lives and livelihoods.  Kerala government should look into the wage problem and harsh working conditions of the migrant workers in the post-opening-up work environment and should implement measures that can ameliorate their suffering. The government should also formulate welfare programs that can uplift the deteriorated living conditions of migrants. The state and central governments should adopt comprehensive social security measures for migrant workers and ensure the effective delivery of existing schemes to this population. Coordination and information-sharing mechanisms can be established between migrants’ origin and destination states to facilitate safe and responsible travel during crises such as COVID-19. It is crucial for the government and relevant agencies to ensure the registration of all migrant workers upon recruitment, thereby enabling their access to legal protections designed to safeguard their rights and well-being. Integrating migrant worker representatives into policy formulation at both local and state levels constitutes a critical step toward inclusive governance, enhancing the responsiveness and equity of institutional frameworks. Migrant-Community Mediation Councils can be established under local self-governments, with representation from migrants, local communities, civil society, and legal experts, which could address conflicts, monitor policing, safeguard migrant dignity, and promote coexistence between migrants and natives through dialogue and participatory conflict resolution. Only a comprehensive and all-encompassing policy framework that is capable of addressing their working and living conditions can deliver justice to migrant workers by helping them come out of the crisis created by COVID-19.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The study received ethical approval from the appropriate institutional review committee, and all procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with established ethical guidelines. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the research.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST 

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Similar demonstrations also occurred at the towns of Pattambi, Koothattukulam and Payyannur in the districts of Palakkad, Ernakulam and Kannur districts respectively (Peter, Sanghvi & Narendran, 2020).

The Indian Railways started running “Shramik Special” trains on May 1, 2020, to return the helpless interstate migrants who were trapped in their destinations due to lockdown to their home states.

REFERENCES

1. Abdul Azeez, E. P., Negi, D. P., Rani, A., & Kumar, A. P. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on migrant women workers in India. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 62(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2020.1843513.
2. Alam, M., & Zaini, S. H. R. (2021). Covid-19 and the plight of migrant worker in India. Community, Work & Family, 24(5), 512–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2021.1975651.
3. Barman, N. (2020). COVID-19 and livelihood challenges of migrant workers after returning home: A case study of reverse migration from Kerala to West Bengal. The Urban World: Quarterly Publication, 13(3), 13–20. https://www.aiilsg.org/pdf/The-Urban-World_July-September-2020.pdf.
4. Chakraborty, M., Mukherjee, S., & Dasgupta, P. (2020). Bengali migrant workers in south India: An inquiry into their earnings and livings. Kolkata: Institute of Development Studies.
5. Choudhari, R. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic: Mental health challenges of internal migrant workers of India. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 54, 102254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102254.
6. Dandekar, A., & Ghai, R. (2020). Migration and reverse migration in the age of COVID-19. Economic and Political Weekly, 55(19), 28–31.
7. Deshinngkar Priya, Kumar Sushil, Chobey H. Kumar. & Kumar Dhananjay (2006). The role of migration and remittances in promoting livelihoods in Bihar. London: Overseas development institute.
8. Dhar, N. S., Nupur, S. And Dutta, M. (2022). COVID-19 induced income loss among
9. Migrant Workers: Evidence from Eight Villages of Bihar”, Economic Papers, 41(4): 325-346.
10. Duggal, C., Ray, S., Konantambigi, R., & Kothari, A. (2022). The nowhere people: Lived experiences of migrant workers during Covid-19 in India, Current psychology, 41(11): 8214–8223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02220-6.
11. Kumar, Ashwani and Bhagat R.B. (2021). Migrants, Mobility and Citizenship in India. Routledge.
12. Kumar, K., Mehra, A., Sahoo, S., Nehra, R., & Grover, S. (2020). The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown on the migrant workers: A cross-sectional survey. Asian journal of psychiatry, 53(1). 102252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102252.
13. Kumar Shailendra and Choudhury Sanghamitra (2021). Migrant workers and human rights: A critical study on India’s COVID-19 lockdown policy. Social Sciences & Humanities Open. 3(1): 125-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100130.
14. The Times of India. (2020, March 30). Migrant workers sprayed with disinfectant in UP. The Times of India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/migrant-workers-sprayed-with-disinfectant-in-up/articleshow/74888075.cms.
15. Naregal, Veena (2021). Labour ‘Invisibility’ during COVID-19 Times. Economic and Political Review, 56(34): 37-43.
16. Saikia, D. (2015). Migrant workers in Kerala: A study on their socio-economic conditions. Journal of Economic and Social Development, 11(2): 29-43. https://doi.10.2139/ssrn.2757483.
17. Suresh Rajani, James Justine and Balraju R.S.J. (2020). Migrant Workers at Crossroads–The Covid-19 Pandemic and the Migrant Experience in India. Social Work in Public Health, 35(7): 633-643, DOI: 10.1080/19371918.2020.1808552.
18. Yadav, S., & Priya, K. R. (2021). Migrant Workers and COVID-19: Listening to the Unheard Voices of Invisible India. Journal of the Anthropological Survey of India, 70(1): 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/2277436X20968984.