Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14) - India (Ratification: 1923)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on working time, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 1 (hours of work), 14 (weekly rest) and 89 and its Protocol (night work of women) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) on Conventions Nos 1 and 89, objecting to amendments to the Factories Act, 1948 as applied to the state of Karnataka (the Factories (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 2023). In particular, the Committee notes that the AITUC expresses concerns regarding the increase in: (i) the maximum number of daily working hours (up to 12 hours, within the weekly limit of 48 hours); and (ii) the maximum number of additional hours of work (up to 144 hours per quarter), which can have negative impacts on safety and health. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the consultations that took place prior to the adoption of those amendments.

Legislative developments and application in practice of the Conventions. The Committee notes the adoption of the Occupational Safety and Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 (hereinafter, the 2020 Code), consolidating provisions of 13 laws, including the Factories Act, 1948 and the Mining Act, 1952. It observes, however, that the 2020 Code is not yet in force. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made concerning the entry into force of the 2020 Code.

Hours of work

Article 1 of Convention No. 1. Scope of application. The Committee notes that, pursuant to section 2(w) of the 2020 Code, factories using the aid of power with less than 20 workers; or factories without the aid of power with less than 40 workers, are not covered by the 2020 Code. This results in a narrower scope of application than the Factories Act, 1948, which excludes factories with less than 10 employees. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it will ensure that the provisions of the Convention are also observed in relation to workers who are excluded from the 2020 Code.

Article 2. Weekly limit. The Committee notes that section 25(1) of the 2020 Code provides for a daily limit to hours of work of eight hours per day but does not contain provisions on weekly limits to hours of work. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the weekly limits to working hours for all workers under the scope of application of the Convention.

Article 6. Permanent and temporary exceptions. Prior consultations with employers’ and workers’ organizations. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that consultations with stakeholders took place prior to the adoption of the 2020 Code, including nine rounds of tripartite consultations. The Committee also notes that, while section 27 of the 2020 Code allows overtime subject to the consent of the worker, it does not fix a maximum number of additional hours, nor does it foresee the circumstances under which overtime is authorized. The Committee recalls the importance of national legislation and practice restricting recourse to exemptions to cases of clear, well-defined and limited circumstances (2018 General Survey concerning working-time instruments, para. 119). The Committee further recalls that, pursuant to Article 6(2), regulations on additional hours shall fix the maximum number of additional hours in each instance. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide information on any Rules adopted under section 27, and to specify: (i) the circumstances under which overtime is allowed; (ii) the maximum number of additional hours allowed; and (iii) the consultations that were held with social partners in the adoption of such Rules.

Weekly rest

Articles 1 and 2 of Convention No. 14. Scope of application. Following its previous comments regarding the exclusion from the Factories Act, 1948 of workers employed in factories with less than ten employees, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 2(w) of the 2020 Code, factories using the aid of power with less than 20 workers; or factories without the aid of power with less than 40 workers, are not covered by the 2020 Code. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that weekly rest is granted to all factory employees, irrespective of the number of employees in the factory.

Articles 4 and 5. Total or partial exceptions. Compensatory rest. The Committee notes that the principle of a weekly rest day is provided under section 26(1) of the Code. However, pursuant to section 26(2) of the Code, workers can be exempted from the application of section 26(1), in accordance with conditions prescribed by the appropriate state government. Furthermore, section 26(3) of the Code provides that workers deprived of their weekly rest shall be allowed a compensatory rest within the month in which the holidays were due or within the two months immediately following that month they were deprived of their weekly rest. In this regard, the Committee recalls the importance of granting compensatory rest within an appropriate lapse of time in order to protect workers’ health and safety and their participation in family life (2018 General Survey concerning working-time instruments, para. 918). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any exemptions introduced pursuant to section 26(2) of the Code, and to indicate how, in accordance with Article 4(1) of the Convention, such exceptions: (i) give special regard to all proper humanitarian and economic considerations; and (ii) are adopted after consultation with responsible associations of employers and workers.

Night work

Article 3 of Convention No. 89 and Article 2 of Protocol No. 89. Prohibition on night work for women. Maternity protection. Following its previous comments on the Protocol, the Committee notes that section 66 of the Factories Act, 1948, and section 46 of the Mines Act, 1952, prohibit the night work of women, subject to limited variations in the hours covered by the prohibition that can be defined by the appropriate state government. The Committee also notes that, pursuant to section 43 of the 2020 Code, which is not yet in force, women may be employed at night with their consent, subject to such conditions relating to safety, holidays and working hours or any other condition as may be prescribed by the appropriate state government. The Committee nevertheless observes that there are no provisions in the 2020 Code concerning the protection of women night workers, in relation to maternity. Recalling that protective measures applicable to women’s employment at night which go beyond maternity protection and are based on stereotyped perceptions regarding women’s professional abilities and role in society violate the principle of equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women, and recalling that Convention No. 89 will be open for denunciation between 27 February 2031 and 27 February 2032, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171), which is not devised as a gender-specific instrument but focuses on the protection of all those working at night (2018 General Survey concerning working time instruments, paras 408 and 545). The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken or envisaged to protect women night workers with regard to maternity, under the 2020 Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee recalls its previous comment regarding the entitlement to weekly rest for workers employed in factories with less than ten employees. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 85(1)(i) of the Factories Act, 1948, which provides that a State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare that all or any of the provisions of the Act shall apply to any place wherein a manufacturing process is carried on, notwithstanding that the number of persons employed is less than ten. However, as the provision stands, it is at the discretion of the state governments to make use of the permissive provision of section 85(1), and extend the coverage of the weekly rest provisions to factories employing less than ten employees. The Committee therefore requests the Government to specify whether any notifications under section 85 have so far been gazetted and if not, to consider appropriate measures to ensure that weekly rest is granted to all factory employees irrespective of the number of employees. The Committee understands that the Ministry of Labour and Employment (MoLE), through an Expert Committee, has recently proposed amendments to the Factories Act. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the current status of the proposed amendments to the Factories Act, and to keep the Office informed of any developments that might have an impact on the workers’ entitlement to weekly rest.

Articles 4 and 5. Total or partial exceptions – Compensatory rest. The Committee notes the list of the state governments that allow for compensatory rest under section 53 of the Factories Act. The Committee also notes that under Section 53(1) of the Factories Act, where workers are deprived of any of their weekly holiday, they shall be allowed, within the calendar month in which the rest periods were due to them, or within the two calendar months next after that month, substituted holidays equal to the number of holidays so lost. The Committee wishes to recall, in this respect, that according to the spirit of the Convention, workers should enjoy a minimum period of rest and leisure at regular weekly, or, in any event, reasonably short, intervals. In this connection, it refers to paragraph 3 of the Weekly rest (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1957 (No. 103), which indicates that persons to whom special weekly rest schemes apply should not work for more than three weeks without receiving the rest periods to which they are entitled. The Committee therefore requests the Government to re-examine the appropriateness of granting accumulated weekly rest – even on an exceptional basis – once every three months and consider the possibility of amending the relevant provision of the Factories Act accordingly.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Convention continues to be given effect through the Factories Act, 1948. It would appreciate receiving additional explanations as to how weekly rest is ensured for workers employed in factories with less than ten employees, which are excluded from the scope of application of the Factories Act. In addition, the Committee notes that more recent legislation, such as section 28(1) of the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996, provides that the appropriate Government may by rules provide for a day of weekly rest for building workers who are not covered by the Factories Act or the Mines Act, 1952 (a similar provision is found in section 19(1) of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961, as amended). It therefore asks the Government to specify whether any such rules have been issued and, if not, to explain how it is ensured that these workers enjoy, like all other workers, a period of at least 24 consecutive hours of rest every week, as prescribed by Article 2 of the Convention.

Article 5. Compensatory rest. The Committee notes that, under section 53(2) of the Factories Act, the State Government may prescribe the manner in which compensatory holidays provided for in section 53(1) shall be allowed. It requests the Government to indicate whether any specific rules have so far been adopted in this regard and, if so, to transmit a copy. Moreover, the Committee notes that, under section 28(1)(c) of the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, building workers performing work on the weekly rest day are entitled to extra pay at the overtime rate. It recalls that the Convention requires compensatory rest to be granted, as far as possible, in the case of suspension or diminution of the weekly rest period, irrespective of any monetary compensation. It accordingly requests the Government to consider favourably the adoption of appropriate measures to this end.

Article 6. List of exceptions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply, in accordance with this Article of the Convention, a list of all the exceptions currently authorized to the general weekly rest scheme (such as exempting rules and orders provided for in sections 64 and 65 of the Factories Act, and in section 39 of the Mines Act), and also provide information on their practical implementation (types of establishment to which exemptions are granted, period of exemptions granted, etc.).

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. As the Committee has not received for a number of years any general information on the practical application of the Convention, it asks the Government to provide up to date and documented information in this regard, including, for instance, statistics on the approximate number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results showing the number of infringements of the weekly rest legislation observed and sanctions imposed, copies of relevant collective agreements containing clauses on weekly rest, etc. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government would transmit a copy of the observations made by the workers’ organization Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh which were not attached to its last report.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that, based on the conclusions and proposals of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards, the ILO Governing Body has decided that the ratification of up to date Conventions, including the Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14), and the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 (No. 106), should be encouraged because these instruments continue to respond to current needs (see GB.283/LILS/WP/PRS/1/2, paragraphs 17–18). The Committee accordingly invites the Government to contemplate ratifying Convention No. 106 and to keep the Office informed of any decisions taken or envisaged in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1987, published 74th ILC session (1987)

The Committee has taken note of the observations made by the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU) on the application of the Convention, and the comments on these observations communicated by the Government.

In its observations the CITU raises the following questions:

1.the applicability of the Convention (a) to air transport, which is not mentioned in Article 1(d) of the Convention and (b) to railway workers excluded from the provisions of the Convention by virtue of Article 1, paragraph 2, which provides for the application of the special national exceptions regarding India, contained in Article 10 of the Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1);

2.the lack of provisions on weekly rest in the Dock Labourers Act, 1934, the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition Act) Act, 1970 and the Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976;

3.the absence of a list of exceptions from weekly rest provided for in Article 6 and made under Articles 3 and 4 and the lack of consultation of organised labour in this respect.

As concerns the scope of the Convention and its application to India, the Committee notes that (a) Article 1(1) of Convention No. 14 gives a definition of "industrial undertaking" which does not include transport by air and (b) that, as far as railway workers are concerned, by virtue of the national exeptions referred to above, it is up to the competent national authority in India to determine in which branches of railway work the principle of weekly rest should apply. However, the Committee considers that it would be desirable for the Government of India to extend the provisions of the Convention to all workers employed in all industrial undertakings.

Concerning the CITU's reference to various Acts which contain no provision on weekly rest, the Committee notes the Government's statement that as the objectives of the different labour laws may differ, these texts should be viewed in connection with the provisions regarding the weekly day of rest contained in other Acts in force such as the Factories Act, the Minimum Wages Act, the State Shops and Establishments Act, etc.

Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to communicate an updated list of exceptions from the provisions on weekly rest and to indicate whether the organisation of employers and workers concerned were consulted in establishing these exceptions.