Gender, Work, and Society in India: An Intersectional Analysis

In India, the question of who works, what kind of work they do, and how much they are paid for it cannot be separated from two foundational social structures: gender and caste. A woman’s experience in the workforce is not shaped by gender alone – it is simultaneously shaped by which caste she belongs to, whether she lives in a rural or urban area, and how much economic mobility her family has. Understanding this complexity requires an intersectional lens – a framework, originally developed by scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, that examines how multiple forms of discrimination overlap and compound each other. In India, this intersection is especially pronounced and shapes the daily realities of millions of working women.

The gendered division of labor in India
Caste, occupation, and women’s work
Upper-caste women and domestic seclusion
Lower-caste women: double burden, limited mobility
The domestic work sector: where caste and gender converge
Barriers to gender parity in the workforce
MGNREGA and its impact on rural women’s employment
Gender-sensitive design
Impact on women’s empowerment
Limitations and ongoing challenges
The path forward: structural change, not just policy fixes

The gendered division of labor in India

In Indian society, the division between productive work (paid labor in agriculture, manufacturing, or services) and reproductive work (unpaid domestic labor, childcare, and elder care) has historically fallen along gender lines. Women are primarily assigned reproductive work, while men are associated with paid employment and public authority. This gendered division is socially constructed, not biologically determined – women are socialized into caregiving roles, and their paid work, even when economically vital to the household, is treated as secondary.

The consequences of this perception are measurable. According to the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) 2022-23, women earn on average 20-30% less than men across sectors, and are disproportionately represented in informal employment, where they lack job security, social protection, and bargaining power. Indian households often require women to prioritize domestic work, and women are also constrained by marriage, religion, caste, and economic class – making exit from unpaid domestic roles structurally difficult.

Caste, occupation, and women’s work

Caste in India is not merely a social identity – it is historically an occupational one. The caste system assigned specific types of labor to specific groups, and those occupational patterns persist in different forms today. Historically, lower-caste individuals were expected to engage in manual and domestic work, with women assisting in domestic work in higher-caste households. This structural expectation continues to drive lower-caste women’s concentration in informal and manual labor sectors.

Upper-caste women and domestic seclusion

For women from upper-caste households, the dynamic is strikingly different. Upper-caste women are often secluded and engaged in domestic activities, while middle-caste women may work in their own fields. This seclusion – historically linked to notions of purdah, honor, and family status – keeps many upper-caste women out of paid work despite relatively higher educational attainment. Research confirms that these norms are typically more binding among wealthier, upper-caste households, suggesting that economic growth alone may not alter their influence. In this context, a woman not working can itself signal social status.

Lower-caste women: double burden, limited mobility

Lower-caste women, and especially Dalit and Adivasi women, face the sharpest end of intersectional inequality. Dalit and Adivasi women are disproportionately represented in the most insecure and hazardous forms of labor – agricultural work, paid domestic service, sanitation, and construction. The employment sector in India reflects a stark reality where women are systematically relegated to the lowest echelons of the labor pyramid, and this marginalization is not incidental – it is the outcome of deeply embedded structural hierarchies.

In the workplace, Dalit women frequently face discrimination, limiting their career growth and financial independence. Even formal legal protections often fall short in practice, because legal frameworks often fail to address the intersection of gender and caste adequately, leaving many women vulnerable.

Research on skill-training programs in India has found that SC/ST women face the lowest aspiration and expectation levels across all groups – a “double jeopardy” where the disadvantages of caste and gender are cumulative, not simply additive.

The domestic work sector: where caste and gender converge

Paid domestic work is one of the most visible sites where caste and gender intersect in the Indian labor market. The history of domestic labor in India is deeply rooted in its caste system – domestic labor was traditionally performed by lower castes who performed menial tasks for upper-caste families. Today, the sector remains heavily feminized, with most domestic workers being women from marginalized caste backgrounds working without contracts, job security, or legal protection.

Female domestic workers are particularly vulnerable, owing to the intersection of social, economic, and gender disparities – they work in private dwellings, beyond regulatory scrutiny or support systems. The societal norms that define women as natural caregivers and homemakers reinforce this power imbalance between employer and worker, making the domestic work sector one of the most exploitative in the country.

Barriers to gender parity in the workforce

India’s female labor force participation rate (LFPR) has been a subject of significant concern. Despite a growing economy, women’s workforce engagement has declined over several decades and remains among the lowest in the world for a major economy. Several structural barriers explain this:

Domestic burden: The main reason women give for not being part of the labor force is domestic work (85%), which reflects deep-rooted patriarchal gender roles and norms. Over 90% of women who do not work were primarily occupied with domestic duties the previous year, with many reporting no other household member available to carry those tasks.

Legal and normative constraints: Indian women are still subject to laws governing which shifts and industries they can work in, and employers may be less likely to hire a woman over an equally qualified man as long as norms against women’s market engagement persist.

Marriage and mobility restrictions: Among upper-caste households, married women’s leisure can often be a form of status-building, meaning that a wife’s withdrawal from the labor market is actively encouraged as a marker of family prestige. Women also navigate restricted mobility in many states, which physically limits access to employment.

Wage discrimination: Gender and social discrimination are key issues in the Indian labor market, and disadvantaged groups like Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are associated with low-paid, insecure employment despite reservation policies in public sector jobs.

MGNREGA and its impact on rural women’s employment

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), enacted in 2005, is one of the most significant policy interventions targeting both rural poverty and gender inequality in India. The scheme provides a legal guarantee of 100 days of wage employment per year to any rural household, and has built-in gender-sensitive provisions that make it distinct from most employment programs.

Gender-sensitive design

MGNREGA explicitly establishes that more than one-third of participants should be women – the program currently sees a female workforce of roughly 57 percent. Other gender-sensitive provisions include equal wages for men and women, mandatory childcare facilities at worksites when six or more children are present, and a requirement that work be provided within 5 km of the applicant’s village. This proximity provision is particularly significant because it allows women to balance income work with domestic responsibilities and overcomes restrictions on their mobility in conservative areas.

Impact on women’s empowerment

According to a working paper by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), MGNREGA has significantly contributed to narrowing gender wage gaps and improving compliance with minimum wage regulations in rural India. Women who participate in the scheme gain not only income but also greater control over household decision-making. Many studies indicate high levels of participation of women in MGNREGA, as well as women reporting positive experiences from this work.

The program has also had indirect effects. Under MGNREGA, the clause of equal pay for men and women has been adhered to and has resulted in shaping a better socio-economic scenario for rural women, because the guaranteed minimum wage under MGNREGA is often higher than the market wage women receive in agricultural labor – making formal participation in the scheme economically rational for women who previously accepted lower wages.

Limitations and ongoing challenges

Despite these achievements, MGNREGA has not fully addressed the structural barriers women face. The scheme has yet to address socio-cultural barriers such as restrictive norms about women’s mobility and employment outside the home, and participation rates vary sharply by state – reaching as high as 89% in Kerala but falling to 30-35% in Uttar Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir. Practical barriers also persist: lack of childcare, the physical nature of work, social norms, illegal presence of contractors, delays in payment, and exclusion from planning stages all limit women’s effective participation.

The path forward: structural change, not just policy fixes

India has made incremental progress – the gender wage gap has narrowed in some sectors, women’s enrollment in education has improved substantially, and programs like MGNREGA have expanded rural women’s economic participation. Yet progress is uneven and the gains often bypass women at the bottom of the caste hierarchy. Addressing women’s labor conditions in India requires structural interventions, not just employment generation – including recognition of unpaid work, expanded social protection for informal workers, and equal wages across all sectors.

An intersectional approach is essential here. Policies that target “women” as a uniform group miss the compounded disadvantages of women who are simultaneously Dalit, rural, and informally employed. Only by acknowledging and addressing these multiple layers of discrimination can we hope to achieve true equality for all. That means building legal frameworks that speak to the intersection of gender and caste, creating workplaces where Dalit and Adivasi women can work without discrimination, and recognizing the enormous economic value of the unpaid domestic labor that women contribute daily – labor that sustains the entire economy yet remains invisible in official metrics.

What do you think? Given that upper-caste women and Dalit women face vastly different barriers in the Indian workforce, should government policies be designed to target these groups separately rather than treating all women as a single category? And if unpaid domestic work were officially counted as economic contribution, how do you think that would change the conversation around women’s labor force participation in India?

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

References

PDF 📄

Table of Contents

The gendered division of labor in India 🔗

Caste, occupation, and women’s work 🔗

Upper-caste women and domestic seclusion 🔗

Lower-caste women: double burden, limited mobility 🔗

The domestic work sector: where caste and gender converge 🔗

Barriers to gender parity in the workforce 🔗

MGNREGA and its impact on rural women’s employment 🔗

Gender-sensitive design 🔗

Impact on women’s empowerment 🔗

Limitations and ongoing challenges 🔗

The path forward: structural change, not just policy fixes 🔗