Time Inequality in India: Hidden Cost of Waiting, Digital Divide, and Two-Tier Citizenship

The Everyday Reality of Long Queues and Lost Time in India

KAKALI DAS

India is often described as a country of deep inequalities. Most discussions focus on income and wealth, which are indeed very unevenly distributed. However, there is another form of inequality that does not receive enough attention. This is the inequality of time. Time shapes how people live, work, and participate in society. The amount of time a person spends waiting for basic services can determine how much control they have over their own life.

In India, the burden of waiting is not shared equally. It falls much more heavily on the poor and the marginalised.

Waiting in queues has become a normal part of everyday life in India. People stand in line for healthcare, for ration supplies, for government services, and even for basic documents. At first glance, waiting may seem like a small inconvenience. But for many people, it is much more serious. It affects their income, their health, and their dignity. When a person who earns daily wages has to stand in a queue for hours, they lose a day’s income. This is not just a delay. It is a direct loss that affects their ability to survive.

There is an important difference between what we can call healthy waiting and harmful waiting. If people choose to wait for something enjoyable, such as eating at a popular restaurant, the waiting is voluntary. They can leave the queue if they want.

But when people have no choice and must wait to access essential services, the situation becomes harmful. A migrant worker who must update their bank details to receive wages cannot simply walk away. If they do not complete the process, they may not get paid at all. In such cases, waiting becomes a form of pressure and even risk.

In India, this kind of forced waiting is very common. Many people visit government offices repeatedly, only to be told to return the next day. This cycle continues, consuming time and energy. Even those with some level of privilege experience these delays. If people with access to education and resources struggle with such systems, it becomes clear that those without these advantages face even greater difficulties.

This leads to the idea of what can be called temporal citizenship. Citizenship is usually understood as a legal status. It gives people rights and responsibilities. But in reality, full participation in society requires more than legal recognition. It also requires time. If a person spends most of their day waiting or travelling, they have very little time left for other important activities. These may include rest, family life, education, or even political participation.

For example, consider a worker who lives on the edge of a city. They may spend several hours each day commuting to work. Public transport may be slow and unreliable. After a long day of work, they must again spend hours travelling back home. This means that a large part of their life is spent in transit. They are not paid for this time, yet it takes a physical and mental toll. In contrast, a more privileged individual may live close to their workplace and travel comfortably. This difference shows how time is unevenly distributed across social groups.

Economic inequality and time inequality are closely connected. Poorer people often live farther away from their workplaces because they cannot afford housing in central areas. This increases their travel time. They also depend more on public services, which often involve long queues. On the other hand, wealthier individuals can avoid many of these delays by using private services or paying for faster access.

Digital technology was expected to reduce these problems. The idea of digital governance promised quicker services and less waiting. People were told that online systems would make life easier. In some cases, this has happened. Many services can now be accessed from home. However, the benefits of digitalisation are not equally shared.

Digital systems often require a certain level of literacy and access to technology. Not everyone has these resources. Even when people own smartphones, they may not be comfortable using complex apps or websites. Older generations, in particular, may struggle with digital processes. When they need help, they depend on others. This creates new forms of dependency.

A new group of intermediaries has emerged around digital services. These are people who assist others in filling forms, uploading documents, and completing online processes. While they provide a useful service, they also charge fees. This means that people who cannot use digital systems must pay extra to access services that are supposed to be free or low cost. This adds another layer of inequality.

Even for those who can use digital systems, the experience is not always smooth. Websites may not work properly. Servers may be down. Processes may be confusing. People often spend a lot of time trying to navigate these systems. In such cases, digitalisation does not reduce waiting. It simply shifts the waiting from physical queues to digital frustration.

One clear example of this is the process of obtaining official documents. Many services require online applications, appointments, and verification. People who can manage these steps quickly may complete their work in a short time. Others may spend hours or even days trying to figure out the process. In some cases, people with online appointments are served quickly, while those without digital access must stand in long queues. This creates two different experiences of citizenship.

This division can be described as a two tier system. On one side are those who can navigate digital systems easily. They save time and avoid queues. On the other side are those who cannot. They spend more time waiting and often pay extra for help. This shows that digitalisation, instead of removing inequality, can sometimes deepen it.

Another important issue is the transfer of time costs from institutions to individuals. In the past, many tasks were handled by officials or employees. Now, these responsibilities are often shifted to citizens. For example, people must update their own records, complete verification processes, and manage documentation. While this is presented as empowerment, it also increases the burden on individuals.

Customer service systems provide another example. People often spend long periods waiting on calls to resolve issues. This is time taken from their personal lives. It is time that could have been used for work or rest. Instead, it is used to fulfil requirements set by institutions.

This shift is not accidental. It is part of a broader economic and administrative approach. By transferring tasks to individuals, organisations reduce their own workload and costs. However, the hidden cost is borne by citizens. This cost is measured in time, stress, and lost opportunities.

Time is a valuable resource. It is not distributed equally, and it is often controlled by larger systems. In many ways, time has become a tool of power. Those who control systems can decide how much time others must spend to access services. This control shapes everyday life in significant ways.

The effects of time inequality go beyond practical difficulties. They also affect people’s ability to participate in society. For example, political participation requires time. People need time to understand issues, attend meetings, and make informed decisions. If someone is constantly occupied with work, travel, and waiting, they may not have the time or energy for these activities.

This has important implications for democracy. If certain groups have less time to engage, their voices may be weaker. Decisions may then reflect the interests of those who have more time and resources. In this way, time inequality can influence political outcomes.

Health is another area where time inequality has serious consequences. Many people avoid visiting hospitals because of long waiting times. This can lead to delayed treatment and worsening conditions. In some cases, illnesses that could have been managed early become more serious because people could not afford the time to seek care.

Despite these challenges, waiting has become normalised in India. People often accept it as part of life. This acceptance may be linked to the fact that those with more influence do not experience the same level of waiting. Many privileged individuals have ways to bypass queues. They use private services, priority access, or personal connections. As a result, they may not feel the urgency to address the issue.

In societies where a larger section of the population experiences similar delays, waiting becomes a public concern. It is discussed and debated. In India, however, the experience of waiting is uneven. This makes it less visible as a collective problem.

To address time inequality, it is important to recognise it as a serious issue. Just as economic inequality is measured and analysed, time inequality should also be studied. One possible approach is to develop a system that measures how much time different groups spend accessing services. This could help identify where delays are most severe and who is most affected.

Policies can then be designed to reduce these delays. This may include improving public services, increasing accessibility, and ensuring that digital systems are user friendly. It also requires investment in infrastructure and training. Digital literacy must be improved so that more people can benefit from online services.

At the same time, it is important to ensure that digital systems do not replace physical services entirely. Both options should be available, so that people can choose what works best for them. Support systems should be in place for those who need assistance.

Another key step is to recognise the value of people’s time. Policies should aim to reduce unnecessary delays and make processes more efficient. Institutions must take responsibility for the time they demand from citizens.

In the modern world, technology has changed how we use time. While it has created convenience in some areas, it has also increased expectations. People are now expected to be available and responsive at all times. This can blur the boundaries between work and personal life. For some workers, especially in informal sectors, this means constant pressure with little rest.

The challenge is to ensure that technological progress leads to real improvements in people’s lives. This includes not only saving time but also giving people more control over how they use it. Time should not be something that is taken away without consideration.

Time inequality is a critical issue that shapes everyday life in India. It affects access to services, economic opportunities, health, and political participation. While digitalisation has brought some benefits, it has also created new challenges.

To build a more equal society, it is necessary to address both economic and temporal inequalities. Recognising the value of time and ensuring its fair distribution is an essential step towards meaningful citizenship for all.

References

1. National Sample Survey Office (2019). Time Use in India Report
2. NITI Aayog (2021). Digital India and Inclusive Growth Report.
3. Reserve Bank of India (2023). Annual Report on Banking and Financial Inclusion.
4. Centre for Internet and Society (2022). Digital Access and Exclusion in India.
5. Azim Premji University (2021). State of Working India Report.

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking.  You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com (For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary) Images from different sources.