SC refuses to issue directions enforcing minimum wages for domestic workers

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a PIL seeking a comprehensive legal framework and enforcement of minimum wages for domestic workers, saying it cannot direct the Centre and states to amend laws.

Acknowledging the “plight” of millions of workers engaged as domestic help across India, a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the judiciary could not encroach upon the legislative domain to mandate enactment of laws.

The Bench said trade unions had been largely responsible for stopping the industrial growth in the country. “How many industrial units in the country have been closed, thanks to trade unions? Let us know the realities. All traditional industries in the country have been closed, all because of these ‘jhanda’ unions. They don’t want to work. These trade union leaders are largely responsible for stopping industrial growth in the country,” the CJI said.

“Of course, exploitation is there, but there are means to address exploitation. People should been made more aware of their individual rights, people should have been made more skilled, there were several other reforms which should have been done” the Bench told senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, who represented the petitioners.

“When a minimum wage is enforced, these unions ensure that every household is dragged into litigation,” said the Bench, which also red-flagged the role of employment agencies in exploitation of workers.

The Bench, however, asked the petitioners, including Penn Thozhilalargal Sangam, a domestic workers’ union, to highlight the plight of domestic helps to the Centre and states to take a suitable decision in the matter.

“Correspondence shows that it’s under active consideration by states and we are hopeful that a suitable mechanism shall be deployed for their help and to prevent exploitation,” the Bench said, disposing of the PIL which also sought recognition of non-payment of minimum wages to domestic workers as a violation of fundamental rights and enforcement of minimum wage regimes across states.

Ramachandran submitted that domestic workers, predominantly women, remain among the most vulnerable sections of the unorganised workforce, lacking effective legal protection.

Drawing comparisons with international standards, he pointed out that in several Asian jurisdictions such as Singapore, domestic workers could not be employed without statutory safeguards, including mandatory leave and minimum service conditions.

Justice Bagchi noted that domestic workers were already covered under existing welfare frameworks. “It is not as if there is no safety net. The Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act does take care of several aspects,” he said.