Corporate sector labels Karnataka's call for 10-hr workdays as ‘modern slavery'
The workhour debate has reignited as a proposal by the Karnataka government to extend the daily work hours in certain sectors, including IT, to 10 has triggered widespread backlash online, with many IT professionals and trade unions slamming the move as 'modern-day slavery'.
Several took to their social media platforms to voice concerns about employee burnout, declining mental health and the practical difficulties of longer commutes combined with extended work hours. Many have even pointed out that this goes against global trends favouring shorter workweeks and better work-life balance.
What happened?
The Karnataka government is pushing to amend two laws, aiming to increase the daily work hour cap from nine to ten hours and exempt establishments with less than 10 employees from the Act. Specifically, the proposed changes to the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1961, would extend daily working hours to ten and drastically raise the permissible overtime from 50 hours to 144 hours over a three-month period.
This could allow employees to work up to 12 hours daily, including overtime.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Karnataka plans bill for crowd management
The Karnataka government is planning to enact a legislation on crowd control and management, state law and parliamentary affairs minister HK Patil said on Thursday, with the draft proposing up to three years in jail or a fine of up to ₹5 lakh for organisers who fail to obtain permission. The proposed law — Karnataka Crowd Control (Managing Crowd at Events and Venues of Mass Gathering) Bill, 2025 — was discussed at the state cabinet meeting on Thursday along with three other laws, and is likely to be placed for approval during the next meeting, the minister said. 'Four bills were proposed today — Karnataka crowd control, managing crowd at events and venue of mass gathering Bill, 2025; Karnataka Rohith Vemula Bill, 2025; Karnataka misinformation, fake news prohibition Bill, 2025; Karnataka hate speech and hate crimes prevention Bill, 2025,' Patil told reporters after the cabinet meeting. The minister said that some of the proposed bills need detailed discussions. 'These Bills were proposed at the meeting today. I mentioned that on some Bills there is a need for a detailed discussion. It has been decided that before the next cabinet meeting, concerned ministers will meet and discuss and bring the Bills before the cabinet,' he said. The crowd control bill has been proposed days after 11 people were killed in a stampede on June 4 outside the M Chinnaswamy Stadium in Bengaluru during the Indian Premier League victory parade of the Royal Challengers Bengaluru cricket team. The draft crowd control legislation outlines a legal framework to regulate gatherings at 'sponsored events and venues of mass gathering pertaining to political rally, jatra, conference, etc.' and seeks to fix accountability on organisers. The legislation exempts certain events from its purview, including religious and traditional gatherings. 'This Act shall not apply to Jatra, Rathotsava, Pallakki Utsava, Teppada Teru, urus, or any religious event pertaining to any religion, caste or creed,' Chapter I of the bill says. HT has seen a copy of the legislation. Chapter IV of the bill lays out penalties for violation: 'If the event planner does not apply before conducting the event or fails to control the crowd gathered and fails to give the compensation or violates the provisions of this Act or rules made hereunder in any other way, [they] shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine up to five lakhs rupees or both.' Further, the bill proposes that event planners who intentionally ignore regulations or fail to take police permission before holding a gathering will be held liable if the event results in casualties. These offences are classified as non-cognizable and non-bailable, triable by a magistrate of the first class. The legislation also criminalises aiding or abetting a crime at such events. It states, 'Whoever knowingly or unknowingly believes commission or omission of any other person would be an offence under the Act' will face legal action. The draft Rohith Vemula Bill, reportedly proposes for compensation of up to ₹1 lakh for students who face caste-based discrimination in higher education institutions, and jail term of one year and pay a fine of ₹10,000 for those guilty of such offences. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi had written to chief minister Siddaramaiah in April urging the Karnataka government to enact 'Rohith Vemula Act' to ensure that no one faces caste-based discrimination in the education system. Rohith Vemula, a Dalit student, allegedly died by suicide due to caste-based discrimination in Hyderabad, in 2016. HT reached out to senior BJP leaders BY Vijayendra and R Ashoka, but did not get any response to requests for comments.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
HC revokes transfer of judge hearing the north-east Delhi riots ‘larger conspiracy' case
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday revoked the transfer of Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai, who was hearing the north-east Delhi riots 'larger conspiracy' case. The High Court had on May 30 transferred ASJ Bajpai, who had been hearing arguments on the framing of charges in the February 2020 communal violence 'larger conspiracy' case in a Karkardooma court on a daily basis since September last year, to the Saket courts complex as part of a routine transfer process. He was replaced by ASJ Lalit Kumar, who, on June 2, had ordered fresh hearings in the matter. The development is likely to speed up one of Delhi's most high-profile trials in connection with the violence in several parts of north-east Delhi, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. The transfer of ASJ Bajpai had drawn criticism from lawyers who felt that the move would cause the trial, which has already been delayed due to pending investigations and judicial transfers, to further slow down. 'The pace at which the case is moving can be gauged by the fact that of the 18 accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, among other charges, most have been in jail for over four years,' said a lawyer on condition of anonymity. The 'larger conspiracy' case is among the many pertaining to the riots and is so named because Delhi Police, which is probing the matter, has claimed that the violence was part of a 'deep-rooted conspiracy'. Key accused in the case include former Delhi councillor Tahir Hussain, student activists Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, and Natasha Narwal. 2,500 arrested so far In the months following the riots, the police arrested over 2,500 people in various cases based on CCTV footage and testimonies of victims and eyewitnesses. During the four years of trials, the city courts gave bail to more than 2,000 people. Several trial courts also made adverse comments about the police's 'shoddy' investigations. The arguments over the framing of charges began in 2024, a year after the filing of the chargesheet.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
RTI victory for JAC at PGI: CPIO directed to provide info in 30 days
Chandigarh: In a significant development at the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, the first appellate authority (FAA) has directed the chief public information officer (CPIO), Vigilance Cell, to furnish information sought under Right to Information (RTI) Act, free of cost, within 30 days. The order follows a complaint filed by the Joint Action Committee (JAC) of PGI over denial of RTI information. The JAC had sought details of cases referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) from January 1, 2020, onward, specifically those related to fraudulent withdrawal of medicines, drugs, and surgical items on forged indents in the Prime Minister's Grant case. However, the CPIO rejected the application, stating that the JAC did not qualify as a "citizen" under Rule 3 of the RTI Act, 2005. In response, the JAC filed a first appeal dated May 24, 2025, before the FAA, requesting immediate disclosure of the information and enforcement of suo moto publication of such details on PGIMER's website under Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act. They also called for imposition of a penalty of Rs 250 per day for delay in providing information, as prescribed under Section 20 (1) of the Act. Dr Sunil K Gupta, chief vigilance officer and first appellate authority, issued a detailed ruling directing the CPIO to provide the requested information within 30 days and ensure its publication on the official website of the institute. He observed that the original case file was examined and the CPIO's technical objection—based on a narrow interpretation of the term "citizen"—was not tenable in light of prevailing legal precedents. "The CPIO, Vigilance Cell, is directed to provide requisite information as per rule to the applicant within 30 days, free of cost, and also ensure suo moto disclosure of the information on the website of PGIMER," stated Dr Gupta in the order. The FAA also referenced a Central Information Commission (CIC) ruling dated January 7, 2025, which clarified that office-bearers of associations, unions, and other collective entities are entitled to seek information under the RTI Act on behalf of their organisations. This legal precedent played a crucial role in the decision to allow the JAC's application. A copy of the order has been sent to the system analyst, computer cell, PGIMER, for prompt uploading of relevant information on the institution's website. MSID:: 121956868 413 |
