Day 6: இணைவோம், கதைப்போம்: A Training Reunion

"Inaivom, Kathaippom" was designed as a reunion and review session for those who participated in Prajnya's 2019 training session for those serving as External/ NGO members on Internal Committees. We invited all the participants to join us at some point during the lunch hour, any time between 12:30 and 2:30 on the 30th of November, just to catch up on how things were going.

Sudaroli from Prajnya hosted the gathering, while Swarna and Pozhil supported her. The following training 'alumnae' attended: 

• Jayanthi, SIMCODESS, Dindigul
• Alagurani, TLRF, Madurai
• Berneth Premila, Blossom Trust, Chennai
• Senthil Kumari, ODAM trust, Virudhunagar
• Sumathi, NMCT, Pollachi
• Jenitha, NMCT, Coimbatore
• Rani ,  HELP Mahalir Trust, Pudukottai                                                          
• Priya, People's Watch, Madurai
• Vasantha,  ODAM trust, Virudhunagar 
• Karthika, NMCT, Coimbatore

We shared how the lockdown had treated each of us and affected our work, specifically on Internal Committees and workplace sexual harassment trainings. 

• While the lockdown had affected everyone's workplace sexual harassment compliance-related work, for some this was not an anomaly. Even before the lockdown, they had been placed on committees nominally and the committees had never met. 
• One person mentioned a committee that did meet during the lockdown but without the external member, which is invalid. 
• Companies said it was not necessary to have an external member if there was a lawyer on board (this is not correct).
• Some organisations had resumed training, both in companies and also in the community on the issue. 
• One person mentioned the challenge of being asked to speak but given only 5-10 minutes. We suggested that she use those to get to the core of the matter: that employers are responsible for workers' safety by law and that workers are entitled to and have a right to expect safe workplaces. 
• One person mentioned that while she heard of workplace harassment incidents, women were still reluctant to file an official complaint. 
• While the training last year was useful, people wanted more--at least for the chance to travel and meet others doing the same work--and also felt that the training should reach further out to rural women. 
• There was mention of an RTI query to find out about the Madurai Local Committee that had not borne fruit. We discussed follow-up. Prajnya maintains a database that we said we would share. 

Participants mentioned growing rights violations, including domestic violence and child marriage (one said she had stopped about 20 such weddings). In their view, these domestic violence victims did not want anyone to intervene. 

While there were challenge on the home front (food shortages, interrupted schooling, etc) and the work front (no transport), many of them expressed satisfaction about the work they were in fact able to do.

For Prajnya, what was clear was that facilitating this kind of informal interaction and sharing among social workers across the state would be a very useful contribution on our part. 

(Based on notes by Sudaroli Ramasamy.)