Socio-Economic Impact of HIV and AIDS in Tamil nadu

Table 4.6
Change in job due to HIV and AIDS
(in Percentages)
Number of workers who changed jobs after being
detected positive
Rural Urban Total
22 21 43
Average monthly income of those who changed jobs 2,470 2,652 2,559
Number that received any benefit 3 4 7
Average benefit received at the time of leaving the job 1,333 28,000 16,571
for those who received benefit
Average number of times people changed jobs after
being tested positive
4 6 10
The impact of
HIV and AIDS
on employment
can influence
the pattern of
employment/
non-employment
of other members
of the household
as well
1.47 percent were unemployed but
after testing around 11.37 percent are
unemployed. The number of unemployed
could well have increased in another way.
If any of the female PLWHA were working
before the test and had to give up work, it
would be reflected in the increase in the
category of ‘others’, and the table shows
that such a difference exists.
Similarly, the difference in the sectoral
pattern of employment is mainly in
terms of much higher proportion of
those for whom the sector is “Not
available” in the case of non-HIV
households (Table 4.8). Here the term
“Not Available” refers to all those who
are in labour force but unemployed,
as well as students, housewives etc.
The percentage of HIV “Not available”
increased after the test. The change in
jobs was mainly out of agriculture and
allied services, manufacturing, trade,
transport, communication into “Not
available” category due to increase in
unemployment and a marginal increase
in health related and other services. Some
of the PLWHA are currently working in
NGO sectors providing services to HIV
infected persons. The decrease in the
percentage of people in agriculture and
allied activities from 24.42 percent (before
test) to 19.58 percent (after test) is clearly
seen in the decrease in the percentage
of people in ‘cultivation’ and ‘agriculture
wage labour’ occupation groups.
The impact of HIV and AIDS on
employment does not remain limited to
only those who are HIV-positive. It can
influence the pattern of employment/
non-employment of other members of
the household as well. This is particularly
true of the person who provides care to
the PLWHA. However, the direction of
this impact is not clear. The pressure on
the time of the caregiver can result in
that person’s withdrawal from the work
force. On the other hand, loss of income
due to withdrawal of PLWHA from work
force or the increased consumption
expenditure requirements (especially
medical expenses) can result in greater
participation of other members of the
household in the work force. It needs to
be noted here that not all PLWHA require
care. It is only at very advanced stages of
the infection that some form of care is
required by the PLWHA. In the sample,
out of the total of 475 PLWHA in the age
group 18 to 60 years, 123 reported that
they needed someone to take care of
them. Some of the PLWHA have more
than one family member taking care of
them and hence the number of caregivers
is 128. Almost 58 percent of the caregivers
were employed at the time of the survey.
However there is no report of anyone
38 Socio-Economic Impact of HIV and AIDS in Tamil Nadu, India