The Broken Promise of the Right to Work

UPSC Syllabus: Gs Paper 3- Employment

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s recent observations on minimum wages have renewed the debate over the constitutional foundations of the right to work. The debate has gained importance after MGNREGA was replaced by the VB-GRAM G Act in 2025. The shift has weakened the earlier demand-driven employment guarantee, while capped funding, greater State fiscal burden, lower wages and reduced employment have raised concerns about rural livelihoods and the broader constitutional commitment to the right to work in rural India.

Constitutional Foundations of the Right to Work

1. Right to work as a constitutional goal: The Constituent Assembly broadly accepted the importance of the right to work but differed over making it a Fundamental Right or a Directive Principle.
2. K.T. Shah’s position: K.T. Shah supported a Fundamental Right to work because he believed the State needed a positive legal duty to ensure socio-economic security for citizens.
3. B.R. Ambedkar’s position: B.R. Ambedkar viewed the right to work as essential but considered immediate universal enforcement fiscally and institutionally difficult for newly independent India.
4. Directive Principles as the chosen framework: The right to work was placed under the Directive Principles of State Policy, which guide governments in making laws and policies but do not automatically create enforceable rights.
5. Article 41 and employment: Article 41 directs the State to provide for the right to work within the limits of its economic capacity and development.
6. Broader welfare commitments: Articles 39, 42 and 43 support adequate livelihood, equal pay, humane working conditions, living wages and a decent standard of life.

From Constitutional Aspiration to a Statutory Right

1. Olga Tellis and livelihood: In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), the Supreme Court held that livelihood was necessary for the effective enjoyment of the Fundamental Right to life.
2. MGNREGA’s statutory breakthrough: The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act was enacted in 2005, making a pan-India statutory right to rural employment a reality for the first time.
3. Demand-driven employment guarantee: MGNREGA created a framework where the State had a statutory obligation to provide employment, although the guarantee remained limited to 100 days per rural household.
4. Minimum wage obligation: MGNREGA initially carried a statutory obligation to provide employment at minimum wages, strengthening the practical basis of the right to work.
5. MGNREGA’s development role: Despite its limited scope and chronic underfunding, MGNREGA became an important instrument for rural development and employment generation.

Weakening of the Employment and Wage Guarantee

1. Wages delinked from minimum wages: In 2009, MGNREGA wages were delinked from the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, weakening the connection between employment guarantee and minimum wage protection.
2. Stagnant rural wages: MGNREGA wages barely kept pace with inflation and remained below minimum agricultural wages in most States, reducing the real benefit of employment.
3. Inadequate employment funding: Limited budgets for generating employment reduced household earnings, with estimated household earnings in July and August this year falling by half compared with the same months last year.

Retreat from the Right to Work: Legal and Economic Concerns

1. Replacement by VB-GRAM G: In December 2025, the Union government replaced MGNREGA with the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar & Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Act, implemented from July 1.
2. Sharp fall in employment: MGNREGA averaged 3.44 crore households and 44 crore person-days in July and August over five years, while employment fell by 68% this year.
3. Capped funding and State burden: The new framework places an arbitrary cap on funds and a greater fiscal burden on States already facing borrowing constraints under the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management framework.
4. Reduced universality: Provisions allowing certain areas to be denotified and excluded from the scheme weaken the universal character of the earlier right to work.
5. Minimum wage concern: The Supreme Court observed that, with unchanged financial resources, a minimum wage threshold could reduce the number of workers receiving employment.
6. Sanjit Roy and Article 23: In Sanjit Roy v. State of Rajasthan (1983), the Supreme Court held that paying below minimum wages violates Article 23 and is akin to forced labour.
7. Concern over non-retrogression: The doctrine of non-retrogression, affirmed in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, suggests that the State should not deliberately undo an already achieved level of rights and legal protection.

Way Forward: Reaffirming the Right to Work

1. Economic rationale for higher wages: Higher wages can raise rural purchasing power, increase demand for goods and services, improve human development and create a multiplier effect that supports economic productivity.
2. Link wages with living wages: Employment-guarantee wages should be linked with living wages so that rural workers receive adequate income and the constitutional commitment becomes meaningful.
3. Ensure timely wage payments: Timely payment of wages should be ensured because delays weaken the practical value of an employment guarantee.
4. Strengthen social audits: Social audits should receive greater attention, with local institutions empowered to help identify and reduce corruption.
5. Empower Panchayati Raj Institutions: Panchayati Raj Institutions should receive greater powers so that local bodies can play a stronger role in implementing employment guarantees.
6. Restore a stronger legal framework: A stronger and more universal legal framework for the right to work can advance constitutional aims while supporting rural incomes and economic growth.

Conclusion

The right to work began as a constitutional aspiration, became a statutory guarantee through MGNREGA, and now faces dilution under VB-GRAM G. Reaffirming employment, adequate wages, timely payments and local accountability can strengthen socio-economic rights while also creating a positive cycle between rural development, demand and economic growth.

Question for practice:

Examine the constitutional and economic concerns arising from the weakening of the right to work in India.

Source: The Hindu