The discussion also touched on broader challenges, including childcare shortages (with crèches covering only a fraction of needs) and the dual burden many women face—balancing work with family responsibilities

As India welcomed 2026, a significant policy shift took centre stage in the country's evolving labour landscape. The four new Labour Codes—implemented in November 2025—formally permit women to work night shifts across sectors, including factories, IT parks, hospitals, warehouses, and even traditionally restricted areas like mining, subject to their written consent and mandatory employer-provided safety measures. These include safe transportation, adequate lighting, security, CCTV surveillance, and restrooms.

The recent pre-publication of draft rules in late December 2025 opened a 30- to 45-day window for public feedback, marking a pivotal moment to test whether these provisions can truly balance opportunity with protection. For decades, women's access to night work has been framed as a stark trade-off: prioritize safety by restricting participation, or open doors and hope risks diminish. 

The new framework attempts to redraw this bargain, shifting the primary responsibility from individual women to employers and indirectly the state. Night shifts are now positioned as a legitimate economic space where dignity, fair pay (including overtime at double rates), and safeguards are intended to coexist. This reform arrives amid a broader push for gender equity in employment, potentially unlocking higher earnings, career progression and greater female participation in India's growth story.

A key highlight was the evolving picture of India's female labor force participation. Recent data shows encouraging trends, with the overall female LFPR rising significantly, driven largely by rural women (reaching around 47.6% in 2023-24, up from much lower levels in 2017-18). Rural women now play a major role in agriculture and allied activities. Urban participation remains lower, but the reforms could help bridge this gap by opening higher-paying, formal sector roles.

A feminist writer emphasized the persistent gap between law and enforcement in India. She pointed out that issues like unsafe public transport, poor street lighting, and societal attitudes toward consent remain rampant. Even during daytime shifts, sexual harassment cases have surged, with many going unreported. Allowing night work, she warned, could shift blame onto women who decline shifts due to inadequate facilities, potentially leading to coercion disguised as "choice" — with threats to promotions or bonuses.

A gender rights activist echoed these fears, describing safety as having been "outsourced to women's courage." While acknowledging the progressive tone of the reforms—especially compared to tragic high-profile cases of violence against women in recent years—she stressed that laws must evolve from mere permission to genuine protection. 

Real safeguards, she argued, require concrete steps: mandatory escort policies, door-to-door verified transport with GPS tracking, functional panic buttons linked to response teams, well-lit workplaces and exits, and 24/7 grievance mechanisms with meaningful women's representation. Without these, the changes risk becoming token gestures or posters in HR offices rather than lived safety.

A female entrepreneur offered a more optimistic employer perspective. She highlighted how her company proactively addresses risks for women providing at-home services, using panic buttons, real-time tracking, verified drivers, and mandatory drop-offs home via partnerships like Uber for Business. Misra viewed the reforms as a welcome move that expands choice and talent pools, especially for women previously excluded from flexible shifts. 

She drew parallels to societal restrictions: instead of locking women away for safety, the focus should be on eliminating threats while enabling participation. Good employers, she noted, already provide such measures in sectors like IT and large corporations, and the new codes formalize this responsibility. An advocate reinforced that women's security must be treated as essential infrastructure for nation-building. Without it, she remarked, the reforms could fail. 

The discussion also touched on broader challenges, including childcare shortages (with crèches covering only a fraction of needs) and the dual burden many women face—balancing work with family responsibilities, especially in urban nuclear families lacking joint family support. Ultimately, the debate boils down to a fundamental question: Is this true empowerment, backed by enforceable infrastructure and cultural change, or does it merely expose women to greater risks in an already unsafe environment?

As India enters 2026, the draft rules offer a chance for refinement through public input. The true test will be whether safeguards extend beyond corporate campuses and tier-1 cities, holding employers and the state accountable even at 2:00 a.m. or 3:00 a.m. Only then can safety and opportunity truly go hand in hand, allowing women to contribute fully as an economic necessity in building an Aatmanirbhar Bharat.