Workers in Gujarat employed under the Centre’s revamped rural employment programme, VB-G RAM G (Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin), will now receive ₹300 per day, up from the existing ₹286.However, the new framework has drawn criticism from labour organisations and opposition parties, who say it weakens employment protections by ending the demand-driven work guarantee and introducing restrictions on public works.
No More On-Demand Employment
The new scheme replaces MGNREGA’s demand-driven employment model with a system based on pre-approved budget allocations. It also proposes a 60-day suspension of public works during the sowing and harvesting seasons.Labour groups argue that the move could leave rural workers without a steady source of income during critical periods and force them to take lower-paying jobs.
Concerns Over Wages and Funding
Although the daily wage has been increased to ₹300, labour organisations say it is still too low considering rising living costs and have demanded that it be raised to ₹400.The revised framework also shifts 40% of the wage cost to state governments, whereas the Centre earlier bore the entire wage bill. Critics fear this could lead to further delays in wage payments, especially in states where such delays have already been reported, including Gujarat.
Pending Payments and Alleged Irregularities
According to a report presented in Parliament, MGNREGA workers in Gujarat are still waiting for nearly ₹4 crore in unpaid wages.The report also states that 9.75 lakh fake job cards were cancelled in Gujarat during 2022–23, pointing to alleged irregularities in the scheme. It claims that officials and agents created fake beneficiaries, falsely showed 100 days of employment and diverted funds, while payments to contractors were cleared faster than workers’ wages.
Labour Groups Seek Changes
Labour organisations have urged the Central government to withdraw the proposed 60-day suspension of public works and increase the minimum daily wage to ₹400, saying the changes could reduce the scheme’s effectiveness as a financial safety net for rural families.