Labour is a Concurrent subject. Discuss how centralised welfare boards affect cooperative federalism in labour governance.

Trade unions, social security and labour welfare fall under Entries 22–24 of the Concurrent List [1]. The Union and the States therefore share both lawmaking and delivery. The Code on Social Security, 2020 places the national boards for unorganised and gig-platform workers under Union control. This gives workers a uniform national floor of protection. But it weakens the Union–State partnership that the Concurrent List assumes.

How centralised boards strain cooperative federalism

• Union-led design: The Union Labour Minister chairs the National Social Security Board, and the Centre nominates its members [2]. States take part only when the Centre chooses to include them.
• Planners vs implementers: States handle much of the registration and delivery, yet the agenda for schemes is set in Delhi. States feel less ownership of these schemes, especially Opposition-ruled States.
• Advisory only: The board only recommends and monitors schemes [2]. It gives States no forum to negotiate priorities or how costs are shared.
• Costs pass to budgets: Aggregators pay 1–2% of turnover, capped at 5% of payouts to workers [2]. Any benefits beyond this must come from government budgets, including State budgets, without a joint decision.

How centralisation supports cooperative federalism

• Portability: Platforms and migrant workers move across State borders. Gig workers may grow from 7.7 million (2020–21) to 23.5 million by 2029–30 [4]. A national system avoids 28 separate State regimes.
• Two-tier structure: The Code also provides for State boards chaired by State Labour Ministers [3]. This mirrors the federal division of work.
• Pooled funding: The Code provides dedicated social security funds for unorganised, gig and platform workers [3]. These help States that cannot fund schemes on their own.

Way forward

• Give States rotating seats on the national boards, whichever party rules them.
• Link national and State boards through joint scheme design and agreed formulae for sharing costs.
• Include Central Trade Unions and platforms, following NITI Aayog's partnership model with platforms [4].

Centralised boards bring uniformity and portability, but they risk turning a shared subject into a Union-led one. Boards that work collaboratively, instead of issuing directions, would respect cooperative federalism. They would also move India closer to universal social protection under Article 41 and SDG 1.3.