THE Overseas Mobility (Facilitation and Welfare) Bill, 2025, which the Union Government intends to table in the ongoing Budget Session of Parliament, arrives not as a shield for the vulnerable, but as a legislative auction block where the Indian working class is sold to the highest bidder. This Bill represents an institutionalized betrayal, a premeditated retreat by the State from its fundamental duty to protect its citizens. While the government parades this legislation as a modernization of the 1983 Emigration Act, its true function is to dismantle the regulatory barriers that once stood between predatory capital and the bodies of the poor. By rebranding the State as a ‘facilitator’  rather than a ‘watchdog,’  the government is signaling that the Indian worker is no longer a citizen with inalienable rights, but an ‘export item’ designed to bridge national trade deficits and stabilize macroeconomics.

The sheer hypocrisy of this Bill is laid bare when one considers the staggering economic contribution of the migrant workforce. In FY25, Indian migrants are expected to send home a record-breaking USD 135.46 billion in remittances, a sum that covers nearly 47% of our national trade deficit. These billions are built on the broken backs of 16 lakh blue-collar construction workers currently toiling in the Gulf. Yet, instead of honouring this contribution with robust legal protections, the Bill treats these workers as disposable assets. It prioritizes the flow of capital over the preservation of life, ignoring the grim reality that between 2022 and 2024 alone, over 6,600 Indian workers died in the Gulf, many of them victims of the brutal, state-sanctioned exploitation inherent in the then officially existing Kafala system.

From Citizens to Commodities: The Institutionalized Abandonment of the Indian Migrant Worker

A closer examination of the Bill reveals a systematic dismantling of worker agency. In previous drafts, like the 2021 proposal, workers were granted the right to directly initiate legal action against exploitative recruiters; however, the 2025 Bill strips this away, forcing workers to rely entirely on an overburdened state machinery for justice.

Beyond this loss of direct legal recourse, the Bill is dangerously silent on mandatory fee disclosure by Overseas Placement Agencies (OPAs). By removing the strict cap on recruitment fees, the government hands a blank cheque to predatory middlemen, effectively legalising the very debt bondage that traps workers in slavery-like conditions before they even board a plane. This structural vulnerability is compounded by the ‘Returnee’ trap found in Section 1(t), which defines a ‘returnee’ only as someone who has completed an arbitrary 182 days abroad. This clause serves as a direct assault on those forced to return within weeks due to contract fraud, physical abuse, or hazardous workplace injuries on global mega-projects like Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030; by excluding these short-term returnees from welfare and reintegration schemes, the Bill punishes the victims of the very exploitation it claims to prevent.

In addition to that, the Bill’s reliance on ‘Digital Governance’ through the ‘Integrated Information System’ model ignores the reality of millions of workers who lack the digital literacy to navigate e-Migrate platforms. This digital barrier pushes desperate workers toward dangerous, irregular ‘dunki’ routes, effectively making the legal path a class-based privilege. The legislation grants sweeping discretionary powers under Sections 12 and 13, allowing the government to ban emigration for specific ‘categories’ of workers or entire regions based on vague grounds of ‘sovereignty.’  These powers can be weaponised to suppress collective actions of workers and prevent union leaders from documenting the horrific reality of overseas work sites, completing a framework that prioritises facilitation over protection.

The Global Skill Hub: A Corporate Front for Labour Export

The government argues that the Bill modernises a ‘colonial-era’ mindset, highlighting the creation of an Overseas Mobility and Welfare Council and Mobility Resource Centres (MRCs) as evidence of their commitment to ‘safe, orderly, and regular’ migration. They further claim that accreditation for agencies and a minimum penalty of Rs 5 lakh per breach will ensure accountability. However, from a working-class perspective, these are cosmetic fixes. An ‘Overseas Mobility Council’ that excludes trade unions, migrant organisations, and sending-state representatives is not a welfare body; it is a corporate board for labor export. Furthermore, a fine of Rs 5 lakh is a mere ‘cost of doing business’ for agencies charging workers lakhs in illegal fees. Ultimately, the Bill prioritises administrative convenience and the branding of India as a ‘Global Skill Hub’ over the dignity of the people providing the skills.

Why India’s Construction Workers Reject the Overseas Mobility Bill

The vast majority of Indian migrants are not white-collar professionals; they are the 16 lakh blue-collar construction workers who build the world’s mega-projects while sustaining our national economy. As the largest federation of Indian construction workers, the Construction Workers Federation of India (CWFI) vehemently rejects the Overseas Mobility (Facilitation and Welfare) Bill, 2025, in its current form. We refuse to allow the Indian worker to be traded as a mere commodity to fix trade deficits.

Our first and most non-negotiable demand is the establishment of a Global Social Security Fund. This fund must not be a burden on the worker; instead, it should be financed through a mandatory levy on recruitment agencies. For too long, placement agencies have reaped massive profits while workers bear the entire financial risk of migration. By shifting the financial responsibility to the recruiters, the state can ensure that every worker has a safety net for health, disability, and old age that follows them across borders.

Moreover, we demand the immediate institutionalisation of universal returnee status. The current ‘182-day rule’  in Section 1(t) is a death sentence for the most vulnerable. We demand the removal of this arbitrary timeline to ensure that any worker forced to return, whether due to contract fraud, physical abuse, or workplace injury—is granted full access to comprehensive medical and legal aid. A worker’s right to state support should be determined by their need, not by how many months they managed to survive an exploitative environment.

This protection must be anchored by mandatory bilateral wage agreements that meet International Labour Organization (ILO) standards. We demand that the Indian government stop signing ‘mobility agreements’ that ignore the reality on the ground. No agreement should be valid unless it includes the active effective dismantling of the Kafala system, which tethers workers to employers in a state of modern-day serfdom. Finally, to protect our citizens from being used as pawns in geopolitical strife, we demand a legal prohibition against utilising Indian migrant workers in conflict zones or for any military-adjacent labour. The safety of the worker must be paramount; there can be no compromise on war-zone deployment.

The government intends to table this Bill in the ongoing budget session of parliament. We strongly urge the Central Government to refrain from doing so. A bill of this magnitude, which commodifies the lives of millions, cannot be rushed through during a session focused on the budget. It requires a fresh draft, deep consultation with trade union representatives, and a total shift from ‘facilitating mobility’ to ‘protecting working people’. Until the worker is treated as a human with rights rather than an item on a trade balance sheet, this Bill must be withdrawn.