In light of the current pandemic the economy has been seriously hindered, Numerous amendments, advisories,

and announcements have been introduced to minimise the impact of the pandemic on the general public and
business establishments, as well as to ensure minimal disruption in the supply chain. These amendments,
advisories, and announcements are intended to last only during the containment period, but may have long-term
implications. Considering the implications of these developments is critical for business operations to run
smoothly. The State of Uttar Pradesh enacted the Uttar Pradesh Temporary Exemption from Certain Labour
Rules Ordinance, 2020, which suspended 35 out of the 38 labour laws for a period of three years. Other states,
like as Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, and Odisha, among others, followed suit, albeit to a lesser extent.

According to reports, the aforementioned decree has suspended all labour-related legislation except the
Workmen Compensation Act of 1923, the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act of 1976, and the Building and
Other Construction Workers Act of 1996. However, Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, which pertains to
timely wage payment, will remain in effect.

Though the Ordinance has been approved by the UP Government, it has not received Presidential Assent yet,
which is required as per Article 213 of the Indian Constitution. The reason for such initiatives has been put
forward as encouraging investment and jobs. The rationale for the suspension and dilution is that in the present
circumstances. There is a demand for business and industry to have some flexibility in order to meet the needs
of providing employment to employees who have returned to the state and protecting existing worker
employment.

While the reforms are well-intentioned and aimed at promoting investment and industries, the unexpected
implications of such a move are severe. While the governments have claimed that workers will be protected as a
result of the action, it reminds us of a Machiavelli quote: "Never let a good crisis go to waste."

When compared to other governments' efforts to avoid layoffs by giving pay subsidies and the UN's request to
reduce the pandemic's impact on employees, this is a step in the opposite direction.

Labour laws can be divided into four categories based on the goals they seek to achieve: working conditions,
wages, social security, and labour relations. On a variety of fronts, the unexpected suspension of labour
regulations would leave the workforce at the mercy of businesses. Some laws require establishments to be
compliant by offering minimum salaries and basic safety standards. If a business employs more than a particular
number of people, shutdown would require prior consent. Other legal obligations include notification,
retrenchment compensation, and payment of dues such as gratuity. There would be a number of employers who
would take advantage of the situation and fire people without having to deal with the paperwork. To make
matters worse, the suspension implies that trade unions would be unable to file a claim under the Industrial
Disputes Act of 1947, leaving hapless workers without a method of redressing their grievances.

The fundamental rights and the directive principles plays a key role in protecting and safeguarding the rights of
the labour
Freedom to Form Associations

The liberty of citizens to form associations and unions, as guaranteed by Article 19(1)(c), has been curtailed by
the aforementioned action. It is worth noting that, as stated in Kulkarni v. State of Bombay, association
presupposes organisation and includes the right to form trade unions within its scope. When all labour laws,
including the Trade Unions Act of 1926, are suspended, this fundamental right is also in jeopardy. Furthermore,
such trade unions speak for and represent other employees in the event of a dispute with the authorities, which is
essential in any collective bargaining structure. The very purpose of a trade union is to balance bargaining
power against the employer. Even if it is argued that suspension would be valid under Article 19(4), which
provides for various reasonable restrictions that can be imposed on the grounds of public order, morality, or
India's sovereignty and integrity, there is a need to strike a balance between rights and restrictions in order to
maintain bargaining power.

The Right to Life and Its Variations

The scope of the right to life conferred by Article 21 has been broadened by the case of Maneka Gandhi v.
Union of India. It's like a Pandora's box, with all of its different facets and interpretations. As stated in the case
of Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, the right to life does not imply a mere animal existence, but
rather a right to live with dignity. Furthermore, as stated in the case of Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal
Corporation, this right includes the right to a livelihood. In support of the aforementioned action, social security
statutes such as the Minimum Wages Act of 1948, the Factories Act of 1948, and even the Industrial Disputes
Act of 1947 have been suspended. This violates labourers' and employees' right to a dignified life, as well as
their right to a livelihood, because they no longer have a guarantee of a fixed minimum income or protection
against retrenchment or layoffs. Employers are also no longer required to provide basic standards of safety and
care, as mandated by the Factories Act of 1948.

Ironically, despite the Supreme Court of India recognising the right to access to justice as a fundamental right in
the case of Anita Kushwaha v. Pushap Sadan, the grievance redressal mechanism for them, as provided in the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is also unavailable due to the suspension of the laws (2016).

Right of Protection from Exploitation

In Sanjit Roy v. State of Rajasthan, the court ruled that paying wages less than the minimum wage to someone
working on famine relief violates Article 23. When the State takes any labour or service from a person who is
affected by drought and scarcity conditions, the State cannot pay him less than the minimum wage on the
grounds that it is given to them to help meet famine situations. The State cannot exploit their helplessness.
Parallels can be drawn between this case and the current situation. The suspension of the Minimum Wage Act
would result in exploitative practises by both private and public sector employers. This would put the workers in
a situation of forced labour, which the Constitution expressly prohibits.
Directive Principles of State Policy

Part IV of the Indian Constitution addresses the issue of non-justiciable Directive Principles of State Policy
(DPSP). They are ideals that must be kept in mind as the state seeks to formulate policies or pass legislation.
The DPSPs serve as the foundation for many pieces of labour welfare legislation, including social security laws.

Article 38 aims to improve people's well-being by ensuring social, economic, and political justice and reducing
inequalities in income, status, and opportunities. Article 39 seeks to secure to citizens, among other things, the
right to adequate means of livelihood for all citizens, the equitable distribution of the community's material
resources for the common good, and the prevention of the concentration of wealth and means of production.
According to Article 41, the state must provide its citizens with the right to work in cases of unemployment and
disability. Article 43 requires states to provide a living wage, a decent standard of living, and social and cultural
opportunities for all workers. Article 51 imposes a duty to promote the observance of international treaties and
obligations. Employees' welfare is not promoted by the suspension of labour laws; rather, they are deprived of
the means to secure social and economic justice. Employee income inequalities would worsen as a result of this.
Furthermore, employees' means of subsistence can be disrupted at the whims and fancies of the employer, with
no legal recourse available to them. In the case of Daily Rated Casual Labour v. Union of India, it was
determined that “job security” is an essential component of the right to work and must be interpreted in light of
the right's socioeconomic philosophy. By suspending labour laws, there would also be a lack of job security and
a living wage, as well as a decent standard of living.

Furthermore, the aforementioned suspension would be in violation of India's international obligations as a result
of its ratification of various international labour conventions. Therefore, the immediate suspension and dilution
would constitute a violation of the DPSPs, which is protected by the State.

Different states have promulgated impugned ordinances with regard to the Labour laws

Uttar Pradesh

For a period of three (3) years, the UP Government promulgated an Ordinance suspending a majority of the key
labour laws and rules in the State for all factories and establishments engaged in the manufacturing process. The
following are the laws that have been suspended:

1. Apprentices Act 1961;

2. Beedi and Cigar Workers Act 1966;
3. Cine Workers and Cinema Theatre W. Act 1981;
4. Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970;
5. Dookan Aur Vanijya Adhisthan Act 1962;
6. Factories Act 1948 (barring provisions relating to safety and security of workers);
7. Industrial Disputes Act 1947;
8. Industrial Employment Act 1946;
9. Minimum Wages Act 1948;
 10. Motor Transport Workers Act 1961;
11. Payment of Bonus Act 1965;
12. Payment of Gratuity Act 1972;
13. Payment of Wages Act 1936 (barring Section 5);
14. Public Liability Insurance Act 1991;
15. Sales Promotion Employees Act 1976;
16. The Indian Boiler Act, 1923;
17. Trade Unions Act 1926;
18. Weekly Holidays Act 1942;
19. Working Journalists Employees Act 1955;
20. Dangerous Machines Act 1983;
21. Sick Industrial Companies Act 1985;
22. Building and other construction workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Services)
Act, 1996 (barring provisions relating to safety and security of workers);
23. UP Shops & Establishments Act 1962;
24. UP Welfare Fund Act;
25. UP Industrial Peace (Timely Payment of Wages) Act 1961;
26. UP Industrial Housing Act 1955;
27. Industrial Establishment (National Holidays) Act 1961;
28. UP Industrial Undertakings Special Provisions for Prevention of (Unemployment) Act 1966;
29. UP Employment of Substitute Workmen Act 1978; and
30. UP Sugar & Power Alchohol Industries Labour Welfare & Development Fund Act 1950.

Barring the provisions relating to safety and security of workers under the Factories Act, 1948 and the Building
and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996; Child
Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986; Maternity Benefit Act, 1961; Employee’s Compensation Act,
1923; Equal Remuneration Act, 1976; Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976; and Section 5 of the
Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (the right to receive timely wages), remaining all labour laws as listed above are
suspended in the State. Exemptions are subject to the fulfillment of the following conditions:

1. Name and details of all employed workers shall be entered electronically on attendance register
prescribed in Section 62 of the Factories Act, 1948.
2. No workers shall be paid less than minimum wage as prescribed by the UP Government.
3. The wages of the workers shall be within the time frame limit prescribed under Section 5 of the
Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
4. The wages to workers shall be paid only in their bank accounts.
5. The provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 and the Building and Other Construction Workers
(Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 relating to safety and security of
workers shall remain applicable.
 6. The workers shall not be allowed or required to work for more than eleven hours per day and the
spread over of the work shall not be more than twelve hours per day.
7. For any death or disability due to accident arising out of and in the course of employment,
compensation shall be paid in accordance with the Employees Compensation Act, 1923.
8. The provisions of the various labour laws relating to the employment of women and children shall
remain applicable.
9. The provisions of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 shall remain applicable.

Madhya Pradesh (“MP“)

The Government of MP amended the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in a gazette notification dated May 5, 2020,
allowing new establishments to be exempt from provisions under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, barring the
provisions of Chapter V-A (Lay-off and Retrenchment), provisions of Chapter V-B (Special Provisions relating
to Lay-off, Retrenchment and closure in certain Establishment) pertaining to the conditions precedent to lay-off
and retrenchment of workers, the procedure for closing down an undertaking, special provisions regarding the
restarting of undertakings closed down prior to the commencement of the Industrial Disputes (Amendment) Act,
1976, the penalty for lay-off and retrenchment without prior permission, and the penalty for closure The
exemption is valid for a period of thousand (1000) days provided that such industries make adequate provisions
for the investigation and resolution of industrial disputes involving their employees.

Furthermore, the notification exempts factories from the provisions of the Factories Act of 1948 and the MP
Factories Rules of 1962 for a period of three (3) months beginning on the date the notification is published.
Exemption is available from all provisions of the Factories Act of 1948, except those pertaining to factory
approval, licencing, and registration, notice by occupiers and inspectors, and provisions of Chapter IV (Safety),
Chapter IV-A (Provisions relating to Hazardous Processes), Section 59 (Extra wages for overtime), Section 65
(Power to make exempting rules), Section 67 (Prohibition of employment of young children), Section 79
(Annual leave with wages), Section 88 (Notice of certain accidents) and Section 112 (General powers to make
rules) and rules made thereunder.

Gujarat

The State of Gujarat has exempted all factories registered under the Factories Act, 1948 from various provisions
relating to weekly hours, daily hours, rest intervals, and so on, with effect from April 20, 2020, subject to the
following conditions until July 19, 2020:

1- No adult worker shall be permitted or required to work more than twelve (12) hours per day or
seventy-two (72) hours per week in a factory.
 2- No worker shall work for more than six (6) hours without a rest interval of at least half an
hour on each day.
3- No female worker shall be permitted or required to work in a factory between the hours of
7:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.
4- Wages will be paid in proportion to current wages. (For example, if the wage for eight (8)
hours is Rs. 80, the proportionate wage for twelve (12) hours is Rs. 120.)

The Chief Minister of Gujarat announced on May 8, 2020, that labour law relaxations would be made applicable
to new projects in the state that operate for at least twelve hundred (1200) days, as well as those that are already
operational during that time. It was stated that a new ordinance would be enacted to put this into effect.

Rajasthan

The State of Rajasthan issued a notification on April 11, 2020, extending working hours to twelve (12) hours per
day for three (3) months from the date of the decree. To minimise workforce requirements in factories
producing vital food and grocery supplies, the Government of Rajasthan has exempted adult workers from the
terms of the Factories Act, 1948, subject to a few conditions. It is also stated that the additional four (4) hours
per day will be paid as overtime, with a weekly overtime limit of twenty-four (24) hours.

Himachal Pradesh ("HP")

The State of HP issued a notification on April 21, 2020 exempting all factories registered under the Factories
Act, 1948 from rules relating to weekly, daily, spread hours, and rest intervals until July 20, 2020, subject to the
following conditions:

1- No worker shall work in a factory for more than twelve (12) hours in any one day or more than
seventy-two (72) hours in any one week.

2- No worker shall work for more than six (6) hours without a rest period of at least half an hour.

3- Wages for extended working hours as a result of the exemption shall be proportionate to the existing
minimum wages set by the Government of HP under the Minimum Wages Act of 1948.

4- The provisions of Section 59 relating to overtime wages will remain in effect indefinitely.

Several additional states appear to be in the process of exempting firms and institutions from labour law
regulations.
Labour Reform is Required, But Not at the Cost of the Workforce

The government is confident about increasing investment and employment by reducing labour restrictions. India
was already facing an economic downturn, which was mostly due to a lack of demand in the economy. The
loosening of labour regulations is a change aimed at increasing supply, but it would exacerbate the demand
problem due to a lack of disposable income among  a large class of people, i.e., the labor force.

Due to the presence of diverse legislation dealing with various parts of labour law, the Central Government
agrees that considerable revisions in the field of labour laws are required. The Central Government attempted to
integrate existing laws into labour codes, which may be considered a step in the right direction in terms of
making compliance with the laws easier. From a constitutional standpoint, the entire suspension of the laws in
order to attract investment and decrease the compliance burden is clearly illegitimate.

Even a global epidemic caused by COVID-19 does not justify the purposeful neglect of the labour force. It is
especially important in these times for the state to take action to defend their interests. Other countries, such as
the United Kingdom, Canada, and others, have responded positively to help employees and companies in times
of crisis.