UP GCC Policy: Govt aims to woo Fortune 500 companies, generate over two lakh jobs
The government has set a target of generating over two lakh jobs in the next five years, and special incentives are being offered to attract investment from top global corporations, they added.
The policy lays out clear rules for setting up level-1 and advanced GCCs. For level-1 GCCs, companies must invest at least ₹15 crore or employ 500 people outside Gautam Buddha Nagar and Ghaziabad. In these two districts, the minimum investment is ₹20 crore.
Advanced GCCs require an investment of ₹50 crore (outside Gautam Buddha Nagar/Ghaziabad) or ₹75 crore (within these districts), along with 1,000 employees. This ensures equal opportunities for both small and large investors, officials said.
The state government has introduced incentives to win the confidence of investors -- including 30-50% subsidy on land cost, 100% stamp duty exemption, 25% capital subsidy (up to ₹10 crore for level-1 and ₹25 crore for advanced GCCs), state GST reimbursement, 5% interest subsidy, and 20% operational subsidy (up to ₹40 crore for level-1 and ₹80 crore for advanced GCCs).
Companies can also receive payroll support of up to ₹1.8 lakh per employee. These benefits will reduce setup costs and encourage investment in the state, officials said.
Customised incentive packages will be offered to GCCs set up by Fortune Global 500 or India 500 companies, as well as those with FDI of over ₹100 crore.
According to the state government, the policy also supports innovation and startups. It includes 50% cost reimbursement for startup ideation (up to ₹2 crore), an intellectual property rights (IPR) subsidy of ₹5-10 lakh for patents, and grants of up to ₹10 crore for setting up centres of excellence.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
10 hours ago
- The Hindu
Political Line newsletter: Cow Economy, and Diplomacy
Culture influences market and diplomacy. But how much is too much on this count? A slice of the stalemate in trade talks between India and the U.S. is related to the U.S. demand for opening up India's farm sector. The U.S. wants to export more of its dairy and poultry products to India. India resists this demand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said he would make personal sacrifices, if required, to ensure that farmers are protected. The proportion of population dependent on agriculture reveals one of the most striking differences between India and the United States, highlighting their vastly different economic structures and development stages. India has nearly half of its workforce engaged in agriculture, while the United States has only less than two percent directly employed in farming — representing a 32-fold difference in agricultural employment dependency. In India's case, agriculture contributes roughly 18 percent of GDP but nearly half of the population is dependent on it. Farmers are a powerful political constituency in both India and the United States. Food is also a question of national security. Post-Covid fears related to self-sufficiency in critical areas have further strengthened the case for national food markets insulated from global disruptions. India's resistance to allowing American farm produce in its market rests on three reasons. The first, as mentioned above, is that too many people are dependent on agriculture, and opening up the sector to American products could render them vulnerable. The second is national security. The third concerns apparently cultural reasons — American cows may be fed meat products such as chicken waste, and this is unacceptable to India. Milk and other products from a cow whose food chain is not clearly plant-based do not meet Indian standards. Whether such determination is consistently applied across all milk produced within India is beside the point. Cultural reasons are relevant to market decisions in all societies. For instance, some Muslim countries or shops may not sell pork; among the GCC countries, pork is available in the UAE and Bahrain, while in others it is not. In large parts of India now, beef is legally banned; in many parts, such as southern India, West Bengal, and the northeastern states, it is widely consumed by all social groups including Hindus. Cultural barriers to global trade are not new in India. Crossing the seas was once taboo — Gandhi had to do penance to be readmitted to his Modh Vaniya caste, which had ostracised him for doing so. Of the three issues at play in trade in agriculture, perhaps the easiest to change is the competency of the sector. But the cultural politics around the cow and the requirements of the agriculture sector often come into conflict. At least 20 out of 28 states have some form of laws to protect cows, which effectively translates into restrictions on the trade and transportation of cattle, including buffaloes. In the last decade or so, many states have enforced these laws aggressively, and vigilantes targeting even legal cattle trade often go scot-free. Simultaneously, a whole network of rent-seeking has emerged in the guise of cow protection, as the state spends massive amounts to shelter unproductive cows that farmers do not want to keep. It is not the case that meat production has ended; India's export of buffalo meat has been growing in the last three years at around four percent annually. What has happened is that cattle and leather trade have been pushed into a grey zone of legality, inflicting costs and losses for all involved and creating new rent-seeking opportunities. You can read about a sample of such restrictions here. Farmers are paying a huge price for this — on the one hand, the difficulty in disposing unproductive cattle, and on the other, the problem of free-roaming cattle destroying their crops. Cow protection in India was linked historically to farming practices of an earlier era. Those factors have changed due to technology and other developments. Yet, productivity in India's agriculture sector remains entangled in the religious association many people have with cows. The cow has long functioned as a symbol in Hindu-Muslim rivalry in the subcontinent. Hindu leaders such as Dayananda Saraswati made cow protection a tool for popular consolidation antagonistic to Muslims in the 19th century. Some Muslim leaders, such as Pir Abu Bakr in Bengal in the early 20th century, argued that cow sacrifice was an essential practice of Islam. Whether cow sacrifice is indeed an essential practice of Islam has been the subject of several litigations in independent India as well. While India grapples with global uncertainties created by political and technological upheavals, it might also make sense to review its priorities at home. The Fear of the Future People Prime Minister Narendra Modi has now raised the spectre of a demographic threat to India in his Independence Day speech. He said there was a conspiracy to change the demographic profile of India. You can read The Hindu editorial on this speech here. Does demographic composition determine the character of a nation? Leaving that question for a future discussion, here are some quick adjacent thoughts. Variations in population growth across communities and geographies pose challenges for governance and national identity. It is one thing to say that everyone is an individual citizen regardless of social location, faith, or ethnicity. But India's governance structure acknowledges the principle of group identities while providing special protections for religious and linguistic minorities, Dalits, backward classes, tribes, etc. Collective identities are not anathema to India's constitutional scheme; in fact, they are central to it. Political contestations have historically been framed in India around the numerical strength of communities. That history warrants discussion separately, but to cite a well known example, the 15% and 7.5% reservations for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities, respectively, were based on their proportion in the population. As the proportion of their population changes, so will their representation. This will be among the issues in the next delimitation of parliamentary constituencies in India. Currently, there are two distinct divergences in population growth in India. First, the north-central regions have higher birth rates than peninsular and western India. Second, Muslims have a higher birth rate than Hindus. Among Hindus, upper castes have lower birth rates compared to other groups. While the BJP and its supporters try to highlight the Hindu-Muslim divergence in population growth, many others, particularly parties in the South, are more worried about the regional divergence in population growth. It is this regional divergence that makes the next delimitation an unsettling prospect for many regions. Population management has to be a secular task, and all communities should participate in it. While the BJP constantly talks up an Islamic demographic threat, there are Muslim actors who acknowledge and even amplify it. Last year, a Muslim Minister in West Bengal said Muslim population was growing fast and would soon become a majority. The ruling Trinamool Congress distanced itself from the statement. Federalism Tract: Notes on Diversity This article by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. K. Stalin discusses how India is home to many nationalities and emphasizes the importance of linguistic diversity as a defining feature of India. It argues that in a true federal system, states should not have to protest, litigate, or plead for their rightful share of revenues. Governors are taking their role as chancellors of State universities too seriously, which is roiling the higher education sector. Read our editorial on the ongoing conflicts between Governors and State governments over university governance here. The drive against unauthorised immigrants from Bangladesh is creating rifts within India, as any Bengali-speaking individual can end up as a target of police action.
NDTV
10 hours ago
- NDTV
77% Of Gen Z Bring Parents To Job Interviews, Even For Salary Talks And Hiring Tests
A recent survey by Resume Templates reveals that 77% of Gen Z job seekers have involved their parents in the hiring process, with many bringing them along to interviews, salary negotiations, and even test assessments, reported the Fortune Magazine. Among those whose parents attended interviews, 40% reported they sat in during the discussion, while one-third said their parents asked or answered questions. Around 27% noted that parents negotiated compensation or benefits, and some even introduced themselves directly to hiring managers, according to the study by Resume Templates. Beyond interviews, parental involvement extends to nearly all stages of the job search. Over 75% of Gen Z candidates used a parent as a reference, 63% had them apply for jobs on their behalf, and more than half allowed their parents to email or call hiring managers. Notably, 48% had parents complete test assignments, and 41% let them handle initial HR interactions, according to Fortune. Experts attribute this trend to Gen Z's lack of professional experience and limited networks, worsened by the pandemic's impact on social development. The tight entry-level job market has also added pressure, pushing young applicants to seek support from trusted sources-primarily their parents. While some view this involvement as overstepping, others see it as a reflection of the changing dynamics in today's workforce. Experts suggest using AI tools like ChatGPT to better prepare for job applications and interviews. What Gen Z asked their parents to do while job hunting? An overwhelming 90% of Gen Z job seekers asked their parents to help find jobs to apply to, while 75% listed them as references. Around 70% had parents submit applications on their behalf, and 60% sought their help in emailing or speaking with hiring managers directly. Over half asked parents to complete test assignments (55%) and handle HR screener calls (45%). Additionally, 35% relied on their parents to write resumes, and 30% for cover letters.
Mint
15 hours ago
- Mint
AI threatens entry-level lobs? Tech openings for new grads have already been halved, says report
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is significantly impacting the job market for new graduates , with the tech sector taking the worst hit. According to a recent report by VC firm SignalFire, job openings for new graduates at the 15 tech largest companies have been cut by over 50 per cent since 2019. The report also stated that before the pandemic, new graduates made up 15 per cent of Big Tech hires, now, that number has dropped to just 7 per cent. This shift can be attributed to companies using AI to automate junior-level tasks and giving them an incentive to delay or reduce early-career hiring. However, experts warn that while this may cut costs in the short term, it could weaken the leadership pipeline in the years ahead, Fortune reported. Kenneth Kang, a computer science graduate, spent his first year after college applying for more than 2,500 jobs, out of which he only got 10 interviews. 'It was very devastating,' he told Fortune. 'Honestly, I thought that having a 3.98 GPA, getting recognition letters, and having an interesting experience in the past, perhaps I could get a full-time job offer easily. But that was not true.' Kang eventually got an offer from Adidas, where he had interned the previous summer, after more than 10 months of endless job applications. This instance shows that the traditional corporate career path, which once began from entry-level roles with on-the-job training is becoming less common. Companies are increasingly expecting new hires to arrive with skills and experience that were once taught on the job. AI is fueling this trend by efficiently handling tasks typically performed by junior employees such as data cleaning, summarization, and basic quality assurance. Shrinking opportunities: Data from Handshake, a Gen Z-focused career platform, shows that entry-level job postings for traditional corporate roles dropped by about 15 per cent last year. Struggling interns: The number of internships converting to full-time offers is also at a five-year low. In 2023–24, only 62 per cent of interns received full-time offers, according to the National Association of Colleges and Employers. Hybrid interns converted at even lower rates than those who were in person. While companies may benefit from short-term cost savings by reducing entry-level hiring, experts warn that this could lead to a significant skills gap in the future as after some point, the companies run out of experts. 'If a lot of firms are cutting, cutting, cutting at the entry level, there's a fear that they might actually miss out on the talent that's going to create their pipeline going forward, that's going to become the managers, executives, etc.,' Tristan L. Botelho, associate professor of organizational behavior at Yale School of Management, told Fortune. Stella Pachidi, a senior lecturer in technology and work at King's Business School mirrored Botelho's thoughts by stating, 'Everyone is just focused on the current efficiencies and not necessarily thinking further about the future.' The rise of AI is also influencing academia, as both professors and students have realized that the majority of work performed in some university courses can be assisted, if not nearly totally automated, by AI. Students were some of the first to realize that ChatGPT is capable of writing essays and summarizing long texts. But while AI tools may help students to lighten their academic load, professors told Fortune they were worried about the prospect of a generation lacking critical skills and traditional education. Forture said citing a study from MIT that LLM (large language model) use can reduce neural engagement and harm learning among students, especially younger users. The study also found that ChatGPT users had the lowest brain engagement and 'consistently underperformed at neural, linguistic, and behavioral levels.'
