'Assault on workers’ rights': NAPM seeks rollback of state amendments of factory work hours

By A Representative 

The National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) and the All India Workers Forum have strongly condemned recent amendments made by several Indian states to labour and factory laws that allow adult workers to work beyond the long-established 8–9 hour daily norm. In a statement issued on December 29, 2025, NAPM said these changes, justified by governments in the name of “ease of doing business”, “attracting investment” and “boosting manufacturing”, amount to a serious erosion of labour protections and pose grave risks to workers’ health, safety and dignity, particularly for informal and migrant labourers.

NAPM pointed out that the Factories Act, 1948, sets 8 hours per day as the benchmark and permits a maximum of 9 hours per day and 48 hours per week for adult workers, with mandatory rest intervals. However, a growing number of state governments have now amended their laws to permit daily shifts of 10 to 12 hours, longer continuous work without breaks, and higher overtime limits. According to the forum, these measures overwhelmingly favour employers and investors, while workers—especially migrants and contract labourers with little bargaining power—bear the social and health costs.

The organisation said these state-level decisions must be seen in a broader context. Corporate leaders in India have publicly advocated 70–90 hour work weeks in the name of competitiveness and rapid economic growth. At the same time, the International Labour Organization (ILO) has repeatedly documented that Indian workers are among the most overworked globally, as reflected in its working-time and labour condition reports (https://www.ilo.org). Further, joint research by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the ILO has established a clear link between long working hours and increased risks of heart disease, stroke and premature death, underscoring the public health implications of extended workdays.

Against this backdrop, NAPM argued, state governments are increasingly “relaxing” labour safeguards under pressure from industry lobbies and in the race to attract investment. These relaxations often reduce effective overtime protections and weaken rest and safety norms, raising alarms among trade unions, labour-rights groups and public health experts who warn that productivity is being prioritised over humane working conditions.

Detailing developments across states, NAPM noted that Karnataka amended its factory law in 2023 to allow daily work of up to 12 hours (inclusive of rest), continuous work of six hours without a break, and a sharp increase in permissible overtime. Gujarat promulgated an ordinance on July 1, 2025, raising daily work hours to 12, extending continuous work periods, increasing overtime limits and permitting night shifts for women under conditional safeguards—moves unions have criticised as intensifying exploitation of migrant and informal workers. Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Goa and Rajasthan have passed similar amendments in 2025, variously extending daily hours to 10–12 hours, raising weekly caps to as much as 60 hours, increasing quarterly overtime ceilings to around 144 hours, and loosening rest interval norms, while expanding night-shift provisions for women.

According to NAPM, these changes reflect a clear shift in labour regulation towards employer flexibility and align closely with the philosophy embedded in the four central labour codes, which aim to consolidate 29 existing labour laws into a framework emphasising simplified compliance and ease of doing business. By normalising longer workdays at the state level, these amendments, the group said, help build regulatory acceptance for the central codes’ emphasis on flexibility, often at the expense of worker protection.

From the perspective of trade unions and migrant workers, NAPM highlighted several red flags. The dilution of the 9-hour daily norm weakens a key protective limit; longer continuous work without breaks increases fatigue and accident risks; and higher daily hours, even when weekly caps are formally retained, impose heavier physical and mental burdens. The expansion of night shifts for women, presented by governments as empowerment, may in practice expose women—especially migrant women—to greater safety and transport risks in the absence of robust enforcement. Consent provisions, NAPM warned, are often meaningless in contexts where workers lack job security or alternatives.

The organisation also flagged serious enforcement gaps, noting that even existing provisions on overtime pay and rest intervals are poorly implemented, particularly for contract and migrant labour. Extended shift norms risk becoming the default standard, further eroding work-life balance and compounding long-term health impacts. Unions have warned that such conditions could amount to “modern-day slavery” under the guise of industrial growth.

NAPM concluded that while these amendments are often projected as pro-worker through promises of higher pay or compressed workweeks, they in fact represent a significant shift in regulatory balance in favour of capital. For informal and migrant workers—who already face weak representation, unstable housing and limited social security—the implications are especially severe. The forum called for united resistance by trade unions, democratic organisations and workers’ collectives, alongside transparent monitoring of actual hours worked, stronger safeguards for migrant labour, and strict enforcement of rest, overtime and safety norms.

Asserting that there appears to be a broad political consensus, across parties and levels of government, that workers’ rights can be compromised in pursuit of “ease of enabling business” and higher private profits, NAPM urged an immediate rollback of what it described as regressive and anti-worker amendments.