Asia-Pacific employment law bulletin 2025

India

Increased focus on mental health and work-life balance

Even with a workforce comprising of over half a billion individuals (which is the second largest in the world), Indian workplaces have historically resisted conversations around mental health and well-being of employees, despite various pre and post pandemic surveys that indicated employees suffering from mental health issue of some form, including burnout, anxiety, distress or depression.

However, the death of an international consultancy firm employee ostensibly from ‘overwhelming work pressure’, in 2024, has given India a jolt and ignited a critical conversation about mental health and work-life balance. Many companies have re-evaluated their approach to employee well-being. Some of the concrete actions that we have seen companies taking include appointing a Chief Happiness Officer and forming an external committee to review the work environment and employee policies, providing onsite confidential counselling and support for personal and professional issues, implementing employee wellness programs by partnering with specialised groups to promote physical and mental wellbeing (e.g. yoga sessions and online stress management workshops).

In terms of legislation, whilst there is a robust framework of Indian labour laws (it is estimated that 47 per cent of the total yearly compliances for Indian businesses are related to labour laws), none of them contain any provisions dealing with the mental health of employees. Even the new proposed labour codes, which mandate an employer to provide and maintain a safe working environment without risk to an employee’s health, do not specifically touch upon mental health.

A recent proposal from the Karnataka government (which came at the behest of companies) to increase daily working time hours for employees in the information technology sector to 14 hours received massive pushback from industry leaders (aligning with the mental health and work-life balance trend), following which the Karnataka cabinet had to indefinitely shelve the proposal. Nonetheless, the issue remains debatable – recently, N.R. Narayana Murthy’s, one of India’s most respected tech veterans, expressed support for a 70 hour working week, which caused a social media debate. Supporters of this view emphasize India’s need to increase efficiency to match-up to other nations globally, but it remains to be seen whether this proposal will get legislative support or not.

India is still a developing economy with a burgeoning workforce, therefore whilst it would be ideal if the government shows legislative intent to implement balanced and nuanced policies related to mental health and work-life balance, some companies are already ahead and have started taking actions regarding these matters.

Loud quitting

A new phenomenon known as ‘loud quitting’ is emerging. Unlike ‘silent quitting’, which consists in burnt-out workers merely coasting by doing the bare minimum at their jobs, loud quitting is about workers speaking up, often through social media. It is a public expression of discontent and unresolved grievances and can lead to reputational damage for the concerned employer. News reports suggest that within the calendar year 2024, 30 per cent of the employees quitting their jobs shared the decision online and 12 per cent criticized their former employer publicly.

Whilst public scrutiny could help employees to achieve their goals, loud quitting could also be used as a retaliation method by disgruntled employees with genuine performance and efficiency issues to discredit their employers. To mitigate the negative impact of loud quitting, employers can incorporate non-disparagement clauses in employment contracts. Such clauses prohibit an employee from making and / or publishing statements which can be damaging to an organization’s image and reputation, both during and after the tenure of employment. So far, we have seen examples of companies revealing that some senior members of the organization were indeed made to sign a mutual non-disparagement agreement – which is in line with the general trend, i.e. it is largely senior employees who are subject to such clauses. However, given the increasing trend of loud quitting across the board, a non-disparagement clause may act as a deterrent for other employees as well.

It is worth noting that non-disparagement clauses are not very well tested in the Indian courts and may have potential enforceability issues. They could raise concerns about an employee’s freedom of speech and expression under the Indian Constitution (Constitution). Courts may also scrutinise these clauses to ensure that they do not stifle truthful and legitimate criticism, whistleblowing or complaints about offences perpetuated by organizations.

It is, therefore, essential to create a balance whilst drafting such clauses so that they do not curtail the fundamental rights of an employee under the Constitution or prohibit them from making disclosures required to be made under the regulatory requirement or revealing malpractices in an organization. 

Contributors: Gaurav Desai, Yashita Sharma, and Mahak Goyal - Touchstone Partners