Precarity in the Sociology Job Market in India
Note: Rituparna Patgiri continues the Miami Institute’s sociology forum, emphasizing that: “While Sociology has expanded in India in recent years, it has become equally difficult to obtain teaching and research jobs in the discipline.” Patgiri calls to action fellow sociologists, concluding that “one must also wonder and ask what sociologists can do. How can sociologists in positions of power who make decisions regarding employment and other opportunities help precarious scholars mitigate their position?”
Compared to other social sciences, Sociology has been a relatively new discipline in India (Beteille 1973). It is also closely connected to other disciplines like Social Anthropology. In the early years of its growth in India, most sociologists were trained in Social Anthropology. As such, there has been an overlap in both the subject matter (caste, religion, kinship, etc.) and methods (ethnography, observation, etc.) that social anthropologists and sociologists use (Mukherjee 1977; Beteille in Das 2013; Palackal 2015). There is a lot of disciplinary fluidity between the disciplines and hence departments. Social anthropologists have been regularly recruited to teach in the Sociology departments.
In recent years, Sociology has expanded and is now taught in almost all major universities in India. It has become a popular discipline in both public and private universities. There is a focus on the ‘contemporary’ in the Sociology curricula (Jaiswal 2019). It is perceived as a discipline that makes one ‘employable’. Sociology is a popular choice amongst various civil and administrative service job aspirants as well as for people who want to work in the development sector, publishing, data analysis, human resource, market research, media, etc. The rising popularity and growth of Sociology can be located within the neo-liberal agenda of the Indian state that believes in the ‘professionalisation of education’. Education is seen as marketable and so is a subject like Sociology. Hence its increasing appeal amongst job aspirants.
However, there is a paradox here. While Sociology has expanded in India in recent years, it has become equally difficult to obtain teaching and research jobs in the discipline. One is expected to present and publish research papers, win research grants and awards as well as possess teaching experience to get a job. In most cases, these are the minimum qualifications required for a non-tenure track job. This process of ‘becoming a sociologist’ is layered and unequal, particularly for people of marginalized caste, class, ethnicity, gender, region and religion.
The rise of neoliberal policies in recent years has meant that there is an increasing trend of both privatisation and casualisation of academic labour. While many private universities now have Sociology departments, their salaries remain much below the scales that the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India recommends. A lot of teachers are expected to perform several administrative and other non-academic tasks along with teaching and research. There are strict rules dictating what clothes are to be worn and how many publications should be brought out in a year. The renewal of one’s job is dependent not just on academic performance, but also on adhering to these diktats of dress codess and publications. One is in constant fear of losing their job because of external factors such as being perceived as ‘less friendly’ or as ‘someone who says no to extra work’. Saying no to additional work is not really an option that can be exercised.
Along with the rise of private universities in India, one can observe a shift towards the casualisation of academic labour in public universities (Chaudhuri et al. in Heath et al. 2022). Most appointments are of guest, contractual and ad-hoc nature, that is, non-tenure track. To give an example, more than 4000 ad-hoc teachers are employed at the University of Delhi alone (The Indian Express 2022). These are non-regularised posts which mean that the teachers can be dismissed anytime. They do not have job security, adequate leaves, an increase in pay, or promotion opportunities. Most ad-hoc teachers live in constant stress that their jobs will not be renewed in the next term.
Sociologically, such experiences of fear and anxiety have been characterised as ‘risk’ (Beck 1992) and ‘precarity’ (Bourdieu 1985). Being in a risky, precarious position reduces an individual’s choices significantly. This casualisation of academic labour has meant that a vast majority of teachers are excluded from further academic pursuits. They cannot pursue advanced research degrees or projects for lack of study or duty leave. Most of them have to pursue their PhDs – a research degree that is mandatory for teaching now – along with managing their precarious jobs. Only a few have the luxury of doing a PhD without a job because of lack of funding.
At this point, I want to go back to the paradox that I had referred to earlier. While the temporary teachers cannot avail leave to pursue their academic goals, they are expected to possess those qualifications while applying for jobs. In most cases, even the teaching experience acquired as a temporary faculty is not considered as part of teaching experience. Such discrimination and unequal practices are not limited to academic institutions in India alone. One requires an institutional affiliation to apply for fellowships, research grants, panel proposals, etc. at the international level. But temporary faculties do not possess an institutional affiliation. Hence, they face systematic exclusion from applying to opportunities that would help them in furthering their careers.
Most people do not have a choice but to accept these terms and conditions considering the status of the job market. According to the Centre for Monitoring Economy (CIME), there are almost 53 million unemployed people in India as of December 2021 (Seth Sharma 2022). Thus, in such a situation, even being able to procure a casual job is seen as an achievement.
As sociologists, we teach and write about the inequality and injustice that pervades our societies. In the 1970s, there was a call to look at disciplinary practices reflexively (Gouldner 1970). In the sociological sense, it means that we as sociologists should reflect on our own positions in society. While the issue of academic precarity and casualisation is a larger structural issue, one must also wonder and ask what sociologists can do. How can sociologists in positions of power who make decisions regarding employment and other opportunities help precarious scholars mitigate their position?
Let me give an example. As most journals are moving towards open access publishing, they expect the authors or their institutions to pay the open access charge (OAC). Open access publishing leads to wider readership and citations. But it is too much money for precarious scholars, particularly from the global South, who cannot ask their institutions to pay the cost because of ‘lack of affiliation’. As such, while they are the ones who need more readership and citations, they are excluded from it. It is time that academics (sociologists) in positions of power put more thought into how these difficulties can be reduced. Minimizing publication and application costs for people who do not have permanent/tenure track jobs can be a step in this direction.
Sociology is not something that should be just practised inside the classroom. Instead, the tenets that we teach – feminism, reflexivity and justice – should be a part of how our lives in universities and institutions operate. Recognizing that precarious teachers and scholars need special attention to improve their workplace conditions should be an integral part of how Sociology is practised at the institutional level.
-Rituparna Patgiri
Rituparna Patgiri teaches Sociology at Indraprastha College for Women (IPCW), University of Delhi. She has a PhD in Sociology from Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi. She is also one of the co-founders of Doing Sociology – an online platform dedicated to making sociological knowledge accessible.
References:
Beck, Ulrich. (1992). Risk Society; Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
Beteille, Andre. (1976). The Teaching of Sociology in India. Sociological Bulletin. 22(2): 216-233. Sage Publications.
Beteille, Andre. (2003). ‘Sociology and Social Anthropology’ in Veena Das (edited) The Oxford India Companion to Sociology and Social Anthropology. Pp. 37-63. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Bourdeiu, Pierre. (1998). Acts of Resistance; Against the Tyranny of the Market. New York: New Press.
Chaudhuri, Maitrayee, Deepali Aparajita Dungdung, Dinesh Rajak, and Rituparna Patgiri. (2022). The Pandemic and our Entangled Lives: Experiencing the Many Relations of Ruling in Melanie Heath, Akosua K. Darkwah, Josephine Beoku-Betts and Bandana Purkayastha edited Global Feminist Autoethnographies During COVID-19: Displacements and Disruptions. Pp. 24-39. Routledge.
Jaiswal, Niharika. (2019). Practice of Sociology: Comparative Study of Public and Private Universities in India. Contemporary Education Dialogue. 16(2): 229-249.
The Indian Express. (2022). Over 4,200 ad-hoc teachers employed in DU colleges: Govt. The Indian Express. 3rd February 2022. https://indianexpress.com/article/jobs/over-4200-ad-hoc-teachers-employed-in-delhi-university-colleges-govt-7753512/
Mukherjee, Ramakrishna. (1977). Trends in Indian Sociology. Current Sociology. 25(3): 1-147.
Palackal, Antony. (2015). Trends in Indian Sociology of the Post-1991 Era. Sociological Bulletin. 64(2): 227-252. Indian Sociological Society.
Seth Sharma, Yogima. (2022). India has 53 million unemployed people as of Dec 2021: CMIE. The Economic Times. 20th January 2022. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/indicators/india-has-53-million-unemployed-people-as-of-dec-2021-cmie/articleshow/89016043.cms
