Follow us on:
Economy and Labour | June 9, 2026
India’s GDP is projected to grow at 7.4% in FY2025-26, the fastest among major economies. The headline unemployment rate, at 3.2% per the PLFS 2024-25, looks comfortable on paper. Yet India’s top three IT companies shed 63,759 jobs in FY24 while revenues grew. Agriculture, which contributes just 11% of GDP, now employs 46.1% of the workforce. Graduate unemployment stands at approximately 40%. And 7 to 8 million young people enter the labour force every year. This is what jobless growth looks like from the inside.
Table of Contents
- Part I: What Is Employment Elasticity and Why It Matters Definition, India’s 1.11 elasticity (2017-23), the earlier near-zero period, what changed
- Part II: Why the Headline Numbers Are Misleading 3.2% unemployment, the PLFS methodology gap, one hour of work counts as employed
- Part III: The Agriculture Trap 46.1% in farming with 11% GDP share, reverse migration, disguised unemployment
- Part IV: The IT Sector’s Headcount Paradox TCS, Infosys, Wipro shed 63,759 jobs in FY24 as revenues grew, AI and utilisation squeeze
- Part V: Manufacturing’s Missing Jobs Only 11.4% of workers in manufacturing, premature deindustrialisation, PLI outcomes
- Part VI: The Educated Youth Unemployment Paradox 82.9% of unemployed are young, graduate unemployment 40%, skills mismatch
- Part VII: The Gig Economy: A Safety Valve or a Structural Fix 12 million gig workers in FY25, Economic Survey 2026, no contracts, no social security
- Part VIII: The Demographic Dividend Window Is Closing Youth at 27% of population now, declining to 23% by 2036, the 10-year window
- Part IX: What Needs to Change Labour reforms, manufacturing push, skills redesign, formalisation imperative
- Frequently Asked Questions
3.2%
Headline unemployment rate, PLFS 2024-25. Masks 46.1% workforce in agriculture.
16%
Youth unemployment rate (ages 15-24), ILO modelled estimate, 2024. World Bank data.
82.9%
Share of unemployed who are young (15-29 years). ILO India Employment Report 2024.
9.4%
Share of total employment that is regular and formal. ILO India Employment Report 2024.
Part IWhat Is Employment Elasticity and Why It Matters
The Core Concept
Employment elasticity measures how much employment grows relative to economic output. Specifically, it is the percentage change in employment that results from a one-percent change in GDP or Gross Value Added. An elasticity of 1 means employment and output grow at the same rate. An elasticity above 1 means employment grows faster than output. An elasticity below 1 means GDP is expanding but employment is not keeping pace.
For a country like India, with 7 to 8 million new entrants to the labour force each year and a demographic structure that concentrates its young population in the next decade, employment elasticity is not an abstract academic measure. It is the most important number in the economy that most people have never heard of.
India’s Recent Elasticity Data: Two Contrasting Periods
India has experienced two starkly different phases of employment elasticity in the past fifteen years.
Between 2011 and 2016, employment elasticity in India was close to zero. GDP grew robustly during parts of this period, but employment barely moved. This was the period that generated the “jobless growth” debate and made it a politically charged phrase.
Between 2017 and 2023, the picture reversed sharply. The Observer Research Foundation, using data from the Periodic Labour Force Survey, estimated employment elasticity at 1.11 for this period. For every one percent increase in GDP, employment increased by 1.11 percent. The Worker Population Ratio increased by 9 percentage points. Capital stock grew by 74 percent while employment grew by over 36 percent, implying a rise in capital intensity of about 28 percent. On these aggregate measures, India’s economy was not jobless between 2017 and 2023.
So is the jobless growth narrative wrong? The aggregate elasticity number tells you that employment is growing. It does not tell you where, in what quality, at what wage, or with what security. An agriculture worker who farms two hours a day counts as employed in the PLFS. A delivery rider on a gig platform with no contract and no fixed income counts as employed. A graduate who has given up looking for a job and returned to help on the family farm counts as employed. The aggregate number is real. The texture underneath it is the real story.
| Period | Employment Elasticity | Dominant Pattern | Quality Signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004-2012 | ~0.4 (positive but low) | Services and construction absorbing labour | Mixed: some formal job creation, significant informal absorption |
| 2012-2017 | ~0.01 (near zero) | GDP grew, employment stagnated. Demonetisation and GST transition disrupted informal sector. | Poor: informal sector contraction, MSME distress |
| 2017-2023 | 1.11 | Post-pandemic recovery, construction boom, female LFPR rise, gig economy expansion | Quantity improved, quality still lagging. Most gains in self-employment and agriculture. |
| 2023-2025 (latest PLFS) | Positive but moderating as GDP growth slows to 6.2% in FY25 | Urban formal sector hiring constrained. Gig and services absorbing marginal workers. | Structural quality gap persisting. Urban youth unemployment at 5.1%. |
Sources: Observer Research Foundation analysis of PLFS data; PIB press note on India’s Employment Growth; PLFS 2024-25 (MoSPI).
Part IIWhy the Headline Numbers Are Misleading
The PLFS Methodology and Its Limitations
The Periodic Labour Force Survey, conducted by the National Statistical Office under MoSPI, is India’s primary official source for employment data. The PLFS 2024-25 reports a Usual Status unemployment rate of 3.2 percent for persons aged 15 and above. Rural unemployment is 2.5 percent. Urban unemployment is 5.1 percent.
These numbers look reassuring. But the way employment is measured in the PLFS creates a significant gap between the statistical picture and lived reality.
Under the Usual Status approach, a person is classified as employed if they worked for at least one hour on at least one day during a reference period. Anyone who worked even a single hour is counted as employed, not unemployed. This means a small farmer who harvested crops for two hours in the survey week is classified identically to a salaried software engineer who worked forty-five hours that week. The headline rate cannot distinguish between them.
The Current Weekly Status rate, which captures short-run employment disruptions, stands at around 4.7 percent all-India, considerably higher than the 3.2 percent Usual Status figure. Even this is likely an undercount of effective joblessness.
The most important number missing from the headline: Only 20.9 percent of India’s workforce is in regular wage or salaried employment. Of these salaried workers, 62 percent lack written contracts and more than 50 percent receive no benefits. This means formal, stable, benefits-attached employment covers a small fraction of the workforce. The 3.2 percent unemployment rate tells you about people who are actively seeking work and not finding it. It tells you nothing about the quality, stability, or adequacy of the employment that 97 percent are technically recorded as having.
| Employment Category | Share of Total Workforce | What It Implies |
|---|---|---|
| Self-employed (own account and employers) | 57.3% | Includes survival self-employment, small farmers, petty traders. Not necessarily entrepreneurial choice. |
| Casual labourers | 21.8% | Day wage workers with no job security. Income fluctuates daily. |
| Regular wage or salaried workers | 20.9% | Stable paid employment. But 62% of these lack written contracts. |
| Of which: formal regular employment | 9.4% | Employees with contract, provident fund, and formal job security. This is the formal economy’s actual footprint. |
Sources: PLFS 2023-24 (MoSPI); ILO India Employment Report 2024.
Part IIIThe Agriculture Trap
The Most Alarming Structural Signal in the Data
Agriculture contributes approximately 11 percent of India’s GDP. It employs 46.1 percent of the workforce. This gap between contribution and employment share is the clearest signal of structural distress in India’s labour market.
In every successful development trajectory from East Asia to historical Europe, the structural transformation runs from agriculture toward manufacturing and then toward services. Workers move from low-productivity farm work to higher-productivity factory work. Wages rise. Household consumption increases. The growth multiplier works.
India appears to be running a partial reversal of this sequence. PLFS data from 2023-24 shows that instead of shifting toward industry, more people are moving back to agriculture. The share of the workforce in farming increased to 46.1 percent, above pre-COVID levels. Manufacturing’s share stands at only 11.4 percent, still below where it was before the pandemic. Construction employs 13 percent but is largely casual, seasonal work with high vulnerability to economic cycles.
What Reverse Migration Looks Like in Practice
Consider a young man from a village in eastern UP who went to Surat in 2018 to work in a textile unit. He returned during COVID in 2020 and helped on the family farm. He tried to return to Surat in 2022 but the job had been replaced by a semi-automated cutting machine. He is now farming half an acre with his father. In the PLFS data, he is counted as employed in agriculture. In his own experience, he is underemployed, earning well below what he could with the skills he developed in the textile unit, and with no path back to formal employment in sight.
Multiply this story by millions. That is what the 46.1 percent agriculture share actually represents.
Economists describe this as “disguised unemployment”: a situation where the marginal productivity of labour in agriculture is near zero or very low, but workers remain in farming because the urban formal sector has not generated sufficient absorptive capacity. The worker shows up in the employed column, but their economic contribution is minimal.
The female LFPR rise: a caution on interpretation: One of the most cited positive data points in recent years is the sharp rise in female Labour Force Participation Rate, from 23 percent in 2017-18 to over 41 percent in 2023-24. This is a genuine positive. However, a significant portion of this rise is in rural female agricultural self-employment. As male members migrate to cities for informal work, women take over farm management. This phenomenon, called the feminisation of agriculture, is a sign of migration pressure, not necessarily of expanded economic opportunity for women. The PLFS captures the participation. It does not fully capture whether the work is productive, paid, or chosen.
Part IVThe IT Sector’s Headcount Paradox
Revenue Up, Headcount Down: FY24 and the New Normal
India’s IT sector is one of the most visible markers of the country’s economic ascent. TCS, Infosys, and Wipro are global companies. Their combined revenues run into hundreds of billions of rupees. They have historically been among the largest formal private sector employers in urban India, and their campus hiring drove aspirational graduate employment for two decades.
In FY2024, that engine stalled visibly. TCS, Infosys, and Wipro together shed 63,759 employees in that single financial year. Infosys, which had 343,234 employees at end of FY23, ended FY24 with 317,240, a reduction of 25,994 people. Wipro reduced its headcount by 24,516 in the same period. Both companies simultaneously reported revenue and profit growth. Infosys posted 4.7 percent year-on-year revenue growth and 8.9 percent net profit growth in FY24 while shrinking its workforce.
The Infosys CFO explained the mechanism explicitly in the company’s Q4 FY24 earnings call: “When we started, we were at 77% utilisation including the trainees. The growth environment was different at that time. Our utilisation has gone up to 82-83%. Our attrition has also come down significantly. That is the reason for net headcount reduction.”
In plain terms: the same revenue can now be delivered with fewer people because each person is working more productively and because the work pipeline has shifted from high-volume, low-complexity coding toward higher-value, lower-headcount work. AI-assisted coding, automated testing, and the consolidation of legacy maintenance contracts into leaner delivery teams have all contributed to this shift.
| Company | Peak Headcount (FY23) | Headcount FY24 | Change | Revenue Change FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TCS | 614,795 | 601,546 | -13,249 | +6.8% YoY |
| Infosys | 343,234 | 317,240 | -25,994 | +4.7% YoY |
| Wipro | 258,570 | 234,054 | -24,516 | Flat to marginal growth |
Sources: Company annual reports and investor presentations, FY2024. Reported figures.
By FY25, the picture partially stabilised. Infosys added back approximately 6,000 net employees in FY25, driven by large deal TCV wins and utilisation reaching its ceiling. But the trajectory had changed. Companies have internalised a model where headcount grows only when utilisation peaks and volume demand forces it, not as a proactive bet on growth. This is a structurally different operating model from the aggressive campus hiring of the 2010s.
What This Means for Graduate Employment
India’s IT sector directly employs approximately 5 million people. It indirectly employs several times that number through vendor ecosystems, facility management, transport, and ancillary services. For the urban graduate cohort, IT has been the primary pathway from college to formal employment for two decades.
When IT companies reduce net hiring and raise utilisation ceilings, the ripple effect is immediate. Engineering graduates from tier-2 and tier-3 colleges, who depended on mass hiring cycles, find offer letters deferred or rescinded. The India Skills Report 2025 found that only 54.8 percent of Indian graduates are considered job-ready for their industries. When even job-ready graduates face constrained hiring, the consequences for those who are not job-ready are severe.
Part VManufacturing’s Missing Jobs
Why Manufacturing Matters More Than Any Other Sector for Employment
Manufacturing is the sector that historically creates the largest number of formal, stable, wage-paying jobs for workers who do not have advanced education. A textile worker, an assembly line operator, a packaging worker: these are jobs accessible to someone with a school leaving certificate and a few weeks of on-the-job training. They come with regular wages, some benefits, and importantly, a pathway to skill upgradation and income mobility.
India’s manufacturing sector employs only 11.4 percent of the workforce. Its share in GDP at the formal sector level has actually declined from 8.68 percent in 2021-22 to 8.15 percent in 2022-23, according to the Annual Survey of Industries. The informal manufacturing share is slightly larger, but informal manufacturing means units with fewer than five workers, no formal contracts, and wages below minimum levels in many cases.
The Production Linked Incentive scheme has generated investment and output growth in targeted sectors, including electronics, pharmaceuticals, food processing, and textiles. But employment generation from PLI has been concentrated in capital-intensive processes rather than labour-intensive ones. Electronics assembly in India, for example, is moving toward increasingly automated production lines rather than the labour-intensive models that characterised electronics manufacturing in 1980s Taiwan and South Korea.
The premature deindustrialisation problem: India appears to be experiencing what economists call premature deindustrialisation, a phenomenon where the manufacturing sector’s share of employment peaks at a lower level and earlier in the development process than in historical comparators. China’s manufacturing employment peaked at roughly 25 to 30 percent of the workforce during its growth phase. Bangladesh’s garment sector employs approximately 4 million workers, representing a far higher share of its workforce than comparable sectors do in India. India, with a much larger economy, has not managed to build the kind of labour-intensive manufacturing base that could absorb tens of millions of workers from agriculture into formal employment.
Over 57% in Micro Enterprises: The Firm Size Problem
Over 57 percent of non-farm workers in India are employed in enterprises with fewer than five workers. These micro-enterprises are the backbone of the informal economy. They are also, by definition, unable to offer the wage stability, benefits, provident fund contributions, and job security that formal employment provides. A worker in a five-person garment unit in Tiruppur earns a wage, but with no written contract, no ESI coverage, and no path to formal employment status.
The firm size distribution in India is characterised by a hollowing out of the middle: very many tiny firms, a small number of very large ones, and very few mid-sized ones. This is sometimes called the “missing middle” of Indian manufacturing. The policy and regulatory environment has historically made it difficult for firms to grow from small to medium because growth triggers compliance requirements that small firms find costly. This structural feature directly suppresses the kind of formal job creation that a growing economy needs.
Part VIThe Educated Youth Unemployment Paradox
The Data That Should Concern Everyone
The ILO India Employment Report 2024 contains a finding that should fundamentally reshape how India thinks about its growth story. In 2022, 82.9 percent of all unemployed persons in India were young people aged 15 to 29. And of these unemployed young people, 65.7 percent were educated at secondary level or above, up from 35.2 percent in 2000.
Read that again. Two-thirds of India’s unemployed young people have completed secondary education or more. The problem is not that India’s young people are uneducated. The problem is that the economy is not generating jobs that match the aspirations and educational attainment of a generation that has invested years in schooling.
The ILO modelled estimate for youth unemployment (ages 15-24) in India was 16 percent in 2024, per World Bank data. The PLFS-based estimates are lower due to methodological differences, but consistently show that youth unemployment runs at multiples of the adult rate. The Azim Premji University State of Working India report found graduate unemployment as high as 40 percent for those under 25.
| Indicator | Data Point | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Overall unemployment rate (Usual Status, 15+) | 3.2% | PLFS 2024-25, MoSPI |
| Urban unemployment rate (Usual Status, 15+) | 5.1% | PLFS 2024-25, MoSPI |
| Youth unemployment rate (15-24, ILO modelled) | 16.0% (2024) | World Bank / ILO modelled estimates |
| Youth (15-29) as share of total unemployed | 82.9% | ILO India Employment Report 2024 |
| Educated youth among unemployed (secondary+) | 65.7% (2022) | ILO India Employment Report 2024 |
| Graduate unemployment under age 25 | ~40% | Azim Premji University, State of Working India |
| Youth employability (graduates considered job-ready) | 54.8% | India Skills Report 2025 |
The Skills Mismatch: Aspirations, Credentials, and Reality
India’s higher education system has expanded dramatically over the past two decades. India now has over 1,000 universities and approximately 40,000 colleges. Enrolment in higher education has grown sharply. The Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education has risen from under 12 percent in 2006 to approximately 28 percent in 2023.
But quantity of enrolment and quality of outcome are different things. Many Indian engineering graduates emerge with degrees but without the problem-solving, communication, and applied technical skills that employers need. The India Skills Report 2025 points to a persistent gap between what colleges produce and what industries require.
At the same time, these graduates will not accept the wages and conditions available in informal manufacturing or agricultural supply chains. Aspiration has risen with education. A graduate will not work as a casual labourer on a construction site. This is rational, but it means the labour market cannot efficiently allocate even the workers it has because aspiration mismatches prevent clearing at the lower end of the formal market.
Part VIIThe Gig Economy: A Safety Valve or a Structural Fix
The Scale of Platform Work
The Economic Survey 2025-26, tabled in Parliament by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on January 29, 2026, noted that India’s gig workforce grew from 7.7 million in FY2021 to 12 million in FY2025, a 55 percent increase driven by smartphone penetration across 800 million users and 15 billion UPI transactions per month. NITI Aayog projects gig workers will reach 23.5 million by 2029-30, forming 6.7 percent of the non-agricultural workforce.
This growth is real and it matters. Platform work has absorbed a significant number of workers who would otherwise be unemployed or in agricultural self-employment. It is accessible with low barriers to entry. It provides daily or weekly income. In urban India, a delivery rider or cab driver earns more than a casual labourer on a construction site.
What Gig Work Is Not
What gig work is not, is a substitute for formal employment. By August 2025, only 3.37 lakh platform and gig workers had registered on the e-Shram portal, against a total estimated gig workforce of approximately 15 million. That is roughly 2 to 3 percent registration coverage. The Code on Social Security 2020 recognised gig workers and mandated creation of welfare schemes, but implementation has been uneven. Karnataka enacted a comprehensive welfare framework in May 2025. Bihar and Jharkhand followed in August 2025. Most states have not.
A gig worker has no written contract, no provident fund contribution, no guaranteed minimum wage, no paid leave, and no job security. When demand for rides or deliveries falls, income simply stops. Income volatility for gig workers is high, and as the Economic Survey 2026 noted, this makes it difficult for them to access formal credit. They exist in a statistical grey zone: employed enough to not count as unemployed, but unprotected enough to have none of the economic security that formal employment provides.
The safety valve risk: The gig economy’s rapid growth may actually be reducing the political urgency of formal job creation. When delivery platforms absorb several million workers who would otherwise be visibly unemployed and agitating, it dampens the social pressure that drives labour market reform. Policymakers can point to gig employment growth as evidence of a vibrant economy. Workers on those platforms know differently. Using gig work as a structural solution rather than a transitional stage is a category error that India cannot afford when the demographic dividend clock is running.
Part VIIIThe Demographic Dividend Window Is Closing
India is in what demographers call the demographic dividend zone: a period when the working-age population is large relative to the dependent population, creating a potential economic windfall if that working-age cohort is productively employed. Youth constituted 27 percent of India’s total population in 2021. That share is expected to decline to 23 percent by 2036 as fertility rates fall and the population ages. The window for capturing the dividend is, therefore, roughly 10 to 15 years wide.
Currently, 7 to 8 million people join the labour force every year. Over a decade, that is 70 to 80 million new entrants. The question is not whether India can create 70 to 80 million jobs. The question is what quality those jobs will be. Seventy million new gig workers or agricultural labourers add workers to an employment count. They do not build the productive workforce that lifts household incomes, drives consumption, and compounds into sustained economic growth.
The ILO India Employment Report 2024 is explicit: for India to benefit from the demographic dividend, it needs to generate productive employment for 7 to 8 million youth who join the labour force each year. Not counted employment. Productive employment. The gap between “counted as employed” and “productively employed” is where India’s employment elasticity crisis actually lives.
Part IXWhat Needs to Change
Labour Market Formalisation Cannot Wait
The single highest-leverage intervention available is formalisation of existing informal employment. India’s four new Labour Codes, consolidated from 29 central labour laws, were passed in 2019 and 2020. As of June 2026, they have not been operationalised, partly because states have not finalized their own rules. The delay is costing workers and the economy.
When informal workers become formal workers, they receive provident fund contributions, ESI health coverage, and contract protections. They also become visible to the credit system, enabling them to borrow for consumption and investment. Formalisation is not just a labour welfare measure. It is a growth multiplier.
Manufacturing Must Absorb Labour, Not Just Generate Output
The PLI scheme is a production incentive. It has succeeded in attracting investment and generating output in targeted sectors. But investment that flows into capital-intensive processes does not create the labour absorption that India needs. The scheme design should incorporate employment benchmarks alongside production benchmarks. A PLI beneficiary that produces a billion rupees of electronics with a hundred workers should not receive the same incentive as one that produces the same output with a thousand workers.
Labour-intensive manufacturing in textiles, leather, footwear, food processing, and light engineering needs deliberate policy attention, including reduced compliance burdens for firms that grow from micro to small and from small to medium. Breaking the “missing middle” problem is essential for the kind of formal job creation that will matter.
Skills Must Match Labour Market Reality, Not Aspiration Alone
India cannot afford to keep producing graduates whose skills do not match market needs. The National Education Policy 2020’s emphasis on vocational education from the school level is the right direction. But execution has been slow and uneven. Industry-linked apprenticeship programmes at scale, where companies co-design curricula and guarantee absorption for trained workers, are one of the few interventions with proven international track records.
The Gig Economy Needs Formalisation, Not Just Recognition
Platform workers need portable social security: provident fund, health insurance, and accident coverage that travels with the worker across platforms. Karnataka’s 2025 model, with a welfare board, a per-transaction levy on platforms, and algorithm transparency requirements, is a template the rest of India should adopt. Waiting for gig work to become formal employment on its own is not a strategy.
Frequently Asked Questions
Employment elasticity measures the percentage change in employment resulting from a one-percent change in GDP or Gross Value Added. Between 2017 and 2023, India’s employment elasticity was 1.11, meaning employment grew slightly faster than economic output during this period. This was a significant improvement from the 2012-2017 period when elasticity was close to zero. However, elasticity above 1 does not necessarily mean quality employment is growing at that rate. Much of the employment growth in this period was in agricultural self-employment and informal sectors rather than formal wage employment. Source: Observer Research Foundation analysis of PLFS data; PIB press note PRID 153247.
The 3.2 percent figure from PLFS 2024-25 counts anyone who worked even one hour in the reference period as employed. This classification makes India’s unemployment rate appear low, but it says nothing about the quality, stability, or income of that employment. Only 20.9 percent of India’s workforce is in regular wage or salaried employment. Of those, 62 percent lack written contracts. Only 9.4 percent of total employment is formal regular employment with job security and benefits. Agriculture employs 46.1 percent of the workforce but contributes only 11 percent of GDP, implying massive underemployment. The crisis is not that people have no work. It is that most work is low-productivity, insecure, and inadequately paid.
TCS, Infosys, and Wipro together reduced headcount by 63,759 in FY24 while posting revenue and profit growth. The explanation is rising utilisation: the same headcount can deliver more revenue when each employee is working at higher capacity. Infosys CFO Jayesh Sanghrajka explained this directly during earnings calls: utilisation rose from 77 percent to 82-83 percent during the year, meaning fewer idle bench employees and more billable work from the same people. AI-assisted coding and automated testing have also shifted the work mix from high-volume low-complexity tasks requiring large headcounts toward higher-value work requiring fewer but more skilled people. The structural implication is that India’s IT sector will no longer absorb large numbers of engineering graduates annually at the scale it did in the 2010s.
The ILO modelled estimate for youth unemployment in India (ages 15-24) was 16 percent in 2024, per World Bank data. Within the broader 15-29 age cohort, youth accounted for 82.9 percent of all unemployed persons in India in 2022, according to the ILO India Employment Report 2024. Most strikingly, 65.7 percent of unemployed youth had secondary education or above, up from 35.2 percent in 2000. The Azim Premji University State of Working India report found graduate unemployment at approximately 40 percent for those under 25. This is concerning because it means India’s investment in expanding higher education has not been matched by the creation of jobs that require that education. The demographic dividend can only be realised if these 7 to 8 million annual labour market entrants find productive employment.
The gig economy is a valuable transitional absorber of labour but is not a structural solution to India’s employment challenge. India’s gig workforce grew from 7.7 million in FY2021 to 12 million in FY2025, per the Economic Survey 2025-26. NITI Aayog projects 23.5 million gig workers by 2029-30. This growth provides income to workers who would otherwise be unemployed or in agricultural subsistence. However, gig work comes without written contracts, provident fund, guaranteed minimum wages, paid leave, or job security. Only 3.37 lakh platform workers had registered on the e-Shram portal by August 2025, representing minimal coverage. Using gig work as a substitute for formal employment creation treats the symptom rather than the underlying structural challenge.
The Growth We Have and the Jobs We Need
India’s aggregate employment numbers are not fabricated. The employment elasticity of 1.11 between 2017 and 2023 is a real statistical finding. More people are working than before. The headline unemployment rate at 3.2 percent is a genuine measurement of the narrow definition it measures. None of these numbers are wrong.
But they are incomplete in a way that matters enormously for policy and for the 7 to 8 million young people entering the labour market each year. Employment elasticity measures quantity. It does not measure whether the jobs being created are in agriculture or manufacturing, informal or formal, subsistence or upwardly mobile. India’s elasticity is high partly because informal self-employment is extremely elastic. When times get hard, people create their own work. They do not create income security. They create survival.
The window for capitalising on the demographic dividend is open for roughly another decade. The youth share of India’s population peaks now and begins declining toward 2036. If the structural conditions for formal, productive, wage-paying employment are not built in the next ten years, India will have spent its demographic dividend on delivery riders and subsistence farmers rather than on the industrial workers, skilled technicians, and service professionals that compound into lasting economic strength.
The GDP headline will keep growing. The question is whether growth will compound into prosperity, or whether India will look back in 2040 and realise it grew fast but employed badly, and that the window to fix it closed quietly while the numbers looked fine.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only and is current as of June 8, 2026. Employment data is drawn from the Periodic Labour Force Survey (MoSPI), ILO India Employment Report 2024, World Bank modelled estimates, and the Economic Survey 2025-26 tabled in Parliament. Corporate headcount data is from company annual reports. Nothing in this article constitutes investment or financial advice.
