This article examines the health vulnerabilities of women earth diggers in the Bhati Mines village in Delhi by broadly considering the nature of work they do, their everyday life, illness and injury narratives and life histories. While the nature of the work allows us to understand the associated risks and vulnerabilities, locating work in everyday life gives us a sense of the contingencies like the daily routine, struggle for survival, domestic responsibilities and multilayered deprivations, providing an overall state of well-being. The narratives of 40 women daily wage labourers were documented through unstructured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. The article adopts an interpretivist and social constructivist approach to contextualise the meaning of health and well-being and understand the impact of the risks and vulnerabilities they face every day and the meanings they ascribe to health. The main themes that emerged from the discussion were of the intergenerational identity of earth diggers and social transmission of risk factors across generation, uncertainty of work, non-existent social protection measures, sub-standard wages and occupational injuries, leading to increasing insecurities and vulnerabilities at work affecting the health and well-being of the women workers and the community.
AkhterS., RutherfordS., & ChuC. (2019). Sufferings in silence: Violence against female workers in the ready-made garment industry in Bangladesh: A qualitative exploration. Women’s Health, 15, 1745506519891302.
2.
BaruR. V. (2005). Disease and suffering: Towards a framework for understanding health seeking behavior. Indian Anthropologist, 35(1–2), 45–52.
3.
BeckU. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. Sage Publications.
4.
BeckwithN. M. (2014). Redefining suffering and illness. Harvard Medical Student Review, 1(1), 1–8.
5.
BhattE. R., DesaiA. S., ThamarajakshiR., PandeM., ArunachalamJ., & KohliV. S. (1988). Report of the National Commission on Self Employed Women and Women in the Informal Sector. Government of India, New Delhi.
6.
BiswasA., HarbinS., IrvinE., JohnstonH., BegumM., TiongM., ApedaileD., KoehoornM., & SmithP. (2022). Differences between men and women in their risk of work injury and disability: A systematic review. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 65(7), 576–588.
7.
BlaxterM. (2004). Life narratives, health and identity. InIdentity and health (pp. 170–199). Routledge.
8.
BlaxterM. (2010). Health. Polity Press.
9.
BolghanabadiS., HaghighiA., & JahangiriM. (2024). Insights into women’s occupational health and safety: A Decade in Review of Primary Data Studies. Safety, 10(2), 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/safety10020047
10.
British Toxicology Society. (2020). Defining hazard and risk (BTS Communication Hazard-Risk 2019, v1.2). https://www.thebts.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/BTS-Comunication-Hazard-Risk-2019-v-1.2-final.pdf
11.
BurgardS. A., & LinK. Y. (2013). Bad jobs, bad health? How work and working conditions contribute to health disparities. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(8), 1105–1127.
12.
CanaanJ. E. (1999). In the hand or in the head? Contextualising the debate about repetitive strain injury (RSI). InHealth and work: Critical perspectives (pp. 143–160). Macmillan Education.
13.
Commission on Social Determinants of Health. (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health: Final report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. World Health Organization.
14.
DoyalL., & DaykinN. (Eds.). (1999). Health and work: Critical perspectives. Bloomsbury Publishing.
15.
EvansJ., & GibbE. (2009). Moving from precarious employment to decent work (Vol. 13). GURN.
16.
FarmerP. (1996). On suffering and structural violence: A view from below. Daedalus, 125(1), 261–283.
17.
FarmerP. E., NizeyeB., StulacS., & KeshavjeeS. (2006). Structural violence and clinical medicine. PLoS Medicine, 3(10), e449. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030449
18.
FoxN. J. (1999). Postmodern reflections: Deconstructing ‘risk’, ‘health’ and ‘work’. InHealth and work: Critical perspectives (pp. 198–219). Macmillan Education.
19.
GarimellaS. (2009). Agency and contingency: Working women in Delhi, India [Doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences].
20.
HashimS. R. (2012). Final report of the expert group to recommend the detailed methodology for identification of BPL households in urban areas. Planning Commission of India. https://des.mizoram.gov.in/uploads/attachments/981d16edfe868b9c691d76c48e8f1251/pages-53-bpl-criteria-in-urban.pdf
21.
HerzogB. (2019). Invisibilization of suffering: The moral grammar of disrespect. Springer Nature.
KailaH. L. (2002). A review of the occupational health of women. Journal of Health Management, 4(1), 1–9.
24.
KaneP., DennersteinL., & World Health Organization. (1999). Women and occupational health: Issues and policy paper for the Global Commission on Women’s Health. World Health Organization.
25.
MayrhoferM. (2025). The concept of vulnerability and its relation to the concepts of inequality and discrimination: A review article. The International Journal of Human Rights, 29(3), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2025.2488938
26.
McCannD., & FudgeJ. (2017). Unacceptable forms of work: A multidimensional model. International Labour Review, 156(2), 147–184.
27.
MessingK. (1997). Women’s occupational health: A critical review and discussion of current issues. Women & Health, 25(4), 39–68. https://doi.org/10.1300/J013v25n04_03
28.
MessingK. (1999). Tracking the invisible: Scientific indicators of the health hazards in women’s work. InHealth and work: Critical perspectives (pp. 127–142). Macmillan Education.
29.
MessingK., PunnettL., BondM., AlexandersonK., PyleJ., ZahmS., WegmanD. H., StockS. R., & de GrosboisS. (2003). Be the fairest of them all: Challenges and recommendations for the treatment of gender in occupational health research. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 43(6), 618–629. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.10225
30.
MishraA., JosephR., GangadharaM., & LoboR. (2023). Body as machine: Health vulnerability of women garment factory workers in India. SSM-Qualitative Research in Health, 4, 100301.
31.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. (2001). Women’s safety and health issues at work (DHHS [NIOSH] Publication No. 2001-123). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2001-123/
32.
NimbalkarR. (2004). Women and occupational health and safety. Journal of Health Management, 6(2), 215–219.
33.
OSHA (1982). All about OSHA. 1982 (rev.). Dept. of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration..
34.
QadeerI., & RoyD. (1989). Work, wealth and health: Sociology of workers’ health in India. Social Scientist, 17(5–6), 45–92.
35.
ShethA., ViramgamiA., ThakorM., LohraG., MohananA., BattiN., KhalilZ., & BalachandarR. (2025). Systematic review of health challenges experienced by Indian women engaged in informal labor. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5246536
36.
SombatsawatE., Saeng-iamK., & KaewdokT. (2025). Prevalence and risk factors of musculoskeletal symptoms among women handloom weavers in Lampang Province, Thailand. Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 34, 102093.
37.
TuressonK., PetterssonA., de HerveM. D. G., GustavssonJ., HaasJ., KoivistoJ., KaragiorgosK., & NybergL. (2024). The human dimension of vulnerability: A scoping review of the Nordic literature on factors for social vulnerability to climate risks. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 100(3), 104190.
38.
UK Government. (2014). The relationship between wellbeing and health. Department of Health.
39.
WilkinsonI. (2005). Suffering: A sociological introduction. Polity.
40.
World Health Organization. (1948). Constitution of the World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/about/governance/constitution
