Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, the term “Life vs Livelihood” has been widespread. It essentially alludes to the question of whether rescuing people from the virus is more vital than guaranteeing continual employment, which is also necessary for survival. With the virus sweeping the globe and putting governments defenceless, the only way to stop it seemed to be to put a complete halt to all activity. Anything that required humans to communicate with one another could be fatal, thus the only way to save humanity is to minimise or eliminate it. As a result, countries all across the world implemented lockdowns, with India’s being the largest. But why do some people in society continue to suffer? And why is it that the worst-affected groups are nearly invariably found in the informal sector? The solution to these questions depends in how they are affected by the term “Life vs Livelihood.”
If you asked a formal sector employee to choose between “Life” and “Livelihood,” they would almost certainly choose “Life.” It’s only natural that we place a premium on saving lives. Most, if not all, workers in the informal sector, on the other hand, would say that their livelihoods are more vital. The disparity in their viewpoints stems from the fact that their lifestyles are so dissimilar. Working from home is manageable for a salaried person because the only thing they have to give up is their social life. For an informal sector worker, it means being fired from your job, having to battle for basic requirements, and having no certainty about your future.
Your livelihood determines your life for an informal sector worker such as daily wage labourers, domestic assistants, street vendors, and so on. Why is this the case? It’s because of insecure working circumstances, a lack of job security, barely making minimum pay, and lack of official recognition or protection. In a situation like this, any amount of money will assist you in surviving. A lockdown would be equivalent to severing these workers’ lifelines and forcing them to fend for themselves. As a result, the expression “Life vs Livelihood” is meaningless to them, as they can only prosper and survive in this world by working.
Since a result, the informal sector is among the hardest hit, as they must now deal with both pre-existing social impediments and the added economic/financial load imposed by the coronavirus. If they are not dismissed, they are frequently abused to work longer hours to compensate for decreased production. Furthermore, because the task in this phase necessitates physical presence, individuals are compelled to expose themselves to the virus. How can they survive when everything is working against them? The government must take action in this area. They are citizens of the country, even though they are untaxed informal workers. Because this industry accounts for 50% of India’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product), the government must take steps to protect it so that they, too, may one day have to choose between “life” and “livelihood.”
