Domestic workers do not need a separate law, says committee formed on Supreme Court directions

The recent conclusion by a committee, formed under the directions of the Supreme Court, that domestic workers do not require a separate law, has ignited a crucial debate on labour rights and social justice in India. This decision, predicated on the belief that existing labour codes offer adequate coverage, stands in stark contrast to the views of rights groups who argue that domestic workers remain practically excluded from legal safeguards and benefits.

**Background Context and What Happened:**

India's unorganized sector constitutes a vast majority of its workforce, with domestic workers forming a significant, yet largely invisible, segment. Estimates suggest millions of individuals, predominantly women, are engaged in domestic work across the country. Historically, this sector has suffered from a lack of formal recognition, abysmal working conditions, low wages, long hours, and an absence of social security benefits. The nature of their work, often within private households, makes regulation and enforcement challenging. The Supreme Court's intervention, leading to the formation of this committee, likely stemmed from petitions and widespread concerns regarding the exploitation and vulnerability of these workers. The committee, after its deliberations, concluded that the four new Labour Codes — the Code on Wages, 2019; the Industrial Relations Code, 2020; the Code on Social Security, 2020; and the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 — are sufficient to cover domestic workers, thus negating the need for a distinct, dedicated law.

**Key Stakeholders Involved:**

1. **The Committee/Government:** Represents the state's view that the existing, consolidated labour legislation is comprehensive enough to address the concerns of domestic workers. Their stance reflects an intent to streamline labour laws rather than create fragmented legislation.

2. **Domestic Workers:** The primary beneficiaries or victims of the current legal framework. Their lives are directly impacted by the presence or absence of robust legal protection, minimum wages, and social security.

3. **Rights Groups and Trade Unions:** Advocates for domestic workers, challenging the committee's conclusion. Organizations like the National Domestic Workers' Movement and various trade unions argue that despite the existence of broader labour codes, domestic workers face unique challenges that require specific provisions, such as lack of formal contracts, informal employer-employee relationships, and difficulties in grievance redressal. They contend that the practical implementation and awareness of existing codes for this sector are extremely low.

4. **The Supreme Court:** Its initial direction for the committee's formation underscores the judiciary's concern for the rights of vulnerable sections of society, acting as a guardian of constitutional principles.

**Significance for India:**

This issue holds immense significance for India across several dimensions. From a **social justice** perspective, it highlights the ongoing struggle to ensure dignity of labour, fair wages, and social security for a highly vulnerable group. The majority of domestic workers are women, often from marginalized communities, making it a critical **gender and equity** issue. Economically, their contribution to the urban economy, though often undervalued, is substantial. Lack of proper regulation perpetuates a vast **informal economy**, hindering formalization and economic growth. Politically, the debate reflects the tension between legislative intent (consolidation of labour laws) and the ground realities of implementation and protection for specific vulnerable groups. Furthermore, India's stance on this issue has implications for its international commitments, particularly concerning **ILO Convention 189 (Domestic Workers Convention)**, which India has not yet ratified, setting international standards for domestic workers' rights.

**Historical Context and Constitutional Provisions:**

Discussions around a dedicated law for domestic workers are not new. The **National Policy for Domestic Workers, 2016 (Draft)**, for instance, aimed to provide a comprehensive framework, including minimum wages, social security, and grievance redressal mechanisms, but it never materialized into legislation. The current debate touches upon several constitutional principles. **Article 14** ensures equality before the law, while **Article 21** guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which the Supreme Court has interpreted to include the right to live with dignity and the right to livelihood. **Article 23** prohibits forced labour and trafficking. The **Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP)** are particularly relevant: **Article 39** (equal pay for equal work, health and strength of workers), **Article 41** (right to work, public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement), **Article 42** (just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief), and **Article 43** (living wage, decent standard of life). The Unorganized Workers' Social Security Act, 2008, while predating the new Labour Codes, also aimed to provide social security to unorganized workers, including domestic workers, but its implementation faced significant challenges.

**Future Implications:**

The committee's recommendation is likely to intensify advocacy by rights groups, potentially leading to further petitions to the Supreme Court. The effectiveness of the new Labour Codes in practically covering domestic workers will be under scrutiny. The government may face pressure to clarify specific provisions or issue guidelines to ensure that domestic workers are indeed included and benefit from these codes, especially regarding minimum wages, working hours, and social security. The challenge lies not just in legal provisions but in their enforcement, awareness among workers and employers, and accessible grievance redressal mechanisms. Without a dedicated legal framework or robust, targeted implementation strategies, the practical exclusion of domestic workers from their rights is likely to persist, making this an ongoing and critical area for social reform in India.