On December 23, 2025, a construction workers association in Madurai organised a public protest against the new labour codes that recently came into force across India. The leaders argued that the new framework makes it easier for companies to rely on contract and daily wage labour instead of permanent employees. They feared that expanded flexibility for layoffs and contract use would weaken job security in an already precarious sector. They also raised concerns that longer working hour possibilities and changes in strike and dispute provisions could tilt the balance of power heavily towards employers, especially in industries where workers rely on welfare boards and local protections to survive periods of downtime.
Among the workers, emotions ran high. Many construction labourers spoke about years of unstable employment, delayed wages and risky work conditions where injuries are common but compensation is rare. Some said that when they hear terms like simplification and reform, they worry it will translate into fewer rights on the ground rather than easier lives. Younger workers expressed fear that as the codes reshape how contracts and unions operate, they may never see the kind of stable employment their parents hoped for. The protest became partly a venting of long term frustration and partly a plea that law makers and companies should listen to the lived experience of workers instead of only compliance consultants.
For HR and industrial relations teams, this is a clear signal that legal reforms cannot be managed only through policy updates and payroll changes. Organisations in construction, infrastructure, and related sectors need to think about how to implement the new codes while preserving fair treatment, predictable earnings, and safe conditions. This could mean more transparent contracts, clear notice and severance practices, and active involvement of worker representatives in explaining what is changing. Companies that treat the codes purely as a deregulation tool risk reputational damage, resistance, and scrutiny from labour departments in states that are politically sensitive to worker sentiment.
How can HR in construction and infrastructure sectors build trust while implementing the new labour codes? What practical safeguards should companies adopt so legal flexibility does not become day to day insecurity for workers?
Among the workers, emotions ran high. Many construction labourers spoke about years of unstable employment, delayed wages and risky work conditions where injuries are common but compensation is rare. Some said that when they hear terms like simplification and reform, they worry it will translate into fewer rights on the ground rather than easier lives. Younger workers expressed fear that as the codes reshape how contracts and unions operate, they may never see the kind of stable employment their parents hoped for. The protest became partly a venting of long term frustration and partly a plea that law makers and companies should listen to the lived experience of workers instead of only compliance consultants.
For HR and industrial relations teams, this is a clear signal that legal reforms cannot be managed only through policy updates and payroll changes. Organisations in construction, infrastructure, and related sectors need to think about how to implement the new codes while preserving fair treatment, predictable earnings, and safe conditions. This could mean more transparent contracts, clear notice and severance practices, and active involvement of worker representatives in explaining what is changing. Companies that treat the codes purely as a deregulation tool risk reputational damage, resistance, and scrutiny from labour departments in states that are politically sensitive to worker sentiment.
How can HR in construction and infrastructure sectors build trust while implementing the new labour codes? What practical safeguards should companies adopt so legal flexibility does not become day to day insecurity for workers?