How to Ensure Employee Accessibility and Grievance Redressal in the Workplace: Lessons from the Delhi Labour Department Incident

On January 1, 2026, a warning from the Delhi government's labour department surfaced. Senior officials had reportedly found staff frequently absent during office hours and unresponsive on official channels, which negatively impacted service delivery. The trigger for this warning was complaints from workers and employers who sought help with wages and grievances but found employees unavailable. The circular instructed all staff to remain present during office hours, made branch and district in-charges responsible for discipline, and emphasized that offices must stay accessible to the public. It also warned that lapses could invite disciplinary proceedings under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965.

This incident is not just about government office discipline. It's about trust. Imagine a contract worker with a delayed wage, a helper whose PF grievance is stuck, a small contractor terrified of a notice, or a woman who has been told to "come tomorrow" so many times she stops believing tomorrow exists. When the desk is empty and the phone is unanswered, the message is clear: the system is not designed to catch you when you fall. And when the labour department itself is perceived as unreachable, it normalises cynicism. People stop filing grievances. They stop documenting. They resort to WhatsApp and street protests instead. For HR teams, this is how "compliance" dies: not through malice, but through absence.

For HR and compliance officers, the leadership lesson is clear: accessibility is a control. The Delhi labour department framed non-availability as a disciplinary risk under CCS (CCA) Rules - but private employers should recognise the parallel risk: when an employee cannot reach HR for wages, exits, POSH, or benefits, the organisation is effectively manufacturing disputes. Build your own "office hours discipline": a single grievance intake channel, backup owners, measurable response SLAs, and audit trails that show when a complaint was received, who touched it, and what action happened. If you can track payroll exceptions, you can track grievance exceptions. Also remember: missing a regulator call-back or notice because "the right person was on leave" is not a story a labour inspector will empathise with. It is an escalation trigger.

If a worker or junior employee cannot access help when it matters, what does that reveal about power and dignity inside the system - and what would "repair" look like beyond an apology? What would you design so grievance redressal cannot be "ghosted" - rotating duty officers, ticketing with SLA breach alerts, escalation matrices, public dashboards, or something else entirely?

The inability of a worker or junior employee to access help when needed reveals a significant power imbalance and lack of respect for dignity within the system. Repairing this situation goes beyond mere apologies; it requires systemic changes to ensure accessibility and responsiveness.

Firstly, the organization should establish a clear and accessible grievance redressal mechanism. This could involve a dedicated helpline, an online portal, or a physical office where employees can lodge their complaints. The system should be designed to ensure confidentiality and protect the complainant from any form of retaliation.

Secondly, the organization should ensure that there are rotating duty officers available at all times to address grievances. This would prevent any single point of failure and ensure continuity of service even when certain officers are on leave or unavailable.

Thirdly, the organization should implement a ticketing system with SLA breach alerts. This would ensure that each complaint is tracked and addressed within a stipulated timeframe, and any delays are promptly flagged for immediate action.

Fourthly, an escalation matrix should be in place to ensure that unresolved grievances are escalated to higher levels of management for resolution. This would ensure that grievances do not fall through the cracks and are addressed at the appropriate level.

Finally, the organization could consider implementing a public dashboard that displays the status of grievance redressal. This would increase transparency and accountability, and give employees confidence that their grievances are being taken seriously and addressed promptly.

Remember, the key to effective grievance redressal is not just having the right systems in place, but also fostering a culture of openness and respect where employees feel comfortable raising their concerns without fear of retaliation. This requires continuous effort and commitment from all levels of the organization.