Case for a living wage
The call by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) to raise the minimum wage to Rs75,000 is neither utopian nor excessive. It is a long overdue response to the crushing weight of inflation that has eroded the very notion of a living wage. In a country where essential commodities now seem to change prices as often as the weather, expecting a working-class family to survive, let alone live with dignity, on the current minimum wage is simply untenable.
It is telling that while the ruling elite have over the years approved staggering increases in their own salaries and perks, labourers and daily wage earners continue to be denied even the most basic protections. This widening gap between privilege and penury reflects a moral failure of governance. The current minimum wage does not even begin to account for the real cost of living for a family of five.
Expenses related to food, education, healthcare and transport have all spiralled beyond reach. And yet, workers are expected to absorb the shocks of inflation and regressive taxation — often justified under the guise of structural reforms dictated by international financial institutions. A society that deprives its labour force of decent living standards cannot expect sustainable growth, much less social cohesion.
Raising the minimum wage to Rs75,000 must be paired with robust enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance across sectors. Furthermore, such a revision must be based on empirical cost-of-living data, regularly updated, and accompanied by measures to formalise the vast informal labour sector. Without implementation, even the most progressive wage laws remain paper promises. Ultimately, a nation's priorities are laid bare in how it treats its most vulnerable.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
12 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Wheat cultivators to protest across Punjab
The Kissan Ittehad and the Sindh Abadgar Alliance have announced a protest movement across Punjab starting from August 11 due to the government's "failure" to fix the official wheat support price. "On August 11, a symbolic funeral for agriculture will be held outside the DC office in Kasur, and a protest will be held outside the Hyderabad Press Club on August 20," Kissan Ittehad Chairman Khalid Hussain Batth said on Saturday at a press conference at the Karachi Press Club. Sindh Abadgar Alliance President Zubair Talpur was also present on the occasion. Batth said protests would take place across all provinces, followed by a march toward Islamabad. "This time, we will protest before the wheat cultivation season begins," he said, clarifying that this movement has no affiliation with any political party. He added that over the past two years, the cost of wheat cultivation has been Rs4,000 per 40kg, while the government purchased wheat from them at only Rs2,200. "We are ready for a forensic audit," he said. "The government demands up to 45% in taxes but how can we pay taxes when we are not even making a profit?" He said if the government does not set a wheat support price before sowing begins, they will initiate talks with the prime minister and chief ministers. If there is still no decision, province-wide protests will be launched in Punjab on August 11 and in Sindh on August 20. "The government has failed to fix wheat prices for the last two years," he noted.
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Express Tribune
SLIC officer penalised for online abuse
In a defining moment for digital accountability and workplace justice, President Asif Ali Zardari has upheld the decision of the Federal Ombudsperson for Protection Against Harassment of Women at Workplace (FOSPAH) in a high-profile case involving sexual harassment via digital platforms at the State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan (SLIC). The complainant, Urooj Wahid, had filed a complaint under the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act, 2010, alleging inappropriate and unsolicited messages from Kamran Channa, Assistant General Manager, which included sexually suggestive comments. While Kamran admitted to sending the messages, he contested the findings of FOSPAH, which had imposed the major penalty of removal from service along with a fine of Rs300,000. Channa filed a representation with the President of Pakistan. According to the spokesperson for FOSPAH, upon personal appearance at the hearing before the president, Channa expressed unreserved regret and issued a public apology to both Urooj and her mother, without presenting any further defence. The president, after hearing both parties and acknowledging the complainant's mental and professional hardship, affirmed the factual findings of harassment, converting the penalty of removal from service into compulsory retirement, citing Channa's 29 years of previously unblemished service as a mitigating factor. However, in a powerful gesture of support for survivors, the President enhanced the compensation to Rs1million, recognising the mental trauma and forced resignation endured by Urooj.
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
Challenging dominant ideology of patriarchy
EDITORIAL: That the scourge of toxic patriarchy has long made life a relentless battle for women in Pakistan — curbing their freedoms, crushing their agency and denying them basic rights in homes, workplaces, courts, and corridors of power — is a brutal reality that demands urgent reckoning. It is highly welcome then that the Supreme Court's July 23 verdict directly confronts one facet of this deeply entrenched patriarchal mindset, unequivocally condemning the cruel and discriminatory weaponisation of a woman's infertility as a means to strip her of rights guaranteed under Pakistani law. Chief Justice Yahya Afridi, while dismissing a petition in which a husband had challenged his wife's right to maintenance and dower, castigated him for the sheer cruelty he inflicted upon her, not just in marriage but through prolonged litigation. The petitioner had abandoned his wife within a year of their union and failed to provide any support or maintenance thereafter. Years later, when she turned to the courts seeking recovery of her dowry, maintenance and dower, he responded with some vindictive claims, alleging she was medically unfit for conjugal duties, incapable of bearing children, and effectively challenged her identity as a woman under the law to deny her rightful legal entitlements. This deeply offensive and baseless claim, disproven by medical evidence, formed the crux of his legal strategy. In doing so, he subjected his estranged wife to years of public humiliation, emotional trauma and highly invasive medical examinations through three tiers of court, causing the judicial process itself to become a tool of degradation. In his seven-page order, where the petitioner was also fined Rs500,000 for his malicious assertions, the chief justice made it unequivocally clear that infertility, in any case, cannot be used as a pretext to deny a woman her right to dower or maintenance, nor can it be grounds to question her womanhood. In a country where women are routinely deprived of maintenance on flimsy, fabricated or no grounds at all, the moral clarity and unambiguous reasoning of this ruling decisively shuts the door on all such regressive justifications. The Supreme Court's ruling is a commendable intervention, but more must be done to protect women against such malevolent legal harassment and systemic erosion of their rights. As the chief justice noted, '… women in our society constitute a vulnerable group, whose dignity requires vigilant protection and care'. In an ideal system, the respondent should never have had to defend her womanhood in open court, an ordeal that could have been avoided with greater sensitivity and restraint from the lower judiciary. While the Supreme Court has, in recent years, largely stood firmly on the side of justice for women facing systemic and social abuse, it is the lower courts where the adoption of more gender-sensitive approaches is essential to ensure that the legal process does not become a harrowing experience for female litigants. Therefore, more gender-sensitive training, procedural safeguards and legal protections must be introduced to ensure that women are not re-victimised by the very system they turn to for justice. Here, it is also important to question societal norms that have turned infertility and personal choices around child-bearing into sources of stigma, reducing a woman's worth to her reproductive capacity. This mindset not only fuels discrimination within families and communities but also enables structural injustices to be inflicted upon women without shame or consequence. Breaking this stigma is vital to ensuring women are treated with dignity, both in society and before the law. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
