POSH Act benefits to be made available to female domestic workers, says women's commission chairperson
She was speaking at the inauguration of a state-level workshop on POSH Act 2013, organised by Kerala Women's Commission at PWD Rest House on Thursday.
The laws enacted in the country post-independence were aimed at ensuring the welfare and safety of women. The POSH Act 2013 was implemented based on the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court. This law includes necessary provisions to prevent violence against women.
The term workplace is defined to include not only the place of employment but also the route to work and home. The law clearly states that harassment includes not only physical assault but also mental and emotional harassment, she said.
While internal committees have been formed in most institutions as part of the law, their functioning needs to be more effective. It was through the intervention of the women's commission that internal committees were formed on film sets and in schools.
The commission has decided to organise workshops in all 14 districts to enhance their effectiveness. If changes can be made in govt offices, it would reflect in the private sector as well, said Sathidevi.
The event was presided over by district collector Anu Kumari. Participants included women's commission director Shaji Sugunan, POSH Act 2013 Thiruvananthapuram local committee chairperson Sreeja Sasidharan, legal cum probation officer at the district child protection unit V L Aneesh, gender council advisor T K Anandi, women's commission member secretary Y B Beena, and project officer N Divya.
Follow more information on
Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad here
. Get
real-time live updates
on rescue operations and check
full list of passengers onboard AI 171
.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
20 hours ago
- First Post
Air India crash victims' families given wrong bodies: How could this have happened?
It's a double trauma for the families who lost their loved ones in the Air India crash in Ahmedabad. Over a month after the tragedy, it has been discovered that two families in Britain have been handed over the wrong remains. Their lawyer has described it as 'appalling' and called for a serious probe. But how could such a mistake occur? read more On June 12, Air India flight AI 171 took off from Ahmedabad for its journey to UK's Gatwick when just 32 seconds after take-off, the plane crashed, killing 260 people and becoming one of the deadliest aviation incidents in recent history. Now, over a month after the tragedy, a new pain has hit some of the families of the victims after it was discovered that the remains of their loved ones were wrongly identified before repatriation to Britain, according to a lawyer representing them. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The news of error comes amid Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to London where he is expected to meet with his British counterpart Keir Starmer and sign the crucial India-UK Free Trade Agreement (FTA) deal. Did India bungle up in sending remains to Britain? A Daily Mail report has revealed that two families of the Air India crash victims in the UK received the wrong bodies. The report states that relatives of one victim had to abandon funeral plans after being informed that the coffin contain the remains of any unknown passenger rather than their family member. In the other case, the 'commingled' remnants of more than one person killed in the crash were mistakenly placed in the same casket. James Healy-Pratt, the lawyer of the families in Britain, was quoted as telling the New York Times, 'This has added an indescribable psychological distress to families who are already going through the trauma of losing a loved one,' he said. 'It's appalling that the families have to go through this,' he said. 'You lose a loved one on the 12th of June, and within a matter of weeks you virtually lost them again.' He added that the family who received the 'commingled' remains were able to have them separated and hold a funeral service. However, the other family is 'in limbo', the lawyer was quoted as telling Daily Mail, adding, 'Family X have no-one to bury because it was the wrong person in their casket. And if isn't their relative, the question is, who is it in that coffin? Presumably it's another passenger and their relatives have been given the wrong remains.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A security personnel and volunteers at the site after an Air India plane crashed moments after taking off from the airport, in Ahmedabad. File image/PTI While Family X's identity hasn't been revealed, those who received the 'commingled' remains were Miten Patel, who lost his mother and father — Ashok and Shobhana Patel. The couple from Kent were on the Gatwick-bound plane when it crashed. Speaking on the mix-up, he Miten told BBC that it was 'obviously very upsetting'. 'People were tired and there was a lot of pressure. But there has to be a level of responsibility that you're sending the right bodies to the UK.' The blunder was realised after a coroner in London, Dr Fiona Wilcox, sought to verify the identities of the remains repatriated to Britain by matching their DNA with samples provided by the families. She has, however, declined to comment on the issue. What do families of other victims have to say? While only two instances of incorrect remains have been discovered so far, it has led to concern for the victims of the families, some now even doubting if they had bid adieu to the right person. As Altaf Taju, from Blackburn, whose London-based parents Adam (72) and Hasina (70), perished along with their son-on-law Altafhusen Patel (51) told the Daily Mail, 'It's horrific that this could have happened, but what could anyone do?' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He takes solace in the fact that his parents and brother-in-law were not involved in the confusion. That's because they were buried quickly, in India as per the Muslim faith. A person stands next to the wreckage of the Air India aircraft, bound for London's Gatwick Airport, which crashed during take-off from an airport in Ahmedabad. File image/Reuters The family of Akeel Nanabawa, Hannaa Vorajee and their four-year-old daughter, Sara, from Gloucester, who were all killed in the crash, also expressed concern over the matter. They noted in a report by The Guardian that the process of identification had left them uneasy. 'From the outset, there was a clear lack of transparency and accountability in how the identification and repatriation of victims was handled. Communication was poor. Processes were unclear. And concerns raised by bereaved families — both in India and the UK — were often met with silence.' How has India responded? Reacting to the news, the spokesperson for India's Ministry of External Affairs, Randhir Jaiswal, said that India has 'been working closely with the UK side from the moment these concerns and issues were brought to our attention'. 'In the wake of the tragic crash, the concerned authorities had carried out identification of victims as per established protocols and technical requirements. All mortal remains were handled with utmost professionalism and with due regard for the regard for the dignity of the deceased. We are continuing to work with the UK authorities on addressing any concerns related to this issue,' a statement issued read. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Air India, the concerned airline in the crash, said it had no comment and it has emerged that the company played no role in identifying the remains of those who died. An official, however, told The Guardian, 'It was the hospital, they who were the ones who confirmed the next-of-kin matches.' But how could misidentification actually happen? This blunder, according to experts, was a result of body tissues of different people getting fused in the aftermath of the crash. This may have led to different results when making DNA analysis. The identification of the victims in the Air India crash began almost immediately after the tragedy. It was led by local recovery teams from Ahmedabad's police and fire departments and the state disaster response force. They used sniffer dogs and high-tech search equipment and were aided by local volunteers who sifted the twisted, smouldering metal with their hands. People carry the body of a victim from the crash site after an Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner plane crashed in Ahmedabad. File image/Reuters That's where DNA testing comes in. Barring identical twins, every individual has unique DNA. Experts note that DNA identification is the gold standard for identifying human remains, especially after mass fatality events in which bodies might not be easy to identify otherwise. These DNA samples are then matched against those taken from relatives. That's because family members share DNA. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD One has to note, however, that this is a highly time-consuming process. It took authorities 10 months to collect DNA samples following the 9/11 attacks in the US. Experts note that the impact of the Air India crash and the ensuing fire, which generated temperatures reaching 1,500°C, left most of the bodies unrecognisable and could have also changed the DNA present in the body. HP Sanghvi, the director of the forensic lab where most of the DNA samples were sent even told New York Times, 'These high temperatures affect the DNA present in various parts of the body. This process is very complex.' With inputs from agencies
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Family of British victim in Air India plane crash given ‘wrong body': Report
The family of a British national, who died in the London-bound Air India plane crash, has allegedly been sent the wrong body, according to a report by DailyMail. In this case, a funeral had to be abandoned after it was discovered that the coffin contained the remains of someone else. Wreckage of the Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner plane sits on the open ground, outside Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, where it took off and crashed nearby shortly afterwards, in Ahmedabad.(Reuters) In another instance, the bodies of two victims were reportedly 'commingled' in the same coffin and had to be separated before burial, the report said. James Healy-Pratt, a lawyer representing several bereaved British families, said the mishandling of remains had left relatives 'distraught'. Also Read | Air India completes check of all Boeing planes, says no issues found 'I have been sitting down in the homes of these lovely British families over the last month, and the first thing they want is their loved ones back,' DailyMail quoted Healy-Pratt as saying. 'But some of them have got the wrong remains, and they are clearly distraught over this. It has been going on for a couple of weeks, and I think these families deserve an explanation.' Healy-Pratt said the family who received the wrong body had been left 'in limbo'. Also Read | Air India plane's tail catches fire after landing at Delhi airport; passengers safe He added that they were awaiting formal responses from Air India and its emergency response contractor, Kenyons International Emergency Services. 'The families are also directly in contact with their MPs, the FCDO, and the offices of the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary — ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to London,' the report stated. Responding to queries about the 'commingled' bodies, India's external affairs ministry said that all the established protocols were followed in identification of victims, but they would work with UK authorities to resolve any issues. "We have seen the report and have been working closely with the UK side from the moment these concerns and issues were brought to our attention. In the wake of the tragic crash, the concerned authorities had carried out identification of victims as per established protocols and technical requirements. All mortal remains were handled with utmost professionalism and with due regard for the dignity of the deceased. We are continuing to work with the UK authorities on addressing any concerns related to this issue," MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said. Air India flight AI 171, operated by a Boeing 787-8, crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad en route to London Gatwick on June 12, killing 241 of the 242 passengers onboard, along with 19 people on the ground. Among the dead were 52 British citizens. Also Read | 'Assigning blame before...': Indian pilots body dissatisfied with Air India crash report The errors were reportedly identified by Dr Fiona Wilcox, the Inner West London coroner. 'If [it] isn't their relative, the question is, who is it in that coffin? Presumably it's another passenger and their relatives have been given the wrong remains. The coroner also has a problem because she has an unidentified person in her jurisdiction,' Healy-Pratt said. The report added that the remains recovered from the crash site were severely burnt, mutilated, or fragmented. Some were identified through DNA testing, while others were matched using dental records. What NFSU in Gujarat said on DNA matching The National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU) in Gujarat had a difficult task of performing DNA segregation and matches for bodies of the deceased and their family members. Officials privy to the matter had earlier said the extraction process would be challenging as some bodies were completely charred and extracting bone samples would take time. 'Under usual circumstances, the extraction process and profiling take barely 30-40 minutes. However, here the extraction will take time, as there will hardly be any bone left on some of the charred bodies. It is challenging to find bone samples from the ashes. In some cases, nearly two-thirds of the body is burnt. Thus, the process has to be repeated three-four times,' ThePrint quoted Dr SO Junare, NFSU Gandhinagar campus director, as saying.
NDTV
2 days ago
- NDTV
Air India Crash: We're All Terrified Of Flying Now, Thanks To Conspiracy Theories
The investigation into the tragic crash of Air India flight AI 171 last month has become a subject of intense speculation, memes and long posts on social media. It has also quickly eroded public trust in the investigator as well as the process of investigation. This is a sad state of affairs and also a bit scary, since erosion of trust has triggered apprehensions among the travelling public about air travel. I know of many erstwhile frequent fliers, who thought nothing before taking a flight for work or leisure, now hesitating before making the next flight booking. Some have been barred from flying by families, others remain confused over which aircraft type to fly and whether to risk a long-haul flight, weighing the option of postponing the flight altogether. Took a flight today and the panic post Air India is real - My neighbour was like what's the smoke when they initially spray the disinfectant (I think) - People were extremely attentive to the instructions sitting at the exit door - The air hostess had to literally explain why… — Kirtan A Shah, CFP® (@KirtanShahCFP) June 20, 2025 Speculation Abounds A million theories of what went wrong had already been circulated when the buzz reached a crescendo last week, after the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) released a preliminary report. In a poorly worded and somewhat verbose report, the AAIB indicated that the cockpit crew could be responsible for the tragic accident, while seemingly absolving the aircraft manufacturer and other stakeholders. Two specific words or phrases in the report are telling. One, the use of the word "transitioned" in reference to fuel cutoff switches. Second, the report has quoted a part of the conversation between the two pilots, in which one is heard asking the other whether he "cut off". The report says the aircraft "achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec". What does "transitioned" mean? Were they moved, or did the switches malfunction? Unless the AAIB was prepared to go further and clarify this, either way, what was the crying need to even mention the 'transitioning' of fuel switches in a preliminary report? The Cost Of Dilly-Dallying As per ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) guidelines, a preliminary report of any accident should ideally be released within 30 days, and the investigator is expected to share "critical initial facts" to enable immediate safety actions globally. The 30-day deadline is meant to compel investigators to prioritise the collection and reporting of readily available, verified factual and circumstantial information, rather than waiting for exhaustive analysis. Obviously, then, the deadline is not meant to encourage speculation, which the AAIB seems to have encouraged, knowingly or unknowingly, by using vague terms like fuel switch transition. Besides, experts have pointed out that while the ICAO norms encourage a preliminary report within 30 days, the AAIB charter has no such requirement, and in at least one previous air crash, the AAIB did not release any preliminary report at all. So, the agency actually had the option of not going through the paces and releasing anything at all. That it chose to do so on the 30th day, past midnight, points to myriad pressures on the investigating team. The Western media thereafter made matters worse by speculating further on pilot suicide theories, quoting unnamed sources. Then, the second word or phrase which stands out in the preliminary report is the mention of a part of the conversation in the cockpit. The AAIB has chosen to reveal that one pilot asked the other about why he "cut off," and the latter replied he did not. Without spelling out which pilot posed the question and which one answered, a Pandora's box has been opened. Not only does providing just a sentence of the conversation in the cockpit fail to give the full picture of what transpired, but there is no clarity on what the pilots were actually talking about. Questions With No Answers Was this conversation about fuel cutoff or something else? If it was about fuel cutoff, which pilot posed the question? AAIB has itself said that it recovered two hours of audio from the flight data recorders. The words "cut off" could have referred to anything - engine, instruments, etc, not necessarily fuel switches. What the preliminary report has also done is this: it has provided a virtual clean chit to Boeing & Co. The report says that at this stage of the investigation, "there are no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers". No one wants to fly Air India anymore. For years, people tolerated bad service, delays, rats and broken TV systems etc, but now it's about existential threat to life. Brand is badly damaged. Tata took it easy and focused on bells & whistles changes instead of improving customer… — Rajesh Sawhney 🇮🇳 (@rajeshsawhney) June 15, 2025 Again, a mere preliminary report need not have been in such undue haste to absolve either Boeing or any other stakeholder of negligence or faults. The report should have stuck to facts. It should have given out the sequence of events; details of the number of crew involved and their experience (without identifying them); number of casualties and number of injured; and the fact that both aircraft engines flamed out. Nothing else was needed in the preliminary report. Flaws are emerging even in the constitution of the probe team. Until recently, no senior pilot had been included in the team, since only Air India has a fleet of Dreamliners, and the AAIB probably wanted to avoid allegations of any bias. Then, despite more than a month having elapsed, the AAIB has not found the time to launch an appeal for the public to depose with any evidence about the crash. The Buzz In Parliament As the buzz about the crash and the AAIB's insinuations gets louder, Union Civil Aviation Minister Kinjarapu Rammohan Naidu has had to assert in Parliament that the AAIB is unbiased and has been conducting a probe based on rules and regulations. His comments follow an appeal by the AAIB itself, urging the media and the public to refrain from "spreading premature narratives that risk undermining the integrity of the investigative process". There are really only two options now to mend the situation: either AAIB release further details of the cockpit conversation and reasons for the crash, or it follow the dictum of 'Mum's the Word' and carry out further investigation out of public glare. Rebuilding public trust in the probe - and Indian aviation- itself is the need of the hour.
