Migrant labour welfare: The government has begun consultations with industry bodies, think tanks, trade unions, and civil society groups on the problems faced by India’s migrant workforce. The exercise, led by the Union labour ministry, comes amid industrial unrest in manufacturing hubs and fears of economic disruption from geopolitical tensions. It also exposes a familiar weakness. Millions of migrant workers keep India’s informal economy running, but remain outside secure wages, safe workplaces, housing, healthcare, and social protection.
The first task is basic. India needs a clearer count of its migrant workforce and a reliable way to track workers as they move across states, sectors, contractors, and employers.
READ | Delhi-NCR labour unrest exposes failure of industrial relations
India is still designing migrant labour policy with weak data. Census 2011 recorded about 45.6 crore migrants, while PLFS 2020-21 estimated the migration rate at 28.9%. A fresh official migration survey is proposed only for July 2026-June 2027. This data gap matters because e-Shram has already registered more than 31.48 crore unorganised workers, but registration is not the same as portable welfare, safe housing, or enforceable labour standards.
Migrant workforce needs a reliable identity system
At the first meeting on May 19, the discussions focused on housing, portability of welfare benefits, and a more efficient identification and registration system for migrant workers. One proposal is to use the existing e-Shram database and link it to a dedicated unique identifier for migrant workers. Another is to examine whether separate e-Shram cards can improve portability of entitlements across states and sectors.
This is among the more structured attempts in recent years to revisit migrant labour welfare after the pandemic. The 2020 lockdown exposed the scale of distress among interstate workers. Reverse migration revealed gaps in social security delivery, housing, healthcare access, and labour regulation. The e-Shram portal was expanded. One Nation One Ration Card was pushed as a portability measure. But implementation has lagged. The problem is sharper for workers employed through contractors and subcontractors.
Worker unrest and labour shortages have again brought the issue to the fore. Noida and Manesar have seen protests. Some southern manufacturing hubs have reported labour shortages after workers did not return from West Bengal and Assam. The circumstances differ, but the underlying complaint is similar: stagnant wages, rising contractualisation, unsafe working conditions, and weak access to social security. These are not temporary disruptions. They reflect the structure of labour-intensive manufacturing, where informal employment remains dominant despite repeated promises of formalisation.
Geopolitical instability in West Asia has added another layer of risk. Elevated crude oil and LPG prices can raise input costs and disrupt supply chains. Small and medium enterprises will feel this pressure first. Since MSMEs employ a large share of migrant workers, industry associations fear that higher operating costs could lead to wage delays, layoffs, and another phase of distress migration unless safeguards are put in place.
READ | Migrant labour shortage exposes South India’s industrial vulnerability
Digital illiteracy limits labour welfare
The labour ministry has asked the Confederation of Indian Industry to continue stakeholder consultations and submit concept notes on possible implementation models. The next round is expected to focus on delivery mechanisms and implementation challenges. One concern already identified is the difficulty migrant workers face in accessing digital welfare systems. Low literacy, language barriers, poor documentation, and limited digital awareness restrict enrolment in welfare databases and schemes.
India’s digital welfare architecture has expanded, but online systems often assume capacities that migrant workers do not have. Even educated citizens struggle with formal documentation and digital platforms. For migrant workers, the barriers are higher. The ministry is therefore examining vernacular interfaces and local facilitation mechanisms for registration and grievance redressal.
The problem becomes acute when welfare has to travel across state borders. Migrant workers often lose access to healthcare, food subsidies, compensation schemes, and childcare services when they move. One Nation One Ration Card has improved access to subsidised foodgrains, but integration between state welfare systems remains incomplete.
Labour welfare must become portable
The next stage of labour welfare reform must be portability. Construction, textiles, logistics, hospitality, and manufacturing depend heavily on migrant workers. Yet many remain excluded from social protection because of administrative gaps, contractor-led employment, and poor documentation. In an economy sustained by interstate migration, welfare cannot be tied only to the worker’s home state.
A previous national roundtable organised by CII had also recommended easier portability of ration, healthcare, and compensation benefits, along with better coordination between central and state welfare databases. The logic is sound. A worker who moves from Bihar to Haryana, Odisha to Gujarat, or Assam to Tamil Nadu should not lose access to basic entitlements because welfare systems do not speak to each other.
READ | Labour codes begin India’s harder reform phase
CII has also proposed facilitation centres for registration, grievance redressal, and awareness of welfare schemes. Such centres can work as single-window support hubs in industrial clusters with high concentrations of migrant labour. Their usefulness will depend on design. They must be accessible in local languages, physically present near worksites, and independent enough to address complaints involving employers and contractors.
Housing deserves equal priority. The pandemic exposed the inadequacy of affordable rental housing for migrant workers, many of whom lived in overcrowded dormitories or informal settlements near industrial clusters. Migrant housing cannot remain an informal arrangement left to employers, labour contractors, or market rents. It must be treated as part of industrial policy and urban planning.
India’s industrial townships, logistics parks, and manufacturing clusters need affordable worker accommodation built into their development plans. Housing policy, municipal planning, and labour welfare must be linked. A worker who lives in unsafe, distant, or overcrowded housing is less productive, more vulnerable, and more likely to return home during stress.
Labour welfare cannot be separated from industrial productivity. Nor can it be treated only as a question of compassion. Migrant workers are central to India’s manufacturing ambitions, urban services, construction economy, and export competitiveness. If welfare systems remain fragmented, employers evade standards, and states fail to coordinate, unrest will recur.
The government’s consultations will matter only if they move beyond registration. India needs portable benefits, affordable housing, credible grievance redressal, and enforcement of labour standards. Without these, the migrant worker will remain visible during every crisis and invisible in every recovery.