By Dr. Gyan Pathak
The Draft “Shram Shakti Niti 2025 – National Labour & Employment Policy” of India is now under sharp attack from various stakeholders. They have pointed out the pitfalls of the policy, while the joint platform of the 10 Central Trade Unions (CTUs) has already launched a month-long campaign against it along with other policies of the government, which will culminate on November 26 with submission of memorandum at every district of the country which will include the demand of its immediate withdrawal.
Other workers unions and associations have also flagged their concerns, while the Internet Freedom Foundation has said that large number of workers will be digitally locked out from jobs under the new employment policy’s digital public infrastructure.
The All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) has demanded immediate withdrawal of the Draft National Labour & Employment policy, which was published by the Union Ministry of Labour on October 8 inviting the stakeholders, institutions, and members of the public to submit their feedback, comments, and suggestion withing 20 days by October 27, 2025.
CTUs are suspecting the real intention of the Centre led by PM Narendra Modi, because the policy has been drafted without deliberation with the stakeholders, as was the case with the four controversial labour codes that were passed in the parliament in 2019 and 2020. Even the highest tripartite body on labour issues, Indian Labour Conference (ILC) was not consulted, and the government has not even convened its meeting since 2015. ILC has recommended in 2013 that the Government of India must frame National employment policy, but the Modi government took 11 years to bring the Draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025, but without due deliberations with stakeholders.
AITUC, while demanding immediate withdrawal of the Draft Shram Shakti Niti 2025, has alleged that the policy has been prepared without consultation with trade unions. AITUC has demanded that discussions with the CTUs should be initiated before finalising it for public opinion.
The All India Bank Employees’ Association (AIBEA) has expressed concern over the Draft National Labour & Employment Policy, alleging that it ignores key worker issues and may legitimise anti-worker measures. AIBEA has even issued a circular expressing serious reservations about the draft, stating that it undermines the role of the government as a protector of workers’ rights and fails to uphold international labour standards.
Questioning Policy’s intent and approach, AIBEA, has even said that it does no uphold India’s constitutional commitments. It rather appears to legitimise the government’s current anti-worker stance. The circular notes that the policy does not mention any machinery to resolve labour disputes.
AIBEA says that labour should be treated as livelihood and not as a moral or religious obligation. However, the policy defines labour as a sacred and moral duty linked to dharma, quoting texts such as Manu Smriti, Yagyavalkya Smriti, Narad Smriti, Sukra Niti, and Arthshastra. AIBEA has objected to the policy shift on labour, which envisions the government as a facilitator instead of an intervenor against exploitation. Additionally, objected to the policy on the ground that it presents a framework where the government becomes a job facilitator rather than a job creator despite the country’s high unemployment levels.
AIBEA has pointed out that the draft policy seeks to align labour governance with the government’s goal of Vikasit Bharat 2047 and appears to support the objectives of the new Labour Codes. The association warns that the policy could affect he trade union movement and the labour rights achieved over time. AIBEA expects central trade unions to respond to the draft policy and advises workers to stay aware of the proposed measures.
The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) has said in its submission that the Policy seeks to connect every worker in the country, whether formal, informal, gig, or migrant, to a unified digital ecosystem that manages employment, benefits and workplace safety putting the workers being locked out of jobs. IFF’s concerns seem to be valid since we have already seen how MGNREGA workers have been locked out from jobs due to the implementation of the digital platform to provide jobs.
IFF challenged the government claim that it has bridged the digital divide showing 97 per cent of youth using mobile phones and over 91 per cent accessing the internet. These numbers are a delusion. They count anyone who has touched a screen as “digitally included,” while the reality on the ground tells a different story. Only 56.9% of rural young women own mobile phones. Just 22.9% of youth have ever drafted a digital document.
What this means is that most Indians are digital consumers, not digital participants. They scroll through content but cannot create it. They watch videos but cannot fill out forms. For informal workers, rural labourers, and migrant workers, the very people policy claims to serve, the National Career Service portal might as well be a distant reality. Without personal devices, stable internet, or basic digital literacy, these workers will be locked out of the employment system that is supposedly designed for them. The government is building a digital gate and advertising it as a bridge.
IFF says that the policy is confident about AI-driven job matching and personalised recommendations on the NCS platform, but it says nothing about which AI models will be used, who will oversee them, or how bias will be prevented. The excess usage of AI is not a solution. Algorithms reproduce the prejudices fed into them, and hiring algorithms have been shown repeatedly to discriminate against women, older workers, and rural applicants. By making NCS the main gateway to employment opportunities and government benefits, the state is practising digital coercion: workers must surrender their personal data and submit to algorithmic judgment if they want jobs or social security. There is no alternative.
Meanwhile, IFF says, basic questions of feasibility remain unanswered. (i) Can NCS actually handle crores of active users searching for jobs in real-time across multiple languages? (ii) Will the AI systems require massive data collection that violates privacy or costs too much to sustain? The E-shram portal has collapsed under far lighter loads, plagued by fragmented data and low employer participation. The draft policy does not explain how these problems have been solved.
IFF says that a primary feature of the policy is a proposed “labour stack”, an integrated digital architecture that combines key national labour databases and schemes into one interoperable system. This includes linking the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) and Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) databases, the e-Shram portal for unorganised workers, the National Career Service (NCS), and health insurance schemes like PM-JAY into a unified Universal Social Security Account (USSA) for each worker.
The ambition is clear, but the execution will be difficult, due to a range of issues including matching errors. If the unified system cannot reconcile records, a worker could be denied benefits due to a data mismatch, turning a bureaucratic error into a denial of livelihood support. Accessibility for all workers will be an additional issue. IFF has also flagged concerns and pointed out precarity of gig and platform workers and algorithmic risks. Without tailored legislation that mandates algorithmic transparency, fair work standards, and genuine grievance redressal mechanisms for platform workers, the policy’s promises of inclusion ring hollow. (IPA Service)
Fear Of Denial Of Right To Vote Haunts Bihar’s Dalits, Muslims 