On November 22, 2025, The Hindu reported on the ongoing complexities and debates surrounding the revision of minimum wages in Karnataka, highlighting the impact of recent labour law reforms introduced by the Indian central government. The issue has sparked confusion and divergent opinions among government officials, trade unions, and employers, as stakeholders navigate the implications of four new labour codes recently notified by the Centre.
The minimum wage revision in Karnataka is long overdue. The last update was notified in 2017-2018, and as per legal requirements, minimum wages must be revised at least once every five years. This delay has left about 1.8 crore employees across 81 scheduled employments in the state awaiting updated wage standards. The current controversy stems from the Centre's notification of four comprehensive labour codes on November 21, 2025, which consolidate and replace 29 existing labour laws, including those governing wages, social security, industrial relations, and occupational health and safety.
The four codes—the Code on Social Security, 2020; the Industrial Relations Code, 2020; the Occupational Health, Safety and Working Conditions Code, 2020; and the Code on Wages, 2019—seek to streamline labour legislation across India. Specifically, the Code on Wages replaces four key laws: the Payment of Wages Act (1936), the Minimum Wages Act (1948), the Payment of Bonus Act (1965), and the Equal Remuneration Act (1976). While this consolidation aims to simplify labour governance nationwide, it has created uncertainty about how states like Karnataka will proceed with their minimum wage revisions, given the new regulatory framework.
Karnataka’s Labour Department had prepared a draft for minimum wage revision earlier in April 2025. This draft proposed a wage range from ₹19,319 per month for unskilled workers to approximately ₹31,000 for highly skilled workers. The department arrived at these figures using a formula established by the Supreme Court in a landmark case (Raptakos Brett and Co.), which factors in inflation and cost of living. However, these proposed hikes faced resistance from employers, who approached the Karnataka High Court to challenge the increases, arguing that the proposed wages were excessively steep.
Labour Minister Santosh Lad addressed these concerns in an interview, asserting that the new labour codes would not hinder the ongoing wage revision process. He emphasized that the codes include provisions similar to the previous laws, allowing states to maintain autonomy in fixing minimum wages. Minister Lad also reiterated that the Central government cannot enforce uniform wages across all states, as labour is a subject on the concurrent list of the Indian Constitution, which permits both states and the Centre to legislate on it.
Trade unions have called for swift implementation of the revised minimum wages. Meenakshi Sundaram, General Secretary of the Centre for Indian Trade Unions (CITU) Karnataka, argued that since the draft notification was issued before the November notification of the labour codes, the new wages should be implemented retrospectively. Sundaram criticized the state government for delaying the process despite the completion of deliberations and stressed that labour matters fall under concurrent jurisdiction, allowing both state and central governments to act.
Responding to the continued delay, Minister Lad explained that numerous objections had been received from various stakeholders, and the government was currently reviewing these concerns before taking a final decision. This cautious approach reflects the complexity involved in balancing the interests of workers and employers, especially in a diverse and economically varied state like Karnataka.
Further complicating the issue, M. Sathyanand, Secretary of the All India Trade Union Centre (AITUC) Karnataka, highlighted additional areas of confusion. He pointed out that the new Code on Wages has done away with the concept of “scheduled employments” found in the old Minimum Wages Act. Karnataka’s draft notification had revised wages for 81 scheduled employments, but the absence of this category in the new code raises questions about the process and scope of wage fixation going forward. Sathyanand urged the government to finalize the draft notification with retrospective effect to avoid further delays and uncertainty for workers.
Another contentious issue raised by trade unions relates to the Code on Wages’ provisions on house rent allowance (HRA). The new code caps HRA at 10% of the combined cost of food and clothing, which translates to roughly ₹1,000 to ₹1,200 per month for a city like Bengaluru. Trade union leaders argue that this cap is illogical and insufficient to meet