Photo: Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah | Twitter
Bengaluru: In a significant development, the Karnataka state government has decided to withhold ‘The Karnataka State Employment of Local Candidates in the Industries, Factories, and Other Establishments Bill, 2024’ following widespread criticism from top corporate leaders and industry bodies. The Bill, which proposes substantial job reservations for local candidates in the private sector, has sparked a heated debate over its potential impact on businesses and economic growth in the state.
The proposed legislation, approved by the state Cabinet just days ago, mandates 75% reservation in non-management roles and 50% in management positions for local candidates, defined as those born in Karnataka or residing in the state for 15 years, proficient in Kannada, and having cleared a language test.
However, influential voices from the business community have vehemently opposed the Bill. Biocon founder Kiran Mazumdar Shaw argued for exemptions for highly skilled positions to safeguard Karnataka’s technological prowess. Nasscom, representing software and service companies, warned that the Bill could drive away investments and stifle startups, urging the government to reconsider its approach.
In response to the outcry, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah announced via social media platform X that the Bill has been put on hold. He emphasized the need for comprehensive discussions within the Cabinet before making a final decision. State Industries Minister MB Patil assured that wider consultations would take place to address industry concerns without compromising the interests of Kannadigas.
Opposition to the Bill has also come from political quarters. Venture capitalist Mohandas Pai criticized it as discriminatory and regressive, questioning its alignment with constitutional principles. Conversely, pro-Kannada organizations have lauded the initiative, viewing it as a fulfillment of longstanding demands for local job prioritization.
As Karnataka navigates this contentious issue, balancing regional employment aspirations with economic imperatives will be crucial. The government’s decision to withhold the Bill reflects a cautious approach, aiming to reconcile diverse viewpoints before proceeding. The outcome of subsequent consultations and the eventual fate of the Bill will likely shape the future trajectory of employment policies and economic development in the state.
