The Maharashtra Cabinet’s decision to amend the Factories Act, 1948, has sparked both praise and controversy as it seeks to extend the daily working hours of employees from nine to twelve, while also raising the weekly cap from forty-eight to sixty hours. According to the government, the intent behind this move is to modernize labor laws, create greater flexibility for industries, and ensure workers receive higher pay for their contributions. Officials insist that the reforms are designed not only to meet the evolving needs of sectors like manufacturing, IT, and hospitality but also to align worker compensation more transparently with the number of hours worked.
Labour Advocate Minister Akash Fundkar defended the amendments by saying that they would bring about more accountability in work arrangements while guaranteeing workers better financial benefits. He emphasized that the new framework strikes a balance between industry requirements and worker welfare, while also allowing for economic growth in a rapidly changing market environment.
The amendments introduce significant alterations across multiple sections of the Act. Section 54 raises the maximum daily working limit to twelve hours, while Section 55 makes rest periods mandatory, requiring thirty-minute breaks after five and six hours of continuous work. Section 56 increases the permissible weekly working cap from forty-eight to sixty hours, whereas Section 65 enhances the annual overtime ceiling from 115 to 144 hours. Despite these changes, the standard forty-eight-hour weekly limit remains the norm, with overtime allowed only under specific conditions. Importantly, factories must first obtain government approval before implementing extended working hours.
State Labour Secretary I. Kundan clarified that the scope of these amendments goes beyond traditional factories, extending to shops, commercial establishments, hotels, and even IT firms. Worker consent is mandatory for overtime, and even with extra hours, the weekly maximum cannot exceed sixty hours. While the rules are pending legislative approval and presidential assent, the government has presented them as reforms that could significantly boost productivity and efficiency in various industries.
However, the move has been met with fierce criticism from labor unions and workers’ representatives, who argue that the reforms prioritize industrial demands over employee welfare. Ajit Abhyankar, a prominent labor leader from the Communist Party of India, strongly opposed the decision, labeling it exploitative. He pointed out that the extension of daily work shifts effectively undermines overtime pay, as three additional hours could be absorbed into regular shifts rather than being compensated at a higher rate. This, he warned, could lead to reduced incomes instead of the promised financial gains.
Union leaders have also raised concerns that the new framework could pave the way for employers to misuse flexibility provisions, such as by disproportionately burdening workers with longer shifts, increasing workloads, or adopting night operations to cut costs. Critics argue that such practices would place additional stress on workers, negatively affecting both their health and family lives. For them, the amendments represent not reform but regression, shifting the balance of labor law in favor of corporations rather than workers.
As the legislation now awaits further approval, the debate continues to intensify. On one hand, the government projects it as a progressive step toward industrial modernization and worker compensation reform; on the other, unions fear it could worsen exploitation and erode hard-won labor rights. The coming months will determine whether Maharashtra can strike the delicate balance between industrial growth and the protection of worker welfare.
