COMMENTARY
Stagnant Employment Growth
Last Three Years May Have Been the Worst
Vinoj Abraham
Employment growth in India
slowed down drastically during
the period 2012 to 2016, after a
marginal improvement between
March 2010 and March 2012,
according to the latest available
employment data collected by
the Labour Bureau. There was an
absolute decline in employment
during the period 201314 to
201516, perhaps happening for
the first time in independent
India. The construction,
manufacturing and information
technology/business process
outsourcing sectors fared the
worst over this period.
The author acknowledges research support by
Pooja Padmanaban.
Vinoj Abraham (vinojabraham@gmail.com)
teaches economics at the Centre for
Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram.
Economic & Political Weekly EPW SEPTEMBER 23, 2017
a lakh households, which is greater
than the sample size of NSSOs EUS.2 The
QES, usually conducted quarterly in a
year, provides employment figures based
on establishments with more than 10
employees, largely in line with the defi-
nition of the organised sector in India.
The QES had covered only seven sectors
I
ndias employment growth, as re- of manufacturing enterprises and infor-
corded by the employment and un- mation technology/business process out-
employment survey (EUS) conducted sourcing (IT/BPO) with the limited sample
by the National Sample Survey Office size of about 2,000 firms till end of
(NSSO), had been slowing down since 2015. Since 2016, in the revised QES, the
200405. From about 2% per annum be- coverage has widened to include all
tween 19992000 and 200405, employ- important segments of the services sector
ment growth declined to around 0.7% per as well3 and the sample size has in-
annum between 200405 and 200910, creased to more than 10,000 enterpris-
and further slowed down to around 0.4% es. It may be noted that using these two
per annum between 200910 and 2011 sources, we get evidence from both the
12 (Mehrotra et al 2014; Shaw 2013). supply-side (LBEUS household surveys)
However, since the last thick sample and demand-side (QES enterprise sur-
round of the EUS in 201112, there has veys). Based on these surveys, a brief
been scant information on employment overview of the Indian labour market
growth, but much speculation around it. is presented.
In this scenario, the three available data
sources, the Labour Bureaus Employ- Employment Growth and Generation
mentUnemployment Surveys (LBEUS), As per the LBEUS, estimates based on
the Quarterly Quick Employment Surveys usual principal status (UPS) criteria for
(QES), and the revised QES that give the age group 15 years and above, total
information for more recent periods, will employment in India shrunk by about
help us decipher labour market trends 0.4% per annum, during the period
after 201112.1 201314 to 201516 (Table 1). This corre-
The Labour Bureau had been conduct- sponds to an estimated reduction in em-
ing nationally representative annual EUS ployment for about 37.4 lakh persons
of households, the latest round being for during the period 201314 to 201516. If
201516 with a sample size of more than we consider the total employment based
Table 1: Employment Levels and Growth Based on UPS, 15 Years and Above
201314 201516
Total employment R 2,146 785 3,066 2,282 730 3,048
(in lakhs) U 1,111 242 1,365 1,096 225 1,330
T 3,259 1,043 4,464 3,404 985 4,426
Change R 136.4 -55.4 -18.0
(in lakhs) U -15.3 -17.1 -35.0
T# 144.6 -57.6 -37.4
T* 121.1 -72.5 -53
CAGR
Growth rate R 3.1 -3.6 -0.3
percent per annum U -0.7 -3.6 -1.3
T# 2.2 -2.8 -0.4
# is the total figures estimated based on total worker population ratio (WPR)*total population projections;
* is the actual totals from the estimated change in employment based on respective segments WPR* projected
population. This discrepancy in the total figures estimated and actuals arise perhaps out of the addition of a new category
in gender (transgenders) whose WPR is estimated separately for the year 201516. But we do not have a similar estimate
for transgenders in 201314, hence separating this category for 201314 is not possible. The estimated WPR for 201314
may be biased to the extent that transgenders have been included in the 201314 data, but since it is not clear as to which
category of gender they had been included in 201314, it may not be possible to say what is the direction of the bias.
Source: Employmentunemployment surveys, Labour Bureau.
vol lIi no 38 13
COMMENTARY

on sectoral estimates then the drop Figure 1: Quarterly Change in Employment and Growth Rate of GVA
would have been to the tune of 53 lakh 8 12

Q to Q annual growth rate of GVA (%)

jobs (see note appended to Table 1 for

Quarterly change in employment in lakh

6
the two estimates). It seems that the 10

deceleration of employment growth dur- 4

8
ing the period 200405 to 201112, has
not reversed, but has worsened during 2
6
the period 201314 to 201516. Perhaps
0
this is for the first time in independent

OctDec 2008

AprJun 2009
JulSep 2009
OctDec 2009

AprJun 2010

OctDec 2010

AprJun 2011

OctDec 2011

AprJun 2012
JulDec 2012

AprJun 2013

OctDec 2013

AprJun 2014

OctDec 2014

AprJun 2015

OctDec 2015

AprJun 2016

OctDec 2016
JanMar 2009

JanMar 2010

JulSept 2010

JanMar 2011

JulSept 2011

JanMar 2012

JanMar 2013

JulSept 2013

JanMar 2014

JulSept 2014

JanMar 2015

JulSept 2015

JanMar 2016

JulSept 2016

JanMar 2017
4
India that we have an absolute decline

-
-2
in employment, though there had been
2
phases of employment growth being low -4

at around 1% during 199394 to 1999

-6 0
2000 and below 1% during 200405 to Source: QES of the Labour Bureau and Press Release of MOSPI, Central Statistics Office, Government of India.
201112. Employment growth, neverthe-
less, was positive for rural males, while The QES since April 2016 are a revised JulySeptember 2016, 32,000 and Octo-
for all other segments, rural females, series, with a much larger sample size berDecember 2016, 1.22 lakh, with the
urban females and males, all had an and widened coverage of various sectors. monthly averages at 26,000, 11,000 and
absolute decline in employment. The However, even the revised series of QES 41,000 respectively (Table 4, p 15).
decline in employment was more wide- confirms the trends of employment stag- These numbers, both the absolute and
spread in the urban areas, while in the nation that are visible in both the large averages, seem to show a continuum of
rural areas, the drop in employment LBEUS and the QES of the earlier version. the near stagnation in employment crea-
was limited to women. The change in employment during April tion that had set in from 2012 for the
From the demand-side, the QES also June 2016 was 77,000, in the next quarter organised sector.
corroborates the dismal picture of em- Table 2: Change in Employment during 201314 to 201516 (in lakh)
ployment creation in India visible in Rural Urban Total# Total*
LBEUS. Since January 2010, successive Agriculture, forestry and fishing -77.9 -6.7 -48.3 -84.6
quarterly surveys show that employ- Mining and quarrying -3.1 -1.5 -4.6 -4.7
ment creation had been slowing down (1) Primary -81 -8.2 -52.9 -89.3
(Figure 1). After October 2011, in no Manufacturing 1.6 -17.4 -21.8 -15.8
quarter was the addition in employment Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 0 -1.6 -4.6 -1.6
more than 2 lakh per quarter. Between Water supply; sewerage, waste management and
remediation activities 0 -1.5 -0.1 -1.6
2014 and 2016, the labour market condi-
Construction 4 -13.2 -4.2 -9.1
tions further deteriorated to an absolute
(2) Secondary total 5.6 -33.7 -30.7 -28.1
decline in employment in three of the
Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor
12 quarters. During the 24-month period vehicles and motorcycles 29.4 25.2 40.7 54.6
from March 2010 to March 2012, the Transportation and storage 5.4 -1.4 2.6 4
employment in the surveyed sectors Accommodation and food service activities 2.9 -3.8 -0.6 -0.9
increased by 18.15 lakh, while in the next Information and communication -0.1 -4.9 -4.8 -5
24 months from March 2012 to March Financial and insurance activities 3 -3.7 -0.4 -0.7
2014, the employment creation slowed Real estate activities 3 1.1 -0.1 4.2
down to just 6.2 lakh and in the following Professional, scientific and technical activities 3 3.1 4.1 6.1
19 months from March 2014 to Decem- Administrative and support service activities -6.3 -6.8 -14 -13.1
ber 2015, employment creation further Public administration and defence;
compulsory social security 9 1.6 8.3 10.6
slowed down to 5.92 lakh. The monthly
Education 11.6 -7.7 2.9 3.9
average of employment creation, during
Human health and social work activities 2.9 -6.2 -4.9 -3.3
201012 was approximately 76,000 per
Arts, entertainment and recreation 0 -2.9 -4.5 -2.9
month (Table 3, p 15). During March Other service activities -0.2 3.1 3.9 2.9
2012March 2014 and March 2014De- Activities of households as employers;
cember 2015, the average monthly em- undifferentiated goods- and services-producing
ployment creation declined to around activities of households for own use -0.1 6.2 4.2 6.1
26,000 and 30,000 respectively. Within Activities of extraterritorial organisations and bodies 0 0 0 0
(3) Services total 63.5 2.9 37.4 66.5
this last period, during MarchDecember
Others (Residual) -6.1 4 8.9 -2.1
2015, the average employment creation
Total -18 -35 -37.4 -53
drastically fell to less than 8,000 jobs For * and # see note given for Table 1.
per month. Source: EUS, Labour Bureau.

14 SEPTEMBER 23, 2017 vol lIi no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
 COMMENTARY
Table 3: Change in Employment during 2010 to 2015, Based on QES (in lakh) Nearly the entire decline in the primary
March 2010 to March 2012 to March 2014 to March 2015 to Total sector was in agriculture, though other
March 2012 March 2014 December 2015 December 2015
Textiles, including apparels 1.88 3.3 2.69 0.48 7.87 sectors such as mining and quarrying
Leather 0.17 0.53 -0.18 0 0.52 also experienced a decline in employ-
Metals 1.72 -0.07 1.11 0.36 2.76 ment. It is to be noted that this decline in
Automobiles 1.44 0.45 -0.02 -0.28 1.87 agricultural employment is mainly that
Gems and jewellery 0.23 0.12 -0.09 -0.13 0.26 of female employment (reference period
Handloom/power loom -0.15 0.05 -0.2 -0.09 -0.3
as UPS) in the sector.
(1) Manufacturing 5.29 4.38 3.31 0.34 12.98
The decline in employment in agricul-
Transport 0.4 -0.11 -0.12 -0.02 0.17
IT/BPO 12.46 1.96 2.73 0.39 17.15 ture during 201314 to 201516 is a
(2) Services 12.86 1.85 2.61 0.37 17.32 continuum of the trends visible during
Overall 18.15 6.24 5.92 0.71 30.31 the period 200405 to 201112. Himanshu
Monthly average 0.76 0.26 0.31 0.08 0.45 (2011) and Thomas (2012) had observed
Coefficient of variation 0.58 0.68 0.61 0.34 0.67 an absolute decline in employment in the
Source: QES, Labour Bureau.
rural agricultural sector by about 200
Table 4: Change in Employment during 2016, accelerated. Between January 2010 and lakh between 200405 and 200910 and
Based on Revised QES (in lakh) December 2013, both the variables had Mehrotra et al (2014) accounted for a
April July October Total
June September December continuously decelerated to reach com- decline of about 130 lakh during 200910
2016 2016 2016 plete stagnation by end of 2013. It may be and 201112. Much of the decline in
Manufacturing -0.12 0.24 0.83 0.95 inferred that the slowdown in employ- employment during this period was due
Construction -0.23 -0.01 -0.01 -0.25
ment growth during this period is basi- to a decline in female employment in
(1) Secondary -0.35 0.23 0.82 0.7
cally a scale effect, wherein the decline the sector (Abraham 2013) and shifting
Trade 0.26 -0.07 0.07 0.26
in GVA growth had led to the decline in of male employment to non-farm sectors.
Transport 0.17 0 0.01 0.18
Accomodation
employment generation. As developing economies undergo the
and restaurant 0.01 -0.08 0 -0.07 However, since mid-2014 there is some Lewisian structural transformation, it is
IT/BPO -0.16 0.26 0.12 0.22 divergence in the growth of employment expected that agricultural employment
Education 0.51 -0.02 0.18 0.67 and value added. During the period March declines and non-agricultural employ-
Health 0.33 0 0.02 0.35 2014 to March 2016 while GVA growth ment would rise due to productivity and
(2) Services 1.12 0.09 0.4 1.61 started accelerating again, employment wage differences between the two sectors.
Total 0.77 0.32 1.22 2.31
creation remained low. From January 2014 Structural transformation is also accom-
Monthly average 0.26 0.11 0.41 0.26
to March 2016 though GVA growth per panied by an initial withdrawal of women
CV 0.39 0.32 0.58 0.81
Source: QES, Labour Bureau.
annum was above 7% on an average, the from the labour force. Thus, the decline
employment additionally created con- in the agricultural employment visible
All three sources of data, namely, tinued to remain flat, realising jobless during 201314 to 201516 may be inter-
LBEUS, the previous version of QES, and growth. preted as partly due to the long-term
the newer version of QES, point to the The growth of GVA had, however, structural shift in the economy from
fact that employment growth has slowed declined since January 2016 and has agriculture to non-agricultural sectors.
down during the period 2012 to 2016. continually fallen throughout the year, However, this period is also accompanied
This is substantiated by data representing and by 2017, the first quarter results show by a slowdown in agricultural GVA growth.
both the demand-side and supply-side. an even further decline in GVA growth. While during 201314, the agricultural
Drawing from the QES, it may be possi- With the GVA growth slowing down sub- GVA grew at 5.57% per annum, during
ble to infer that there is almost a secu- stantially to less than 6% during the 201415 it fell to -0.19% per annum and
lar decline in employment generation quarter OctoberDecember 2016 into 0.69% in 201516. In 201617, the growth
from quarter to quarter since 2010. How- early 2017, it may be only realistic to rate increased to 4.88% (DBIE 2017), but
ever, the period January 2014 to Decem- assume that employment creation is available data for the first quarter of
ber 2016 is marked by three instances of going to slow down even further, at least 201718 again shows a fall to 2.3% (CSO
an absolute decline in employment. in the organised sector. 2017). Given the decline in agricultural
A comparison of the growth trends in GVA, that in employment may be partly
gross value added (GVA) shows that Change in Employment by Industry due to negative scale effects as well, and
quarterly movements in employment It can be seen from the LBEUS that dur- not entirely due to long-term structural
creation for the sectors covered under QES ing 201314 to 201516, across various transformation.
seem to follow by and large the quarterly sectors, the largest decline in employ- The fall in employment in agriculture
movements in GVA of the economy till ment was experienced in the primary had been conventionally accompanied
mid-2014 (Figure 1). Between October sector (Table 2, p 14). Employment de- by increasing labour absorption in two
2008 and December 2009, both employ- clined by about 52.9 lakh in the primary industries, namely manufacturing and
ment generation and GVA growth had sector, both in rural and urban areas. construction, along with other sectors
Economic & Political Weekly EPW SEPTEMBER 23, 2017 vol lIi no 38 15
COMMENTARY
such as trade and transport, albeit in the
unorganised sector. However, what is
worrisome in the recent period is the
absolute decline in both manufacturing
and construction sector employment,
especially in urban areas.
In the secondary sector, employment
decline was highest in urban manufac-
turing followed by construction. While
manufacturing employment had increased
by 98 lakh persons between 200910 and
201112 (Mehrotra et al 2014), between
201314 and 201516 there was a decline of
21 lakh jobs in this sector. Further, most
of the decline in employment in this sector
was concentrated in urban areas. The
construction sector also experienced an
absolute decline in employment of about
4.2 lakh. In the services sector, there was
an increase in employment by 63.5 lakh in
rural areas, while in urban areas, employ-
ment increased by just about 2.9 lakh.
Within the services sector, the increase in
employment was concentrated mostly in
one sector, namely wholesale and retail
trade, and motor repairing. In rural areas,
this sector accounted for more than 40%
of all employment generated in this
period, in urban areas this accounted
for more than 62.5% of all employment
generated. In rural areas, public admini-
stration and education sectors also saw
some increase in employment, in urban
areas, while the wholesale and retail trade
saw an increase in employment, there
was a decline in employment in almost all
other sectors within services.
Thus, it can be seen that in general,
the decline in employment is a widespread
phenomenon, affecting most labour-
absorbing sectors with the singular excep-
tion of trade and motor vehicle repairs.
The fact that the productive non-agricul-
tural sectors of the economy, such as manu-
facturing, have shown negative growth
in employment does not fit the structur-
al change argument. The absolute fall in
employment in sectors such as construc-
tion, which acted as an employer of last
resort for the ones displaced from agricul-
ture, implies the dismal state of employ-
ment creation in India. What we are
experiencing currently in the Indian
labour market, especially in the non-
agricultural sectors, cannot be viewed
as part of long-term structural change.
16
It is possible to make some supporting
inferences regarding the sectoral perfor-
mance of the organised sector from the
QES as well. Between March 2010 and
March 2012, the increase in employment
in these eight sectors was to the tune of
18.15 lakh jobs, of which nearly 70% of
the additional employment was generated
in the IT/BPO segment. During the period
201214, the employment created fell
sharply to 6.24 lakh new jobs, but this
drop in employment was mainly owing
to the drop in employment in the IT/BPO
segment from 12.46 lakh jobs in 201012
to merely 1.96 lakh jobs in the period
201214. Thereafter, the IT/BPO segment
has not shown any major signs of recovery
in the subsequent period March 2014
to December 2015. During the period
March 2014 to March 2015, five out of
the eight sectors recorded a decline in
employment. This deepening and wid-
ening of the employment crisis is visible
from the monthly average employment
created which declined to just 8,000
during March to December 2015. Corre-
sponding to these periods, the coefficient
of variation for quarterly employment
creation declined from 0.68 to 0.61 to
0.34, implying the spread of the decline
to nearly all sectors.
As noted earlier from the LBEUS as
well, manufacturing sector employment
creation for the surveyed sectors of QES
had been declining from 5.29 lakh to
4.38 lakh, to 3.31 lakh during the period
2010 to 2012, 2012 to 2014, and March
2014 to December 2015, respectively.
However, it may be noted that overall,
these organised sector industries show
positive growth in the aggregate. So it
may now be possible to argue that the
brunt of the absolute decline in employ-
ment is in the unorganised sector, at
least in case of these sectors, while the
organised manufacturing sector is see-
ing a dramatic slowdown in the employ-
ment growth.
With the revised QES for 2016, it can be
seen that the stagnation in employment
creation continues well into 2016 though
signs of marginal recovery is visible in the
last quarter of 2016, during October
December 2016, at least for the organised
sector. For the period April to December
2016, the total employment created in
SEPTEMBER 23, 2017
these sectors was 2.3 lakh. The employ-
ment decline that was recorded in the
manufacturing sector continues till
AprilJune 2016, thereafter there seems
to be recovery in employment creation in
JulySeptember 2016 and further during
OctoberDecember 2016. However, the
decline in employment creation in con-
struction sector continues throughout
the year. The decline in IT/BPO employ-
ment also seems to continue till April
June 2016 and subsequently a marginal
revival in the later part of the year. Trade,
which had shown robust growth during
the period 201314 to 201516 as per the
LBEUS also seems to have stagnated by
mid-2016.
Absolute Decline
Thus, the picture that emerges from these
data sources is that of an absolute decline
of employment in India, with much of it
probably in the unorganised sector, while
the organised sector is seeing a sharp
decline in the growth of employment. This
stagnation in employment is widespread,
affecting almost all sectors of the economy,
as is visible from three different data sets.
This slowdown in employment growth
was marked since 200405, however, the
period 201213 and after is marked by
absolute declines in employment.
Even though employment creation
had stagnated for the manufacturing
sector, GVA growth had been high at
above 7% rates during this period, reso-
nating the jobless growth phenomenon
for the past years, wherein employment
elasticity of manufacturing value added
had remained at less than 0.10 during
19992000 to 200910 (GoI 2013).
However, in the construction sector, the
decline in employment was accompanied
by sharp fall in GVA growth as well. This
is also the case with the real estate, finance,
and business services sector wherein both
GVA growth and employment creation
slowed down. These two sectors had the
highest employment elasticities during
19992000 to 200910, at 1.13 for con-
struction and 0.66 for real estate finance
and business services. The decline in
growth of GVA of these two labour
absorbing sectors has greatly impeded
employment creation in the past few
years. Since the IT/BPO segment also
vol lIi no 38 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
 COMMENTARY

falls within business service, the de- stagnation is visible from multiple sourc- 2 The 68th round of NSSO on employment and
unemployment and second round of Labour
cline in the growth of this sector, and in es of data. The period since mid-2014, Bureaus EmploymentUnemployment were
turn, its contagion on construction sec- wherein there was a change of govern- conducted in 201112 with approximately the
same reference period. Indicators of labour
tor may well have possibly played a key ment, does not show any improvement in market such as the total labour force participa-
role in reducing employment growth. the labour market conditions. If any- tion rates (LFPR) and workforce participation
The slowdown in growth rates of GVA thing, these indicators seem to have got rates, based on usual principal status (UPS)
criteria for age 15 and above, estimated by
during the first quarter of 201718, es- worse since mid-2014. There is an abso- both these surveys match reasonable well.
pecially in manufacturing, construction lute decline in employment during the This gives us some confidence is using
LBEUS in the absence of NSSOs EUS for
and business services, may only aggra- period 201314 to 201516, which is per- recent periods.
vate the employment crisis further. haps happening for the first time in in- 3 Labour Bureau states these selected industries
represent more than 80% of all industrial
dependent India. The stagnation in em- employment in industries with more than 10
Unemployment Rates ployment growth seems to be largely a employees.
It seems that the slowdown in employ- scale effect, where the slowdown in 4 As can be seen from Table 5 the LBEUS
results for the same year and category of popu-
ment growth had aggravated the prob- economic growth, especially of labour- lation, shows a higher unemployment rates
lem of unemployment (Table 5). The absorbing sectors such as agriculture, compared to NSSOs EUS. So the levels shown
in NSSOs EUS and LBEUS are not comparable
UPS-based overall unemployment rates construction and business sector, has con- for the years. But the trends in both the surveys
stricted employment growth. can be interpreted together.
Table 5: Unemployment Rate (per 1,000) for Persons of Age
15 Years and Above according to Usual Status Approach of India Though some of these trends,
Rural Urban All such as decline in agricultural References
Male Female Person Male Female Person Male Female Person
employment, have their roots Abraham, Vinoj (2013): Missing Labour or Con-
NSSOs EUS sistent De-feminisation, Economic & Political
19992000 18 5 12 38 13 26 NA NA NA
in structural transformation of Weekly, Vol 48, No 31, pp 99108.
200405 18 12 15 34 19 27 22 14 18 the economy, it is the loss of BusinessLine (2017): Panagariya to Head Task
growth dynamism of highly Force to Measure Job Creation, BusinessLine,
201112 21 29 23 32 66 38 24 36 27
9 May, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com
LBEUS employment elastic sectors, /economy/panagariya-to-head-task-force-to-
201112 27 56 34 34 125 50 29 69 38 such as construction and fi- measure-job-creation/article9689201.ece.
CSO (2017) Press Release of Ministry of Programme
201213 40 58 44 42 128 57 40 72 47 nance, and business services, Implementation, 31 August, Central Statistics
201314 42 64 47 39 124 55 41 77 49 that have aggravated the stag- Office, Ministry of Statistics and Programme
201516 42 78 51 33 121 49 40 87 50 Implementation, Government of India.
nation in employment creation.
Source: EUS, Labour Bureau. DBIE (2017): Database on Indian Economy, Re-
While laudable efforts like the serve Bank of India, viewed on 10 August 2017.
increased from 38 per thousand in 201112 Make in India programme aimed GoI (2013): Twelfth Five Year Plan, Government of
India, Vol 3, p 136.
to 50 per thousand. Unemployment rates at enhancing manufacturing growth Himanshu (2011): Employment Trends in India: A
had been gradually increasing in India, in India may have positively affected Re-examination, Economic & Political Weekly,
Vol 43, No 59, pp 4359.
at least since 19992000 as per the NSSOs manufacturing, its conventionally low
Mehrotra, Santosh, Jajati Parida, Sharmistha Sinha
EUS. 4 The gradually rising unemploy- labour-absorbing capacity seems to and Ankita Gandhi (2014): Explaining Employ-
ment rates for the rural areas continue have not reaped benefits for the work- ment Trends in the Indian Economy: 199394
to 201112, Economic & Political Weekly,
to show a rising trend till 201516 in the ing class. Given that GVA growth rates Vol 49, No 32, pp 4957.
LBEUS as well. The urban unemploy- have fallen continuously during the last Shaw, Abhishek (2013): Employment Trends in India:
An Overview of NSSOs 68th Round, Economic
ment rates also show a rising trend till quarter of 201617 and 201718, argua- & Political Weekly, Vol 48, No 42, pp 2325.
201213, thereafter there seems to be a bly a fallout of demonetisation and the Thomas, Jayan Jose (2012): Indias Labour Market
marginal decline. Given that these are goods and services tax, it is possible during the 2000s: Surveying the Changes,
Economic & Political Weekly, Vol 48, No 51,
open unemployment rates pertaining to that employment growth may further pp 3951.
the major-time criteria, which has con- remain subdued in the near future.
ventionally shown very low figures, ow- Much of the employment decline is
ing to the lack of alternatives for the probably concentrated in the unorga- Obituaries
poor, these increasing rates of open nised sector, while the organised sector The EPW has started a section, Obituaries,
unemployment may also be indicative has experienced a slowdown in growth, which will note the passing of teachers
of the worsening underemployment, a thus the weakest among the working and researchers in the social sciences and
more pertinent problem for India. class are bearing the brunt of the em- humanities, and social activists who have
ployment decline. contributed to a just society.
Conclusions
From the analysis, it seems to be clear The announcements will be in the nature of
Notes short notices about the work and careers of
that since 201112 the labour market in
1 Both the Labour Bureau data sets have been those who have passed away.
India is facing a severe crisis with employ- criticised in the past for their lack of represent-
ment growth stagnating across almost ativeness. While the LBEUS had small sam- Readers could send brief obituaries to
ples initially, the QES suffered from low sam-
all sectors, and unemployment rate is ple size and poor coverage in terms of sectors. edit@epw.in.
worsening. This trend of employment For instance, see BusinessLine (2017).

Economic & Political Weekly EPW SEPTEMBER 23, 2017 vol lIi no 38 17