Across megacities, workers in gated communities are subjected to checks at entry and exit points. Often excessive and intrusive, these include bag searches, confiscation of items without a gate pass, and, in some cases, pat-downs of workers — practices justified as deterrents against theft.
During an anonymous survey, we spoke to 20–30 residents and domestic workers across Bengaluru, and a few communities in Chennai and Mumbai. Respondents across these cities reported “visual cues” of suspicious behaviour that corresponded with these searches. While respondents in the surveys reported no pat-downs in their communities, some employers and domestic workers informally flagged pat-downs in theirs.
Domestic workers believed bag checks minimised allegations of theft. However, they objected to purse searches, pat-downs, and having to show their hard-earned money to the guards. “I work in eight flats. Many employers pay me in cash. Why should the guards know what I am earning? Why should I explain why I am carrying the money I earned?” asks a cook in an apartment in south-east Bengaluru.
Regarding grievances and addressing excesses by security guards, employers reported that they had received no complaints. Some communities regularly educate the guards about maintaining dignity and have implemented surveillance to monitor their behaviour. However, worryingly, many residents, including management committee members, replied that they weren’t aware of what happened at the gates.
Domestic workers across apartments had a constant concern: not being treated with dignity.
Women face more intrusive checks and harassment
Women employed as housekeeping staff, cooks and domestic workers go through more rigorous and intrusive checks at the gates compared to male workers. Often, pat-downs were conducted only on women, we found. While a woman guard was employed in these situations, the workers expressed discomfort with the use of touch.
When “visual cues” are used for pat-downs, it may sometimes border on profiling. Women are generally stopped more, based on their appearance.
Despite carrying gate passes, their bags are emptied during the checks, and they are expected to explain the source of the money they are carrying. For instance, one domestic worker in Bengaluru, the author spoke to, said she carries her cash around to hide it from her husband, who is an alcoholic.
Read more: Behind closed doors, domestic workers continue to face discrimination and abuse
The workers put up with the excessive checks and discrimination because they fear losing their jobs if they object. They point out that guards ask for cash or items to be given to them, but are apprehensive about escalating the matter out of fear of retaliation.
Can frisking in gated communities be justified?
Asked about the invasiveness of frisking, employers responded that this, and even pat-downs, happened at airports and malls. However, searches in malls and airports happen at the point of entry and are applied uniformly to all. Moreover, searches in public spaces such as malls could potentially be challenged as these are carried out by “private actors,” who are considered untrained and lack the legal mandate for such searches.
The practice of frisking in public places, where the justification is a threat to life due to terror attacks, fails the “proportionality test” as mandated in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors case. In this context, how can frisking be justified in gated communities, considering the justification here is “just a deterrent”?
Role of policing, lack of worker welfare
Residents’ associations take on the role of policing workers, even though they do not have a say in the hiring process. Dr Prabha Kotiswaran, a professor of law and social justice at King’s College London, writes: “Homeowners’ associations or resident welfare associations (RWAs) regulate reproductive labour through surveillance and wage fixing and by regulating entry and exit. Despite their public function, RWAs claim no responsibility for worker welfare due to privity of contract and the exclusion of ‘domestic service’ from labour laws.”
While associations “protect the safety and security” of residents, they often turn a blind eye when workers accuse residents of crimes. Invariably, a closure happens with the worker’s exit from employment. But despite the frisking, no matter how excessive, accusations against employees never stop.
Read more: Invisible no more: Domestic workers demand dignity, safety and legal rights
What gated communities must ask themselves
- Are guards or management committees trained in or have the legal authority to stop and interrogate any worker, based on assumptions or prejudice? If a crime is committed, shouldn’t a resident call in the police? Why should associations play a role in this?
- The police follow a process while searching, arresting, detaining or collecting evidence against a suspect. What processes do associations use to ensure their actions don’t inadvertently tamper with evidence?
- How do we define “excessive”? How could a worker be stopped from leaving the premises for not justifying why they are carrying “excessive” amounts of money or any item, because the employer is unreachable?
- Could guards withhold money or any item because the employer said they didn’t give it to the employee? What if the employer’s action was malicious? Who is responsible if the held-back item is lost/misplaced but proven to belong to the worker?
- Despite gate passes, if guards resort to checking bags given by employers, would it infringe on the residents’ privacy?
What data says about theft by workers
According to the 2024 Karnataka crime data, around 382 of the total 9,605 thefts reported in Bengaluru involved domestic workers, with a detection rate of 40 to 60%. This includes malicious and false cases filed by the employers.
Additionally, many of these crimes were committed by staff without a proper address. No background checks or police verifications were conducted, or records kept of the staff. In many of these 382 cases, the accused had intentionally targeted large independent homes and gained the trust of the employers, where the employer willingly handed over the house keys to the thieves.
Meanwhile, the interrogation that happens in police stations is often brutal. Domestic workers are well aware of this fact to avoid inviting trouble for themselves. People living in independent houses and smaller communities do not conduct any searches – how do they manage without deterrents?
What residents can do to take responsibility for their items:
- Conduct thorough background checks and police verifications, especially while hiring foreign workers.
- Keep valuables and cash in locked cupboards or a locker.
- Pay staff directly into their bank account. This also serves as a means of record-keeping.
- Pay workers fair wages, and guide them with basic financial planning and savings.
- Install CCTV cameras near the main door and in the living room.
- Visit their homes before hiring them. Drop them off at homes once in a while.
- Build mutual trust while maintaining a level of caution.
Gated communities often give residents a sense of security. However, superficial frisking only provides a false sense of security and isn’t necessarily a deterrent to those determined to steal. We have to take precautions, believe that most people are honest and accept that they don’t deserve the daily undignified treatment and suspicion.