NEW DELHI: The recent announcement of a gender-based reservation policy reserving 80 per cent of nursing posts for females at Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) hospitals didn’t go well with nursing professionals. The nursing federations argue that the policy undermines meritocracy and overlooks the contributions of male nurses.
The All India ESIC Nursing Officers’ Federation has stated that it will mobilise people to challenge the policy, calling it discriminatory, unconstitutional and unethical. “This proposal is against the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948 and also a blatant violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution of India. It will lead to gender discrimination in public employment,” said Chandrani Deewanji, Vice-President, East Zone of ESIC nursing federation.
“Men can excel in this profession, and no evidence suggests that nursing is unsuitable for males. Restricting the profession largely to females alone contradicts the principles of modernity and progressive values,” she added.
Arun Krishnan, Joint secretary, South Zone of the federation, said the policy is not implemented in any central hospital like RML and Safdarjung except AIIMS which has been given the status of an autonomous institute. He also accused the ESIC headquarters for not consulting with the nursing cadre before imposing the reservation policy.
“We approached the Director General with our opposition regarding the policy on October 3. We were assured that a final decision would only be made after carefully considering all relevant aspects. However, despite the assurances, the proposal was placed before the corporation meeting held on October 8 and was hastily approved without adequately addressing our concerns,” Krishnan said.
In an interview, Jodhraj Bairwa, President, All India ESIC Nursing Officers’ Federation, Ashish Srivastava discusses the various aspects of reservation policy Excerpts.
Why are you opposing the gender-based reservation policy?
We oppose the gender-based reservation policy for several reasons. Firstly, it’s unconstitutional. The 80:20 gender reservation violates Article 16 of the Constitution of India, which ensures equality of opportunity in public employment. Recruitment should be based solely on merit, not gender. Gender-based reservations reinforce outdated stereotypes about certain jobs being suitable for specific genders, which is regressive and discriminatory in nature. The notion that nursing is only suited for women perpetuates harmful gender stereotypes. Besides, reserving vacancies for women and men leaves no space for transgender candidates, effectively excluding them from government service opportunities.
What are consequences and implications of this policy?
The policy disproportionately affects male nursing officers, limiting their chances of selection in recruitment processes despite qualifications and experience. Implementing such a policy invites legal scrutiny.
How would the policy impact the cadre and the profession? What kind of challenges would it pose in the future?
Healthcare is a sector that thrives on diversity—different perspectives and approaches—whether from male, female, or transgender professionals—enhance patient care. Limiting nursing to females alone deprives the healthcare system of this diversity and can reduce its overall effectiveness. Policies that disproportionately favour one gender can result in reverse discrimination.
Does its successful implementation open a gateway for replication in other central hospitals?
Yes, it could set a precedent for other central hospitals. Implementing the policy without sufficient challenge may encourage similar policies to be replicated across other government institutions. It could also lead to widespread discontent among healthcare professionals and create a ripple effect of protests and legal challenges across the sector.
