A MEMORY LANE
Extract of an article appeared in the July-August 1984 issue of Vimochana Vartha Patra, a bimonthly women’s Magazine which implies “No struggle goes in vain”– By Com. A. Savitha, Organizing Secretary-CHQ. Is reproduced below.
A DEFINING MOMENT
The Bangalore Trunk Exchange Women’s Strike of 1984
Original Article appeared in the July-August 1984 issue of Vimochana Vartha Patra, a bimonthly women’s magazine.
It is quite common for the majority of middle class women, who constantly yearn to live in a cinematic world of sarees, jewellery, and material wealth, to remain passive regarding the fundamental struggles of life. In stark contrast to this, the operators at the Bengaluru Trunk Exchange are raising their voices against the issues they face.
Women working as telephone operators at the Trunk Exchange went on a sudden strike on March 9, 1984. Leaving their work at exactly 1:30 PM, the operators held a strike lasting a total of four and a half hours. Due to this protest, the Trunk Exchange became completely non-functional. The female employees working here faced numerous hardships:
• Due to a shortage of staff, a single operator working the night shift was forced to manage three switchboards simultaneously. As a consequence, a high volume of calls ended up being cancelled.
• Employee efficiency could only be fairly measured if the equipment functioned properly. On the Delhi cordless board, connections could often be established for only one out of ten attempts, resulting in just one successful call per hour.
• Due to persistent technical faults, connections to major cities like Delhi, Calcutta and Bombay could not be established, and some lines remained permanently asleep.
• Although letters of appreciation were given to three operators every month, memos were issued to those whose performance fell below the average line. Even when an operator’s efficiency dropped solely due to technical glitches, a black mark was still stamped onto the service record.
Senior workers operating on busier boards bore the brunt of this problem, as their efficiency was constantly questioned due to equipment failures. Furthermore, working a one-week night shift was mandatory. No matter how serious or genuine the emergency, employees had to practically beg the management to get leave. If leave was taken without prior notice, a memo was issued. An employee receiving such a memo faced a deduction of one day’s salary, and the day was erased from service history.
Sometimes, these memos were dispatched so irresponsibly that even those who were already on approved leave received them. Even when leave was officially sanctioned, it could be cancelled arbitrarily at the whim of the management.
Facing these mounting challenges, the operators decided to protest against the unjust and meaningless attitude of the authorities. Representatives from the Post and Telegraph Union met with the General Manager to outline their grievances. The General Manager assured them that he would investigate the technical faults and other issues.
Note by A. Savita, CHQ Org. Secretary:
The above article about the snap strike by the women employees of the feminised Bangalore Trunk Exchange on 9 March 1984 appeared in the July-August 1984 issue of Vimochana Vartha Patra, a bimonthly women’s magazine.
I came across this piece, which I had completely forgotten, though I had not forgotten the strike itself, the most memorable event of my working life. I felt that this historical account deserved to be shared with a wider readership through Pensioners Patrika.
Although the strike lasted only a short time and was declared illegal, it reflected the deep frustration and anxiety experienced by the operators over their working conditions. It was an important experience in understanding collective action, negotiations, and the courage required to fight out unfair practices.
In the early 1980s, trunk telephony was one of the most demanding services in Telecom. Long-distance calls were manually connected by operators who had to work with speed, accuracy and concentration under constant pressure. Every call was monitored, and efficiency figures were closely watched by the administration.
Around this period, the management expressed concern that the overall trunk efficiency had declined from 80% to 60%. In an effort to improve performance, stringent supervisory measures were introduced. However, these measures had an unintended consequence. Operators increasingly felt that they were being subjected to harassment rather than constructive supervision.
Memos were issued frequently for late attendance, for handling fewer trunk calls even when the reasons were beyond the operators’ control, such as faulty lines or defective switchboards, and even for emergency leave. The atmosphere became one of fear rather than encouragement.
Against this background, resentment gradually built up. On 9 March 1984, the women operators of the Bangalore Trunk Exchange resorted to a snap strike. It was neither a prolonged nor a carefully planned industrial action. It was a spontaneous expression of accumulated frustration over ill-treatment.
The strike was declared illegal by the management. During the agitation, the General Manager personally came to the Trunk Exchange and appealed to the operators to resume duty. Union leaders entered into discussions with the management and presented a number of demands. These discussions did not bring any immediate settlement.
Memos for alleged dereliction of duty were issued to several participants. Adverse entries were also made in the C&D Roll for the period 1983–84. However, with the passage of time, these adverse entries were reviewed and eventually expunged.
Although the strike did not secure all the demands placed before the management, the practice of issuing memos at the slightest pretext became considerably less frequent. The administration also adopted a more practical approach in certain situations.
For many of us, this episode was about dignity at work, fair treatment, and the need for management to understand the realities faced by frontline employees. It demonstrated that discipline and efficiency could not be achieved through fear alone; they also required trust, fairness and mutual respect.
The strike taught that collective action often emerges not from a single incident but from the accumulation of many small grievances. While the strike was declared illegal, it succeeded in drawing attention to the problems faced by women operators and prompted at least some improvements in administrative practices.
No struggle goes in vain. The impact of an action may become visible after some time. The above spontaneous strike established that women are not weak and that ‘Naari Shakthi’ will rise up to resist injustice.
