An Analysis Of The Socio-Economic Status Of Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Employees: A Study Of Bhilai Steel Plant
Keywords:
Scheduled Castes1; Scheduled Tribes2; Socio-economic status3; Bhilai Steel Plant4; Reservation policy5; Public sector employment6; Chi-square test7Abstract
This empirical study examines the socio-economic status of Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) employees of the Bhilai Steel Plant, a major public sector undertaking of the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) located in Durg district of Chhattisgarh, India. The plant was chosen because it combines a long reservation history with a workforce drawn from tribal Chhattisgarh. Although constitutional guarantees, reservation policy and affirmative action have opened government employment to historically deprived communities, the realisation of genuine socio-economic parity inside India's heavy industrial workforce remains an under-researched issue. The investigation rests on primary data collected through a structured questionnaire administered to 150 SC and ST employees selected by stratified random sampling from seven functional departments, together with a reference group of 60 general-category employees used only for benchmarking. The schedule covered demographic profile, education, designation, income, housing, healthcare, children's schooling, asset holding, social participation and perceptions of workplace equity. Data were analysed using percentages, averages, a composite Socio-Economic Status (SES) index and chi-square tests of association. Occupational segregation and promotion equity were examined as linked dimensions. Results show that secure public employment has raised incomes, yet the composite SES score of SC employees (58.4) and ST employees (49.5) remains well below the general-category benchmark (74.6), and ST respondents score lowest on education, assets and social participation; 41.3 per cent perceive bias in promotion. The paper concludes that formal job equity has not by itself produced wider socio-economic equality, and it recommends mentoring, promotion monitoring and community-linked welfare measures.


