India's Tech Hub Workers Slam 12-Hour Day as 'Modern Slavery'

A proposal by the Karnataka government to amend labor laws and extend daily work hours to as long as 12 hours has ignited a firestorm of controversy across the state's burgeoning information technology sector. The move, intended to provide operational flexibility for companies, has been met with fierce opposition from employee unions, who decry it as "modern-day slavery" and warn of dire consequences for work-life balance, mental health, and job security. The debate places India's Silicon Valley at the center of a larger, global conversation about the future of work, pitting corporate demands for efficiency against the well-being of a massive workforce already grappling with economic uncertainty and the disruptive force of artificial intelligence.

The proposed amendment to the Karnataka Shops and Commercial Establishments Act of 1961 would increase the maximum daily working hours from the current nine or ten hours (including overtime) to twelve.[1][2][3][4] The government and some industry proponents argue this change will enable companies to adopt a two-shift system instead of the current three, potentially enhancing operational efficiency and making the state more attractive to investors.[5][2] The Federation of Karnataka Chambers of Commerce and Industries (FKCCI) has voiced support, suggesting that longer hours can drive productivity, which is crucial for global competitiveness, and that a younger workforce is capable of working more.[6][7] The state's Labour Department has indicated the push aligns with central government directives for states to adopt national model labor codes.[6] However, this rationale has done little to quell the anxieties of the state's estimated two million IT professionals.[8]

Employee unions have been swift and vocal in their condemnation of the proposal. The Karnataka State IT/ITeS Employees Union (KITU) has been at the forefront of the opposition, arguing that legalizing 12-hour shifts prioritizes corporate profits over the fundamental rights and welfare of employees.[9] A primary concern is the potential for mass layoffs.[1][9][2] Union leaders allege that by moving to a two-shift system, companies could render as much as one-third of their workforce redundant, a devastating blow in a sector already experiencing job cuts due to global economic pressures and the rise of AI-driven automation.[9][5][2][10] This fear is not unfounded; recent reports indicate significant job losses in Bengaluru's tech industry, forcing some laid-off professionals into precarious, lower-paying work to make ends meet.[11][12] The proposal comes at a time when the IT sector is already exempt from the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, a key piece of legislation that provides protections against arbitrary dismissals and defines fair working conditions.[13][14]

Beyond the threat of job losses, the proposal has intensified long-standing concerns about the mental and physical health of IT workers.[13][15] KITU has pointed to alarming statistics, including a report that found 90% of corporate employees under 25 suffer from anxiety, and has cited recent employee suicides allegedly linked to work-related stress.[9][5][16] Critics argue that extending work hours will only exacerbate these issues, turning employees into "machines" and normalizing "inhuman conditions."[2][16] International studies corroborate these fears, with research from the World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization linking workweeks of 55 hours or more to a significantly higher risk of stroke and heart disease.[17][18] Extensive research also challenges the core premise that longer hours lead to greater productivity. Studies from Stanford University and others have shown that productivity per hour sharply declines after a 50-hour workweek, and that overwork leads to more errors, higher absenteeism, and increased employee turnover.[19][20] This stands in stark contrast to global trends, where many countries and companies are experimenting with and successfully implementing four-day workweeks, often reporting increased efficiency and improved employee well-being.[21][17][22][23]

The role of major industry bodies has added another layer of complexity to the debate. While the state government has felt pressure from the IT industry to introduce more flexible labor laws, the National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM), the sector's primary trade association, has publicly stated its opposition to a 14-hour workday, a figure that was floated in earlier discussions.[24][8][25] NASSCOM has clarified that it supports the standard 48-hour workweek and has only asked for flexibility within that existing framework to help companies with a pan-India presence standardize their operations, given that different states have varying daily limits.[24][8][15] This position distances the main industry body from the most extreme versions of the proposal, though the call for "flexibility" is seen by unions as a door to the very changes they are fighting. The current proposal for 12-hour days, while less than the 14 hours previously mentioned, remains a significant increase over the current legal limit.

As the Karnataka government convenes meetings with stakeholders, the future of the state's IT sector hangs in the balance.[9] The proposal represents a critical juncture, forcing a reckoning with deeply ingrained notions of work and productivity in India. While the government and some business leaders frame the issue in terms of economic growth and global competition, employees and their advocates are raising fundamental questions about human dignity, health, and the right to a life outside of work.[17][26] The outcome of this contentious debate will not only shape the working conditions for millions in Bengaluru's tech hubs but could also set a precedent for the broader Indian corporate landscape, determining whether it moves towards a more sustainable and humane future of work or doubles down on a culture of long hours that research suggests is ultimately detrimental to both employees and the companies they work for.