Archives: News

Mentor’s Comment

India’s draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025 arrives at a critical juncture, when over 90% of India’s workforce is informal, and 11 million people endure modern slavery-like conditions. While the government calls it a “rights-driven, future-ready” labour vision grounded in “ancient Indian ethos”, the policy remains mired in contradictions. Behind its digital optimism and flexibility rhetoric lie deep structural issues, casualisation, exclusion of women, erosion of unions, and poor enforcement of safety norms. This article analyses how the draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025 attempts reform but risks widening inequality instead of bridging it.

Introduction

India’s labour force, the world’s largest after China, is undergoing unprecedented informalisation. A majority of workers remain without contracts, benefits, or occupational safety, particularly in construction, seafood, textiles, and stone quarrying. Against this backdrop, the government has unveiled the draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025, the first comprehensive labour and employment policy in independent India, aimed at aligning with India@2047 goals. Yet, its “future-ready” tone contrasts sharply with the daily struggles of India’s informal workers. The draft blends cultural nostalgia with digital platforms and flexible labour regimes, but experts warn that without strong safeguards, it may formalise exploitation under a new vocabulary of efficiency and empowerment.

Why is the draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025 significant?

1. First comprehensive labour policy: India has never had a single overarching labour and employment policy before; this is the first draft of its kind.
2. Presented as “rights-driven” and “future-ready”: The draft positions itself as a framework for inclusive, dignified employment by 2047.
3. Ground reality contrast: It appears while millions remain in debt bondage or unsafe informal work, revealing a sharp policy-practice gap.
4. Cultural framing: It draws legitimacy from “ancient Indian ethos” and texts like Manusmriti, a move critics call regressive in a modern labour context.

Does the draft empower workers or employers?

1. Contractual and casual labour domination: In several sectors (textiles, seafood, stone quarries), workers are hired by middlemen without contracts, paid daily wages, and denied ESI or PF benefits.
2. Employer-biased flexibility: The draft promotes “ease of doing business” but underplays enforcement of worker rights, effectively institutionalising job insecurity.
3. Constitutional dilution: The framework overlooks Articles 14, 16 and 21, which guarantee equality, opportunity, and dignity, replacing them with moral and cultural justifications.
4. ILO mismatch: The policy ignores obligations under ILO Conventions 42, 155, and 156, especially concerning maternity protection, safety, and gender equity.

Can digital optimism bridge the informal-formal divide?

1. Digital skilling and employment matching: The draft relies heavily on AI-driven National Career Service (NCS) and Skill India digital platforms, promising to reduce mismatches.
2. Reality check: Digital literacy in India remains at 38%, and most informal workers, particularly women and the elderly, remain excluded from such systems.
3. eSHRAM limitations: Despite over 30 crore registrations, payouts remain minimal and inconsistent, with large data gaps for unorganised workers.
4. Algorithmic exclusion: Tech-based hiring may amplify caste and gender bias, lacking oversight on fairness, grievance redress, or algorithmic accountability.

Does the draft align with constitutional and global standards?

1. Constitutional inconsistency: Ignores equality provisions (Articles 14-16) and fails to guarantee dignity (Article 21) by sidelining unionisation and inspectorate powers.
2. ILO and OECD compliance gap: India risks non-alignment with ILO Conventions 87 and 98 (freedom of association and collective bargaining) and OECD recommendations on equitable labour transitions.
3. Rights to collective action: Tripartite bodies (state, employer, worker) are mentioned but not institutionally strengthened, weakening labour representation.

What are the draft policy’s main areas of concern?

1. Inspectorate dilution: Reduction in on-ground inspections under the garb of self-certification leads to unchecked safety violations.
2. Gendered impact: While women’s participation is targeted to rise to 35% by 2047, no clear mechanism ensures safe, accessible, or equitable workplaces.
3. Wage inequality and gig exclusion: Wage Code 2019 is silent on platform workers’ benefits, leaving gig labourers outside social protection systems.
4. Union erosion: By promoting individual “digital dashboards” over collective negotiations, the draft undermines trade union power and collective action.

What should guide India’s final labour framework?

1. Universal social protection floor: Extend ESI, EPFO, and health coverage to informal and gig workers.
2. Reinstate labour inspectorates: Institutionalise independent audits for occupational safety and minimum wage compliance.
3. Gender-responsive budgeting: Make gender equity measurable through labour audits, wage reporting, and leadership representation.
4. Digital inclusion safeguards: Ensure data privacy, algorithmic fairness, and accessibility for low-literacy workers.
5. Constitutional morality over cultural ethos: Replace rhetoric with enforceable rights, ensuring compliance with Articles 14, 19, 21, and 23 (prohibition of forced labour).

Conclusion

The draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025 aspires to modernise India’s labour market, but its moral overtones and digital bias risk leaving the poorest behind. Without strong enforcement, union empowerment, and gender-sensitive safeguards, this “future-ready” vision may perpetuate rather than resolve inequality. India’s final policy must reflect constitutional morality, not cultural nostalgia, ensuring labour dignity remains the cornerstone of economic growth.