'Rights On Paper, Not In Life': Workers Protest Labour Codes

Carrying red banners and flags over tired yet resolute shoulders, over 150 migrant workers gathered at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi on December 14.

Supporting them were women and children in the front rows, sitting on the ground and sloganeering along. Handwritten signs hung unevenly near the stage, “Hamara Adhikar, Sthaai Rozgaar” and “Mazdooro ko samaan vetan dena hoga”.

The protest mirrored similar demonstrations in Kolkata, Bengaluru, Chennai, Patna and other cities across the country. It was organised by a coalition of 16 workers’ organisations under the Mazdoor Adhikar Sangharsh Abhiyan.

The protests were directed at the four new labour codes that the government notified on November 21, which workers’ groups say shall negatively impact conditions of employment and weaken existing labour protections, affecting the livelihoods of the labourers—the backbone of the economy.

The government says replacing 29 labour laws with four unified codes covering wages, industrial relations, social security and occupational safety will simplify compliance and make India more attractive for investment.

Most of India’s existing labour laws date back to the Pre-independence and have long been criticised by businesses as complicated, inconsistent and a barrier to scaling up manufacturing, an industry that still accounts for less than 20 percent of India’s nearly $4-trillion gross domestic product (GDP).

How Do the Labour Codes Affect Job Security?

Santosh Thakur, one of the protesters, stated that alongside diluting protection guaranteed to the workers under the previous 29 labour law; the new laws not only hide under the guise of ‘ease of doing business’ but also overlook decades long struggle that went into securing labour rights.

The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code 2020 is to replace 13 Central Labour Acts including Factories Act 1948 , Revised Factory Thresholds: Applicability increased from 10 to 20 workers (with power) and 20 to 40 workers (without power), reducing compliance burden for small units.

Yogesh Kumar, a worker who travelled 30 kilometres from Delhi’s Bawana Industrial Area to attend the protest, said the labour codes were not a new form of intimidation.

He said that the new labour laws only make the arm-twisting official. Presented as laws meant to help workers, the laws only legalise the daily struggles of labourers, Kumar added.

“I come from the Bawana Industrial Area, where no labour laws are enforced. Earlier, a workplace with 10 workers using electricity counted as a factory, but now that number has been raised to 20. Because of this change, 90 to 95 per cent of workers are excluded from the Factory Act, and we cannot even demand ESI or PF. On paper, there may be factories, but in reality, workers have been erased.”

Speaking about changes to job security and trade union rights, Thakur warned that the new framework will undermine the workers’ collective strength.

“In the name of ease of doing business, the government is trying to eliminate permanent jobs by introducing fixed-term employment,”

The government claims that the reforms introduce significant shifts in how factories operate. Women can now legally work night shifts, firms have greater room to extend working hours, and the threshold for companies requiring prior approval for layoffs has been raised from 100 to 300 workers.

According to Thakur, these codes will absolve the right to form unions and weaken the protections against retrenchment and layoffs that the labourers have won through 150 years of struggle.

He alleges that owners show only one or two workers on record and refuse to recognise the rest, adding that previously only the owner would be lawless, however, now the entire system has been made lawless.

When questioned about the provisions that will allow women to work night shifts with security guarantees, Thakur expressed scepticism over the government’s intent.

“When violence against women is continuously increasing in Delhi and other cities, the claim that women’s safety during night shifts will be ensured appears to be a very hollow promise, because the government has consistently failed to fulfil such assurances.”

Kumar also criticised the idea of independent women being manufactured through the introduction of these codes, wherein he says, “The four labour codes have now allowed women to work 24 hours a day, including night shifts. But even before these codes, in places like Manesar, women were already being forced to work nights.”

The laws state that overtime should not exceed 50 hours in three months, but workers were already doing 12 hours of compulsory work, 150 to 200 hours of overtime every month, Kumar said, adding that the violations existed previously, but now they have just been legalised.

On paper, these Labour Codes do promise inclusion, efficiency and modernisation, which align these reforms seamlessly with the Atmanirbhar Bharat agenda. However, the response from Shobha Karandlaje, Union Minister of State for Labour and Employment in the Rajya Sabha, does not spell out how these assurances will be translated into action.

There is little detail on enforcement, timelines, state-level preparedness or mechanisms to ensure compliance.

Thakur, commenting on the government’s claims regarding pension and social security under the new codes, also said that the assurances lack credibility, and pointed out that earlier pension schemes had already been dismantled and replaced with minimal payouts.

“Without permanent employment or protection against layoffs, the promise of a pension amounted to little more than a symbolic gesture.”

Rural and Urban Workers Face a Growing Divide

The new labour codes, while framed as modernisation and ease-of-doing-business measures, sharply contrast with the principles behind MGNREGA, which guarantees employment as a statutory right. Where MGNREGA seeks to provide rural households with a safety net and dignity through assured work, the labour codes weaken urban and industrial protections, reducing job security and collective bargaining power.

This creates a growing divide: rural workers retain a legal claim to livelihood, while urban and industrial labourers face increasing precarity. The gap highlights a troubling policy shift, where the state continues to uphold work as a right in villages but simultaneously strips it away from those sustaining the cities.

“MGNREGA provides rural households with a rights-based guarantee to employment, and historically labour laws have played a similar role for industrial and urban workers. Both frameworks were designed to recognise Labour work as an entitlement rather than a favour, and to ensure a basic level of dignity and security for workers”, says Dr. Urvashi Prasad, Senior Fellow Pahle India Foundation.

The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) was overhauled on December 18, with the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, aka VB-G RAM G has now taken over, despite protests by the Opposition.

The bill will leave the states shouldering 40% of the costs, this raises serious concerns about the future of rural employment and social security.

Prasad pointed out that while MGNREGA continues to guarantee employment in rural areas, labour protections in industrial and urban sectors are being steadily weakened. It creates a gap between rural workers who retain a statutory right to work, while urban and industrial labourers are pushed deeper into insecurity.

Prasad explains that during the pandemic, as urban jobs disappeared and migrant workers went back to their villages, the demand for work under MGNREGA increased sharply. Not every household that requested work got it, due to funding cuts and delayed payments, but for those who did, it provided much-needed support. Even though the scheme was not perfectly implemented, it helped many rural families cope when there were no other sources of income.

Shreya Ghosh, Member of Centre For Struggling Trade Union, says enhanced hours for women workers need to be accompanied by safer workplaces. "While the labour code mentions that women can work at night, and has mentioned about taking care of their security, will the Government be actually able to implement this? The statistics and repeated incidents show that women’s security has not been ensured in recent years. Cases like RG Kar, along with protests by women wrestlers against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, show that even months of effort are ignored. So the question of whether women labourers can work safely at night is already answered by the reality—they cannot."

Ghosh adds that the red seen across the protest site represents the blood, sweat, and tears of labourers, reflecting the real struggles they face every day and the hardships that the new labour codes threaten to worsen.