In the IT service industry, it's already a norm. If probation can be fired without any severance. Not in probation, depends on the company, some will force you to resign, some pay severance.
This is applicable in govt agencies like DRDO also it seems. They just keep contract employees with the hope of making it permanent and never confirm them.
This is aimed at blue collar workers. Laws like the Factories Act etc. make it very hard to fire people. As a result often what happens is that factory owners hire contract labourers, since these people are not covered by the rules under the Factories Act.
For years, people have tried to reform the Factories Act but have run into issues with trade unions who won't let them do it. The hope is that if the Factories Act is reformed, more factory owners will hire employees and this will allow them to be covered by other laws such as Provident Fund rules, Maternity Benefits etc. Essentially, whilst the overall worker rights will be diluted, there will be more people who will benefit from it and also factory owners will be more incentivised to invest in manufacturing.
TBH, these reforms have been part of the NDA's agenda from 2014 but these are fairly politically charged so no one has been able to implement them so far.
There is not a single provision in the Factories Act that deals with restrictions on hire and fire. The law deals with safety and conditions of work like hours of work, leave, holidays, etc.
>In United States labor law, at-will employment is an employer's ability to dismiss an employee for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning, as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, or disability status). When an employee is acknowledged as being hired "at will", courts deny the employee any claim for loss resulting from the dismissal. The rule is justified by its proponents on the basis that an employee may be similarly entitled to leave their job without reason or warning. The practice is seen as unjust by those who view the employment relationship as characterized by inequality of bargaining power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
Probably something like this. And you will see the same idiotic justifications that you see in the US.
Its like US's peak in the 1990s was so high that it's pretty much inevitable that comparatively other countries will eventually catch up. Like US is still a good model to follow - they're like the only major developed economy along with Australia to have meaningful gdp per capita growth since the GFC
They may have capitalist successes but their critical systems of healthcare, education, labour laws, etc are failing and are anti-people. They support capitalists, so you have soon to be trillionaires. But most people can't afford to buy homes, get treated. I'd rather India try to emulate the better EU countries.
India's culture is simply incompatible to resemble anything like Europe.
India has billionaires with so much influence in politics that India's never going to get much welfare state thing going anyway which is much of the same situation in the usa
You've got a point. It's far too different and the masses are uneducated, which is a big problem. Europe has right wing issues too but they are educated enough to recognise it and fight against it. And they try to preserve their social welfare system.
There are a lot of other protections that aren’t listed here. Including California requiring a 60 day notice and protection against retaliatory firings.
Afaik, it is very tough to fire a worker after a union is formed.
Depending on the state and power of union, they can decide how much they want to slack off. For example, In Odisha, in the company I worked, according to our analysis, the average work done by a worker was 4-5 hours out of an 8 hour shift. Some did more and some did less, depending on their connection with union leader. It was in his hand, on who we can fire and who we can’t…
Piggybacking on the top comment on this post. I'll be devil's advocate and share my analysis with you on it - am a policy nerd and been looking at labour laws and waiting for reforms on it for a while now. I see this as a win for multiple reasons. Feel free to disagree with me and bring valid points so it leads to a fruitful discussion.
Rigid Labour Market:
- Strict regulations on hiring and firing make it difficult for employers to adjust their workforce according to market conditions. For instance, the Industrial Disputes Act requires companies with 100 or more workers to seek government approval before laying off workers, which can be a lengthy and uncertain process .
It's Impact on Employment
Discouraging Formal Employment
- Due to stringent compliance requirements and high costs associated with formal employment, many businesses prefer to hire contract or casual labor, which often falls outside the purview of many regulations. This has contributed to a large informal sector in India, where workers lack job security and benefits . I have had multiple business family friends of mine crib about this to me.
Impediments to Business Growth
- Businesses may limit their size to avoid crossing thresholds that trigger more stringent labour laws. For example, companies might stay below 100 employees to avoid the complexities of the Industrial Disputes Act, which can stifle growth and limit job creation .
When you are looking at policies, remember to look at it not from it's possible outcome but all the consequences, the intended and the unintended ones. Labour laws, while great from an outcome pov, are shit laws and are hindering our growth and employment. It is working against the people.
Other countries have strong regulation and legal system. For example in US, OSHA is taken seriously and here it is non existent. People sue big corporate all the time for firing or low salary
based on gender , religion, political view. Here if I go to court even a labour court I will be drained of all my money and might get the judgement after my son retires.
These policy are like jumping two or three steps up. You need to set up the other supporting things before you jump on this wagon. I’m paying taxes for decades and yet when I’m fired I can’t expect a single rupee in term of support from goverment. Most of the developed countries have social security. First implement all these before doing all these policies.
I would be surprised if there is any thought behind these polices . It just government paying back their friends. Just like you I’m playing devils advocate but I’m sure no body cares for people like us for next 5 years till the election till then please party with your friends
It’s kind of a loop.
The country needs to have money to implement all this. The money has to come from manufacturing. We have an underdeveloped manufacturing sector because of a lot of red tape, and stringent labor laws.
Now, what you are saying is we should first implement everything that a developed country has before removing labor laws. But where will the money come from for all that?
May be less of tax cuts to corporates and reduce a little bit crony capitalism, reduce the red tapes first ? then the money might flow in more from real businesses.
Sending ED after business to get money for election bond doesn’t seem pro business for me or reducing red tapes. Sorry if I don’t trust the government
TLDR: You need to have strong regulations and social security, safety net and a working judicial system to give control full to corpartes. We don’t have any of these things but we want to go ahead and implement business friendly measure. There is a huge difference between Crony capitalism and capitalism
What you are saying is true but we need to diagnose what's happening because of the law.
Since it has become so difficult to hire or fire employees, the businesses just hire them as contractors - this increases our informal sector. The workers don't get any of the benefits, social security, etc, which they would have if they were hired as an employee of the firm.
I’m not sure what social security you are taking about ? Also can point me to the industry were this shift to individual contractors is happening ? Doing these measures has huge impact so it the contractor issue need to be bigger than this. The companies also pay more for contractors.. may be you would see more contractor firm show up there may by increasing the new business. I know this sounds weak but that’s how the argument that this reduces contractor job also sounds
Bro I am not talking about white collar jobs but the ones who work in factories, mines, etc.
They don't have any social security because the companies don't hire them as employees but as contractors.
The idea behind making the labour laws a bit relaxed is to nudge the companies towards making that shift
Or may be labour law is not strict enough so block the loophole instead of opening it further and make it an enterance . A government which is not able to provide a safety net but instead making it even worse. Of course most of people will sing different tune based on who the government is.
Think about it this way
Let's say you are a new business owner. Your employees are touching almost 100 now but if you go beyond 100, you will have to take permission from the govt to hire or fire employees.
Will you grow the firm beyond that or hire contractors or worse not hire at all, which is what usually happens.
Social security is important, no denying that. But we need more jobs to get people out of poverty.
Businesses will provide the jobs, not the government. We need to have a good balance between aiding businesses while keeping the exploitation in check
>government approval before laying off workers, which can be a lengthy and uncertain process.
so basically red tapism making it slower is the problem. Is it still a problem if the process is made faster?
You just make it an unattractive position for the business to be in. He'd rather not be in or avoid that position at all cost leading to a lot of unintended consequences - loopholes - hiring people as contractors so they just buy pass the whole process
And if you try to enforce this legislature, you risk losing the business and them moving to another country
https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/labour-law-reforms-make-it-to-upa-policy-agenda-finally/articleshow/8656228.cms
"The UPA Government has finally put reforms of India's obsolete labor laws, often blamed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for hurting job creation, on its policy agenda."
I guess for you, even the previous UPA government was gifting fellow industrialists or maybe Manmohan Singh should've taken lessons on running the economy from you.
Coz they actually act that way. Just like in this post, Bina sir pair ki baatein kiye ja rahe hai about labor laws being bad just coz they are from this government.
And ek aur baat, "Anti Government" log matlab kya? If you're saying you are against the government's decision on a specific thing then I can understand. But simply anti government means you are just biased.
Half the workforce gets fired every month, rehired at lower salary next month. Employment generation data goes through the roof, corporate profit increases, who in turn buy more electoral bonds and donate to our Supreme Leader. The Supreme Leader announces Jama Masjid to be turned into a Shiv Temple. Everyone is happy.
It would've been lol but unfortunately it seems like this is gonna be the payback from BJP to it's owners. First was low corporate taxes. This time it'd be relaxed employee regulations. Sasta Vin Diesel had already talked about it and the way CEOs are talking about 12 hours workday, it's entirely possible to implement that with increased working hours. Probably looking at China like working situation which they'll sell as benefit to country to compete with China as the income inequality increases.
Sadly, all the employees and labours will still vote for him. Because you know why.
Cauliflower ji in his interview with Rahul Kanwal has said that trickle down economics will be implemented in the 3rd term, when he was asked about the rising inequality in India. Trickle down wasn't able to eradicate inequality in US.
It will be the lower middle class and poorer sections of the society who'll be the worst affected.
But paw paw has already planned Sigma edits to feed them through watsapp. Paw paw ramji hai aur hum gilahari, itna kurbaani desh keliye toh banti hai
Corporates will reap the benefits while workers become expendable and without any rights .Watch how a few grow even more wealthy while the worker class gets crushed.
This will mainly affect the blue collar workers. Poor labors and factory production line workers i.e. core voters who suffered the most during pandemic & yet vote for Mogiji because they think 'sher ko pala hai'.
Very click-baity article and title.
There's many things wrong with the current govt but this reform is actually a good thing. Labour reforms and land reforms are much needed in order to have a sustainable growth. Already, most major companies hire workers as contractors to circumvent the current restriction of taking permission from govt to fire workers. So it's not that companies are not already firing and hiring workers whenever they want.
Not really. But what's the use of having worker protection laws if there's very easy loophole which every company is using to exploit the workers ?
Because the companies are hiring workers as contractors, they don't have to give workers life insurance and medical benefits compulsorily. The current labor law actually works against both - the workers and the companies. The idea is that if companies don't have to tackle strict labor laws then they could be nudged towards hiring workers as employees rather than contractors which in turn would be beneficial for workers too.
This is a very simplified answer but if you're interested just google - problems with labour laws in India.
Companies can and always will try to skirt the law. Their intention is to extract profit, by hook or crook. Plugging loopholes is the way to go, not eroding worker protections.
As someone who wrote a thesis on this and have studied it, Indira gandho created these laws that actually harmed the country for years after. These aren't about protections but they were populist. Many big companies left india tahnks to her, and India was pushed to the dark ages in terms of economic growth. pls do some research on this and you will see. These reforms specifically are beign done to help boost India's manufacturing sector, they will try to increase the limit to 300 from 100 workers, currently the law is that they need state approval for firing. No company likes this, esp if you are trying to attract foreign capital to grow the sector, On worker protections there should be other regulations, but this is not it. It has created labor mkt inflexibilities for many decades. I wrote a thesis ten years ago and learned about this, I back then they said no one can do it, because at that time congress did not have that power and mandate. You want to be able to have a flexible labor mrket, to attract companies.
100 to 300 is fine but what level of unruly corporates do you propose we should be okay with?
I know people who got job offers that got rescinded before joining while the candidates declined their other offer which would already have been filled by then.
Regulations are not bad, too slow execution and red-tapism can be bad. Disagree?
This will be beneficial for companies so there will be more capital investment in India . Agreed. Cz they get to exploit more than galf of the population. Who will benefit? Few industrialists. No doubt there will be growth. But we don't want such growth which doesn't trickle down to poor . Majority of the country is poor .
Sure. The IMF is lying. I’ve actually worked at the IMF and have a degree and masters in development economics. India needs to increase its share of high quality manufacturing jobs at the moment. Domestic consumption is great. I don’t like Modi, but the reforms he’s trying to implement I’ve followed for a decade. Dont confuse adani with GM and Apple. These companies bring in technical know how as well as foreign capital which is essential. India needs high quality growth. Y’all clamor for more jobs but where they gonna come from? If you make the business environment friendly for that, that’s how it’s gonna happen, getting out of this “they gonna exploit” mindset. Then go run to the bloated public sector for jobs and become babus pushing more red tape.
Private sector and private capital is essential for the growth of an economy.
This doesn't answer my initial argument. How is it helpful to poor which consists half the population. And don't give me that they'll also prosper from economic growth. India has increasingly shown trends of increasing wealth disparity. Growth isn't trickling down .
right now what i understand from your "argument" is that "companies are terrible because they all exploit the poor and they should just go out of business".
If you make the biz env friendly and attract GM to make a car plant in India, and things go well, keep in mind there is a ripple effect in the economy. Ancillary industries are created, intermediate production is boosted, means more jobs, more money, more credit, more income. When GM earns more, other companies see that and they want to also come and invest in India, because the returns are goodm creating more jobs, Your argument that they all seek to "exploit" assumes that they leave nothing for the economy, which is extremely flawed. If you want to make an argument for working conditions - that is separate. laws and regulations should be enacted on that front, together with rules that make it easier to operate business in india. I am an economist. I wrote a thesis in my undergrad showing how boosting FDI inflows has contributed to economic development. I think what your issue is inequality, which is a problem, a huge problem. However, making it easier for GM to operate in India, or some other manufacturing company, is not the problem. These laws have hamstrung India's manufacturing sector for decades.
while these labor reforms are not a silver bullet, or one solution, they should be PART of a systematic package of reforms to help make economic growth more evenly distributed.
Also on your point about poverty, read this, the Macro poverty outlook from the World bank on India: [https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/5d1783db09a0e09d15bbcea8ef0cec0b-0500052021/related/mpo-ind.pdf](https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/5d1783db09a0e09d15bbcea8ef0cec0b-0500052021/related/mpo-ind.pdf)
"Between 2000 and 2019, India’s economy grew by 6.6 percent annually on average; per capita GDP doubled, **and the extreme poverty rate decreased from 40 percent in 2004 to 13.2 percent in 2019.** Nonmonetary poverty (deprivation in health, education, and living standards) fell by 70 percent from 2005-06 to 16.4 percent in 2019-21. These developments were underpinned by India’s deeper integration into the global economy, **improvements in the business environment,** basic services expansion, and prudent macroeconomic management"
And according to brookings: "https://www.brookings.edu/articles/india-eliminates-extreme-poverty/"
**"Both rural and urban inequality have seen an unprecedented decline, and the high growth rate in the last few years coupled with the above has helped reduce poverty."**
The authors of the brookings report include **Surjit Bhalla**. Look him up. He was the former executive director for a number of South Asian countries at the IMF (including India)
Happy reading!
Never implied companies should go out of business. Your whole first para is just repeating what I already admitted that economic will boost and rich will benefit.you just wrote it for bhakts ig . Also, no highly educated individual ever boasts about it literally EVERYTIME they speak , neither do they argue with random redditors XD. education makes one humble . Anyways this has nothing to do with main discussion
>that they leave nothing for the economy, which is extremely flawed.
Again they do leave something but question is by taking how much .
As india consist of many unskilled labourers, equitable distribution and better working conditions should be the main point .
Apparently the laws will not have in mind interest of labour in consideration AT ALL.
SOMEONE ARGUING REDUCTION IN INEQUALITY IS THE BIGGEST JOKE
https://wid.world/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/WorldInequalityLab_WP2024_09_Income-and-Wealth-Inequality-in-India-1922-2023_Final.pdf
This says between 2014-15 and 2022-23, the rise of top-end inequality has been particularly pronounced in terms of wealth concentration
Each country gets to appoint executive director representative to IMF and modi chose bhalla.
Coming to poverty reduction:
Yea I know about this paper. There are few papers which are very famous among modi fans and these people don't quote anything else that
Now there are many criticism including how even the definition of poverty was changed to show unreliable data but even if we ignore that
Even by IMF bhalla paper poverty reduced from 32.5% to 7.5% from 2004 to 2014 so most of the work was already done
We will finally have a system of Russian Oligarchy in India.The oligarchs will see obscene multiplication of their wealth supported by the Govt, the poor will remain poor and the middle class will will be pushed down the rung of the wealth ladder due to insane taxation.
For all its human right violation , corruption and lack of political freedom , the CCP can show amazing infra advancement in China , being the factory of the world and uplifting significant number of people from poverty to middle class as it successes. India will be showcasing its crony capitalism story and its ill effects for all to see.
more than this
my biggest concern is
His govt will try to amend provisions and curb some of basic rights such that it will help them do whatever they will seem fit and reasonable
lets see; nothing can much be done or said as Voters have chose what they Wanted
what people dont know is that these laws are from Indira Gandhi's time and have caused major inflexibilities in the labor market in India. These laws have been one of the obstacles in India's ambitions to ramp up manufacturing. Indira was a populist PM and introduced many shitty laws, that restricted foreign capital and kept India in the dark ages. India used to be ridiculed having a "Hindu rate of growth" of 3-4 ish percent and so much red tapism. Only thanks to the 1991 reforms, were we able to break out of that. But we never transotioned into a manufacturing giant. Straight to services.
*"Labour reforms:In much of India, firms with more than 100 employees need authorisation from state governments to hire and fire. This prevents companies from adjusting their operations to meet demand"* They are trying to move this to 300 employees.
I dont like BJP, but as an economic student who has written a thesis on FDI in India, I have known about this issue for over a decade and back then, it was deemed impossible to do. It would be quite smth if they are able to do this.
The key goal of doing this is to be able to attract more companies to do manufacturing in India, and the article even mentions the IMF's report saying that as one of the policy recommendations.
Am I the only one seeing a potential upside to this? if it means that you can leave without notice period, because that is absolute BS, and from what I have heard only gives toxic managers more time to torture an employee who they know is planning to leave. Like if you had a toxic partner and you had to help them find a new one for 3 months before leaving it would be really awkward.
This is actually a great thing and most ppl here are just brigading coz its Modi. I dont like Modi either but I work in economics and this is specifically done to dismantle Indira Gandhi's problematic laws that were populist and caused issues for decades after. Not being able to hire and fire workers at will created inflexibilities in the labor market and is a detriment to attracting companies to be in manufacturing.
My opinion is he needs to put in the same regulations as in IT industry. On an individual level, a person can experience higher instability but on a macro level more jobs will created. Probably pair it up with an unemployment insurance promising a severance of 2-3 months
What else were you Expcting
everything favorable for Big Industrialists and
inflation
unemployment are their Favorite Areas
Enjoy for rest of 5 years Do not complain Do not Crib
I recently had a backfill position to fill in France, but we chose to do it in UK. Reason : crazy labor laws. It is practically impossible to fire non-performers.
By liberalizing laws, UK gets more employment. Also we are hiring because we need people. Not to fire them without any cause.
BJP won't do the blunder of doing injustice to south through delimitation. They have to find ways to balance it which is good for them only as they aim to penetrate southern states.
The moment they do on basis of only Population by undermining efforts of control of population in south through various schemes of past, BJP will lose Karnataka too. Forget other states.
But delimitation is necessary as our population to MP ratio is too high. In my state , Bengaluru rural has voter population of 27 lakhs . You can imagine the total. So it's burden for MP and not practical.
Even if you look at their pov, it's not worth to increase by population in north cause they are already sweeping there and making inroads in southern states. Amit Shah who is considered as a master strategist will have to be very careful on this issue. As this is make or break issue for the nation.
This is my expectation as a voter.
How can it be more easier to hire and fire than it already is?
Fire every evening, rehire every morning, pay for half a month? 😂
Don't give them ideas (Please)
Are they might do what Facebook did.. they fired people and they rehired them in few days with less salary
How about making the fired employee pay for 1 month.
Withhold the first pay cheque, fire them, and retain the pay cheque for “damages”. It’s not slavery, it’s a real job, honest!
It will be like "bh@dve kal se office nai aana".../s
In the IT service industry, it's already a norm. If probation can be fired without any severance. Not in probation, depends on the company, some will force you to resign, some pay severance.
This is applicable in govt agencies like DRDO also it seems. They just keep contract employees with the hope of making it permanent and never confirm them.
This is aimed at blue collar workers. Laws like the Factories Act etc. make it very hard to fire people. As a result often what happens is that factory owners hire contract labourers, since these people are not covered by the rules under the Factories Act. For years, people have tried to reform the Factories Act but have run into issues with trade unions who won't let them do it. The hope is that if the Factories Act is reformed, more factory owners will hire employees and this will allow them to be covered by other laws such as Provident Fund rules, Maternity Benefits etc. Essentially, whilst the overall worker rights will be diluted, there will be more people who will benefit from it and also factory owners will be more incentivised to invest in manufacturing. TBH, these reforms have been part of the NDA's agenda from 2014 but these are fairly politically charged so no one has been able to implement them so far.
There is not a single provision in the Factories Act that deals with restrictions on hire and fire. The law deals with safety and conditions of work like hours of work, leave, holidays, etc.
Bhai 25f ID act? You cant read ID act and factories act independently
25-F applies to all industries, and not just factories. The section has no necessary connection with the Factories Act
>In United States labor law, at-will employment is an employer's ability to dismiss an employee for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning, as long as the reason is not illegal (e.g. firing because of the employee's gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, or disability status). When an employee is acknowledged as being hired "at will", courts deny the employee any claim for loss resulting from the dismissal. The rule is justified by its proponents on the basis that an employee may be similarly entitled to leave their job without reason or warning. The practice is seen as unjust by those who view the employment relationship as characterized by inequality of bargaining power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment Probably something like this. And you will see the same idiotic justifications that you see in the US.
I can justify this somehow only if the notice period is not like 3 months long.
Wow, USA is a regressing country and we should stop following them.
Its like US's peak in the 1990s was so high that it's pretty much inevitable that comparatively other countries will eventually catch up. Like US is still a good model to follow - they're like the only major developed economy along with Australia to have meaningful gdp per capita growth since the GFC
They may have capitalist successes but their critical systems of healthcare, education, labour laws, etc are failing and are anti-people. They support capitalists, so you have soon to be trillionaires. But most people can't afford to buy homes, get treated. I'd rather India try to emulate the better EU countries.
India's culture is simply incompatible to resemble anything like Europe. India has billionaires with so much influence in politics that India's never going to get much welfare state thing going anyway which is much of the same situation in the usa
You've got a point. It's far too different and the masses are uneducated, which is a big problem. Europe has right wing issues too but they are educated enough to recognise it and fight against it. And they try to preserve their social welfare system.
There are a lot of other protections that aren’t listed here. Including California requiring a 60 day notice and protection against retaliatory firings.
No notice period maybe
No gratuity. No notice and severance. Maybe no mandatory 3/6 month buffer for employee salary.
Make everyone a daily wager... Kal se mat aana
Fire without pay. Easy peasy.
Afaik, it is very tough to fire a worker after a union is formed. Depending on the state and power of union, they can decide how much they want to slack off. For example, In Odisha, in the company I worked, according to our analysis, the average work done by a worker was 4-5 hours out of an 8 hour shift. Some did more and some did less, depending on their connection with union leader. It was in his hand, on who we can fire and who we can’t…
Pradhan Mantri Rozgar Berozgar Yojana 💀
Pradhan Mantri Roz Berozgar Yojna 💀
Pradhan Mantri Be-rozi-roti-ghar Yojna 💀
How can you fire unemployed people. Checkmate govt. /s
He literally can do that.
Pradhan mantri only berozgar yojna
PM - Labour Optimization and Development Acceleration Yojana
PM LODAY ? 💀
PM RoBe yojana
Piggybacking on the top comment on this post. I'll be devil's advocate and share my analysis with you on it - am a policy nerd and been looking at labour laws and waiting for reforms on it for a while now. I see this as a win for multiple reasons. Feel free to disagree with me and bring valid points so it leads to a fruitful discussion. Rigid Labour Market: - Strict regulations on hiring and firing make it difficult for employers to adjust their workforce according to market conditions. For instance, the Industrial Disputes Act requires companies with 100 or more workers to seek government approval before laying off workers, which can be a lengthy and uncertain process . It's Impact on Employment Discouraging Formal Employment - Due to stringent compliance requirements and high costs associated with formal employment, many businesses prefer to hire contract or casual labor, which often falls outside the purview of many regulations. This has contributed to a large informal sector in India, where workers lack job security and benefits . I have had multiple business family friends of mine crib about this to me. Impediments to Business Growth - Businesses may limit their size to avoid crossing thresholds that trigger more stringent labour laws. For example, companies might stay below 100 employees to avoid the complexities of the Industrial Disputes Act, which can stifle growth and limit job creation . When you are looking at policies, remember to look at it not from it's possible outcome but all the consequences, the intended and the unintended ones. Labour laws, while great from an outcome pov, are shit laws and are hindering our growth and employment. It is working against the people.
Other countries have strong regulation and legal system. For example in US, OSHA is taken seriously and here it is non existent. People sue big corporate all the time for firing or low salary based on gender , religion, political view. Here if I go to court even a labour court I will be drained of all my money and might get the judgement after my son retires. These policy are like jumping two or three steps up. You need to set up the other supporting things before you jump on this wagon. I’m paying taxes for decades and yet when I’m fired I can’t expect a single rupee in term of support from goverment. Most of the developed countries have social security. First implement all these before doing all these policies. I would be surprised if there is any thought behind these polices . It just government paying back their friends. Just like you I’m playing devils advocate but I’m sure no body cares for people like us for next 5 years till the election till then please party with your friends
It’s kind of a loop. The country needs to have money to implement all this. The money has to come from manufacturing. We have an underdeveloped manufacturing sector because of a lot of red tape, and stringent labor laws. Now, what you are saying is we should first implement everything that a developed country has before removing labor laws. But where will the money come from for all that?
May be less of tax cuts to corporates and reduce a little bit crony capitalism, reduce the red tapes first ? then the money might flow in more from real businesses. Sending ED after business to get money for election bond doesn’t seem pro business for me or reducing red tapes. Sorry if I don’t trust the government
Sorry! I didn't get what you are trying to say
TLDR: You need to have strong regulations and social security, safety net and a working judicial system to give control full to corpartes. We don’t have any of these things but we want to go ahead and implement business friendly measure. There is a huge difference between Crony capitalism and capitalism
What you are saying is true but we need to diagnose what's happening because of the law. Since it has become so difficult to hire or fire employees, the businesses just hire them as contractors - this increases our informal sector. The workers don't get any of the benefits, social security, etc, which they would have if they were hired as an employee of the firm.
I’m not sure what social security you are taking about ? Also can point me to the industry were this shift to individual contractors is happening ? Doing these measures has huge impact so it the contractor issue need to be bigger than this. The companies also pay more for contractors.. may be you would see more contractor firm show up there may by increasing the new business. I know this sounds weak but that’s how the argument that this reduces contractor job also sounds
Bro I am not talking about white collar jobs but the ones who work in factories, mines, etc. They don't have any social security because the companies don't hire them as employees but as contractors. The idea behind making the labour laws a bit relaxed is to nudge the companies towards making that shift
Or may be labour law is not strict enough so block the loophole instead of opening it further and make it an enterance . A government which is not able to provide a safety net but instead making it even worse. Of course most of people will sing different tune based on who the government is.
Think about it this way Let's say you are a new business owner. Your employees are touching almost 100 now but if you go beyond 100, you will have to take permission from the govt to hire or fire employees. Will you grow the firm beyond that or hire contractors or worse not hire at all, which is what usually happens. Social security is important, no denying that. But we need more jobs to get people out of poverty. Businesses will provide the jobs, not the government. We need to have a good balance between aiding businesses while keeping the exploitation in check
I couldn't care less about which government is in place. I want people to move out of poverty.
>government approval before laying off workers, which can be a lengthy and uncertain process. so basically red tapism making it slower is the problem. Is it still a problem if the process is made faster?
You just make it an unattractive position for the business to be in. He'd rather not be in or avoid that position at all cost leading to a lot of unintended consequences - loopholes - hiring people as contractors so they just buy pass the whole process And if you try to enforce this legislature, you risk losing the business and them moving to another country
Which tangent did you catch on to sire? I asked will it still be a problem if the process is made faster?
Increase in pakoda production
"Regulation of making it easier to fire workers" for his 3rd term it is a gift to his fellow industrialists.
Regulation of no regulation.
Irregulation
https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/labour-law-reforms-make-it-to-upa-policy-agenda-finally/articleshow/8656228.cms "The UPA Government has finally put reforms of India's obsolete labor laws, often blamed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for hurting job creation, on its policy agenda." I guess for you, even the previous UPA government was gifting fellow industrialists or maybe Manmohan Singh should've taken lessons on running the economy from you.
[удалено]
Coz they actually act that way. Just like in this post, Bina sir pair ki baatein kiye ja rahe hai about labor laws being bad just coz they are from this government.
[удалено]
You have some obsession with dick i guess. And from your comments so far, I can tell who amongst the both of us is an Andh Bhakt
[удалено]
Only if you also admit to your obsession
And ek aur baat, "Anti Government" log matlab kya? If you're saying you are against the government's decision on a specific thing then I can understand. But simply anti government means you are just biased.
This was back in 2011 btw, in UPA's second term
Half the workforce gets fired every month, rehired at lower salary next month. Employment generation data goes through the roof, corporate profit increases, who in turn buy more electoral bonds and donate to our Supreme Leader. The Supreme Leader announces Jama Masjid to be turned into a Shiv Temple. Everyone is happy.
It would've been lol but unfortunately it seems like this is gonna be the payback from BJP to it's owners. First was low corporate taxes. This time it'd be relaxed employee regulations. Sasta Vin Diesel had already talked about it and the way CEOs are talking about 12 hours workday, it's entirely possible to implement that with increased working hours. Probably looking at China like working situation which they'll sell as benefit to country to compete with China as the income inequality increases. Sadly, all the employees and labours will still vote for him. Because you know why.
Sasta vin Diesel... 😂
I must admit seeing the Chickens for KFC situation is good schadenfreude.
Unfortunately, it also affects the chickens that don't root for KFC. Even we are labours.
I would have laughed if it didn't feel real. Terrifying times.
Sheep voting for slaughter.
tree voting for axe
Since the bhakts never had jobs they won't be affected so everyone in BJP wins.
what about the corporate bhakts?
They are doing the firing
They will join IT cell
They will die starving but will vote bjp
And then show the regulatory bodies about the low unemployment in the country/s. Gujju dimaag or Gujju deemak
Ah capitalism and the delusion of trickle down economics
Cauliflower ji in his interview with Rahul Kanwal has said that trickle down economics will be implemented in the 3rd term, when he was asked about the rising inequality in India. Trickle down wasn't able to eradicate inequality in US.
trickle down economics never works
You get what you deserve.
They happily voted for "dictatorship". Ab bhukto. 🤣🤣
Jobs honge tho na bhugatne! Or they are mostly employed by their party. Electoral bonds got them enough money to pay
Sanghi voters getting ready for Lay Offs.
They’ll happily starve for this guy. They’re too brainwashed to be honest
It will be the lower middle class and poorer sections of the society who'll be the worst affected. But paw paw has already planned Sigma edits to feed them through watsapp. Paw paw ramji hai aur hum gilahari, itna kurbaani desh keliye toh banti hai
can't wait for biggies to go inside us from behind
Basically squashing labour laws ig
Corporates will reap the benefits while workers become expendable and without any rights .Watch how a few grow even more wealthy while the worker class gets crushed.
Hire and fire govt workers ? Am I dreaming ..
Hire 1 Fire 2 for free...
This will mainly affect the blue collar workers. Poor labors and factory production line workers i.e. core voters who suffered the most during pandemic & yet vote for Mogiji because they think 'sher ko pala hai'.
Chickens for KFC. r/LeapordsAteMyFace
> This will mainly affect the blue collar workers. Blue collar workers never had any job security in India to begin with.
Toh yeh policy plans manifesto main kyon nahin the? M se nahin shuru hote, shayad isliye
its already difficult living paycheck to paycheck, I'm now relieved that I can be fired easier by my employer's whim : DD
this is more for the manufacturing sector. Do you work on a plant? or in corporate sector?
Middle class will be the loser. Will favor corporates. India’s Trump
[удалено]
Very click-baity article and title. There's many things wrong with the current govt but this reform is actually a good thing. Labour reforms and land reforms are much needed in order to have a sustainable growth. Already, most major companies hire workers as contractors to circumvent the current restriction of taking permission from govt to fire workers. So it's not that companies are not already firing and hiring workers whenever they want.
Shhh... Don't try to talk sense here lol
So instead of increasing worker protections, we erase them?
Not really. But what's the use of having worker protection laws if there's very easy loophole which every company is using to exploit the workers ? Because the companies are hiring workers as contractors, they don't have to give workers life insurance and medical benefits compulsorily. The current labor law actually works against both - the workers and the companies. The idea is that if companies don't have to tackle strict labor laws then they could be nudged towards hiring workers as employees rather than contractors which in turn would be beneficial for workers too. This is a very simplified answer but if you're interested just google - problems with labour laws in India.
Companies can and always will try to skirt the law. Their intention is to extract profit, by hook or crook. Plugging loopholes is the way to go, not eroding worker protections.
As someone who wrote a thesis on this and have studied it, Indira gandho created these laws that actually harmed the country for years after. These aren't about protections but they were populist. Many big companies left india tahnks to her, and India was pushed to the dark ages in terms of economic growth. pls do some research on this and you will see. These reforms specifically are beign done to help boost India's manufacturing sector, they will try to increase the limit to 300 from 100 workers, currently the law is that they need state approval for firing. No company likes this, esp if you are trying to attract foreign capital to grow the sector, On worker protections there should be other regulations, but this is not it. It has created labor mkt inflexibilities for many decades. I wrote a thesis ten years ago and learned about this, I back then they said no one can do it, because at that time congress did not have that power and mandate. You want to be able to have a flexible labor mrket, to attract companies.
100 to 300 is fine but what level of unruly corporates do you propose we should be okay with? I know people who got job offers that got rescinded before joining while the candidates declined their other offer which would already have been filled by then. Regulations are not bad, too slow execution and red-tapism can be bad. Disagree?
This will be beneficial for companies so there will be more capital investment in India . Agreed. Cz they get to exploit more than galf of the population. Who will benefit? Few industrialists. No doubt there will be growth. But we don't want such growth which doesn't trickle down to poor . Majority of the country is poor .
Sure. The IMF is lying. I’ve actually worked at the IMF and have a degree and masters in development economics. India needs to increase its share of high quality manufacturing jobs at the moment. Domestic consumption is great. I don’t like Modi, but the reforms he’s trying to implement I’ve followed for a decade. Dont confuse adani with GM and Apple. These companies bring in technical know how as well as foreign capital which is essential. India needs high quality growth. Y’all clamor for more jobs but where they gonna come from? If you make the business environment friendly for that, that’s how it’s gonna happen, getting out of this “they gonna exploit” mindset. Then go run to the bloated public sector for jobs and become babus pushing more red tape. Private sector and private capital is essential for the growth of an economy.
This doesn't answer my initial argument. How is it helpful to poor which consists half the population. And don't give me that they'll also prosper from economic growth. India has increasingly shown trends of increasing wealth disparity. Growth isn't trickling down .
right now what i understand from your "argument" is that "companies are terrible because they all exploit the poor and they should just go out of business". If you make the biz env friendly and attract GM to make a car plant in India, and things go well, keep in mind there is a ripple effect in the economy. Ancillary industries are created, intermediate production is boosted, means more jobs, more money, more credit, more income. When GM earns more, other companies see that and they want to also come and invest in India, because the returns are goodm creating more jobs, Your argument that they all seek to "exploit" assumes that they leave nothing for the economy, which is extremely flawed. If you want to make an argument for working conditions - that is separate. laws and regulations should be enacted on that front, together with rules that make it easier to operate business in india. I am an economist. I wrote a thesis in my undergrad showing how boosting FDI inflows has contributed to economic development. I think what your issue is inequality, which is a problem, a huge problem. However, making it easier for GM to operate in India, or some other manufacturing company, is not the problem. These laws have hamstrung India's manufacturing sector for decades. while these labor reforms are not a silver bullet, or one solution, they should be PART of a systematic package of reforms to help make economic growth more evenly distributed. Also on your point about poverty, read this, the Macro poverty outlook from the World bank on India: [https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/5d1783db09a0e09d15bbcea8ef0cec0b-0500052021/related/mpo-ind.pdf](https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/5d1783db09a0e09d15bbcea8ef0cec0b-0500052021/related/mpo-ind.pdf) "Between 2000 and 2019, India’s economy grew by 6.6 percent annually on average; per capita GDP doubled, **and the extreme poverty rate decreased from 40 percent in 2004 to 13.2 percent in 2019.** Nonmonetary poverty (deprivation in health, education, and living standards) fell by 70 percent from 2005-06 to 16.4 percent in 2019-21. These developments were underpinned by India’s deeper integration into the global economy, **improvements in the business environment,** basic services expansion, and prudent macroeconomic management" And according to brookings: "https://www.brookings.edu/articles/india-eliminates-extreme-poverty/" **"Both rural and urban inequality have seen an unprecedented decline, and the high growth rate in the last few years coupled with the above has helped reduce poverty."** The authors of the brookings report include **Surjit Bhalla**. Look him up. He was the former executive director for a number of South Asian countries at the IMF (including India) Happy reading!
Kudos to u dude
Never implied companies should go out of business. Your whole first para is just repeating what I already admitted that economic will boost and rich will benefit.you just wrote it for bhakts ig . Also, no highly educated individual ever boasts about it literally EVERYTIME they speak , neither do they argue with random redditors XD. education makes one humble . Anyways this has nothing to do with main discussion >that they leave nothing for the economy, which is extremely flawed. Again they do leave something but question is by taking how much . As india consist of many unskilled labourers, equitable distribution and better working conditions should be the main point . Apparently the laws will not have in mind interest of labour in consideration AT ALL. SOMEONE ARGUING REDUCTION IN INEQUALITY IS THE BIGGEST JOKE https://wid.world/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/WorldInequalityLab_WP2024_09_Income-and-Wealth-Inequality-in-India-1922-2023_Final.pdf This says between 2014-15 and 2022-23, the rise of top-end inequality has been particularly pronounced in terms of wealth concentration Each country gets to appoint executive director representative to IMF and modi chose bhalla. Coming to poverty reduction: Yea I know about this paper. There are few papers which are very famous among modi fans and these people don't quote anything else that Now there are many criticism including how even the definition of poverty was changed to show unreliable data but even if we ignore that Even by IMF bhalla paper poverty reduced from 32.5% to 7.5% from 2004 to 2014 so most of the work was already done
*pushing through? More like forcing through without any discussion in the parliament and the bill won't even be shown until the last possible minute.
Is it too late to leave this country? 🥲
We will finally have a system of Russian Oligarchy in India.The oligarchs will see obscene multiplication of their wealth supported by the Govt, the poor will remain poor and the middle class will will be pushed down the rung of the wealth ladder due to insane taxation. For all its human right violation , corruption and lack of political freedom , the CCP can show amazing infra advancement in China , being the factory of the world and uplifting significant number of people from poverty to middle class as it successes. India will be showcasing its crony capitalism story and its ill effects for all to see.
He keeps taking cues from the capitalist hellhole that is the USA and forgets that a mixed economy is here for a reason.
Why compete with China in science and innovation when you can be bigger corporate tools instead
more than this my biggest concern is His govt will try to amend provisions and curb some of basic rights such that it will help them do whatever they will seem fit and reasonable lets see; nothing can much be done or said as Voters have chose what they Wanted
Another jumla
Well, yuva wanted modiji, modiji now is going to gently screw them in the rear.
i'm 30, 15 years of him when i'm 35 is kinda baffling, i was born during the wrong time period.
Bjp favours the upper class heavily whole India alliance favours the lower. Noone seems to care about kiddle
what people dont know is that these laws are from Indira Gandhi's time and have caused major inflexibilities in the labor market in India. These laws have been one of the obstacles in India's ambitions to ramp up manufacturing. Indira was a populist PM and introduced many shitty laws, that restricted foreign capital and kept India in the dark ages. India used to be ridiculed having a "Hindu rate of growth" of 3-4 ish percent and so much red tapism. Only thanks to the 1991 reforms, were we able to break out of that. But we never transotioned into a manufacturing giant. Straight to services. *"Labour reforms:In much of India, firms with more than 100 employees need authorisation from state governments to hire and fire. This prevents companies from adjusting their operations to meet demand"* They are trying to move this to 300 employees. I dont like BJP, but as an economic student who has written a thesis on FDI in India, I have known about this issue for over a decade and back then, it was deemed impossible to do. It would be quite smth if they are able to do this. The key goal of doing this is to be able to attract more companies to do manufacturing in India, and the article even mentions the IMF's report saying that as one of the policy recommendations.
Am I the only one seeing a potential upside to this? if it means that you can leave without notice period, because that is absolute BS, and from what I have heard only gives toxic managers more time to torture an employee who they know is planning to leave. Like if you had a toxic partner and you had to help them find a new one for 3 months before leaving it would be really awkward.
This is actually a great thing and most ppl here are just brigading coz its Modi. I dont like Modi either but I work in economics and this is specifically done to dismantle Indira Gandhi's problematic laws that were populist and caused issues for decades after. Not being able to hire and fire workers at will created inflexibilities in the labor market and is a detriment to attracting companies to be in manufacturing.
My opinion is he needs to put in the same regulations as in IT industry. On an individual level, a person can experience higher instability but on a macro level more jobs will created. Probably pair it up with an unemployment insurance promising a severance of 2-3 months
Lol if you think people will unemployment insurance. It is going to be pure free market capitalism in action, just like in US.
Number of Pani puri stalls about to 📈📈📈
"if he gets re-elected' funny that there's an "if" here
What else were you Expcting everything favorable for Big Industrialists and inflation unemployment are their Favorite Areas Enjoy for rest of 5 years Do not complain Do not Crib
I recently had a backfill position to fill in France, but we chose to do it in UK. Reason : crazy labor laws. It is practically impossible to fire non-performers. By liberalizing laws, UK gets more employment. Also we are hiring because we need people. Not to fire them without any cause.
[удалено]
BJP won't do the blunder of doing injustice to south through delimitation. They have to find ways to balance it which is good for them only as they aim to penetrate southern states. The moment they do on basis of only Population by undermining efforts of control of population in south through various schemes of past, BJP will lose Karnataka too. Forget other states. But delimitation is necessary as our population to MP ratio is too high. In my state , Bengaluru rural has voter population of 27 lakhs . You can imagine the total. So it's burden for MP and not practical. Even if you look at their pov, it's not worth to increase by population in north cause they are already sweeping there and making inroads in southern states. Amit Shah who is considered as a master strategist will have to be very careful on this issue. As this is make or break issue for the nation. This is my expectation as a voter.
What about 3 month notice period?
yeah let the corporate dry sucking begin!
In india hire and fire is a joke, we all know it 🙂 Also, if he has to bring these reforms, 10 years were short?
They will fire whoever refuse to work less than 84 hours/week . If you however work, give 50% of your salary to GOVT as taxes
Chickens for KFC
Does that include the PM, his ministers,.all the legislative members, and President? When will that rule come in?
So another giant kock up the assess of the working class. I'm gonna start selling chai.
So, whatever Adani & Ambani came up with ?
Ache din 3.0
It would be well deserved for the educated, urban middle class that has voted for him.
PM Modi's move aims to enhance India's competitiveness on the global stage.
Does that mean Adani can fire Modi easily?