Indian Economy and Employment for the Eleventh Five Year Plan for India

Technical Note on Employment for the Eleventh Five Year Plan
(2007 – 2012)
Report submitted
to
Planning Commission
(Labour, Employment & Manpower Division)1
1
Planning Commission Order No.P-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008, placed at Appendix II,
refers.

Fore Word
This 'Technical Note on Employment for the Eleventh Five Year Plan'
presents the quantitative basis for determining the targets and projections on employment,
and the related variables given in the Eleventh Five Year Plan document. While, in
principle, each Chapter of the Plan document has an 'employment dimension', three
Chapters of the Plan document that relate directly to this subject are:
Employment Perspective and Labour Policy
Skill Development and Training
Social Security of Workers
(Volume I, Chapter 4)
(Volume I, Chapter 5)
(Volume II, Chapter 4.2)
2.Preparation of the Five Year Plan Document commences with the release of an
'Approach Paper'. A Steering Committee on Labour & and Employment was set up,
which constituted six Working Groups on the specific subjects pertaining to Labour and
Employment. After receipt of the Reports of the Working Groups, and deliberations in
the Steering Committee on the proposals put forth ,by the Working groups, there were
internal deliberations within the Planning Commissipn, where a stand on the findings of
the Working Groups and the Steering Committee was taken. The Chapter(s) of the Plan
Document state the conclusions of the internal deliberations. The technical details that
underlie the conclusions and setting of the targets for the Plan are furnished in this
Technical Note on Employment.
4.Shri Shailendra Sharma, the former Adviser (Labour & Employment), Planning
Commission,) was deeply involved, after superannuation, in the technical work done for
preparing the employment strategy for the Eleventh Five Year Plan. He was supported in
this task by Shri Raj Kumar, Deputy Adviser (Employment) from the Indian Statistical
Service Cadre. Being the main architect of the Eleventh Plan Chapter on employment,
Shri Shailendra Sharma was given the task to prepare this Technical Note on
Employment by the Planning CommissionI.
5.The quantitative analysis presented here might be useful for the experts, research
workers, and in the future exercises on this subject (including the mid-term appraisal of
the Eleventh Five Year Plan). Dr. Bhalchandra Mungekar, Member (Labour &
Employment), Planning Commission approved this Technical Note and instructed that it
be published and kept on the website of the Planning Commission.
-:1.
~
(Jayati Chandra)
Principal Adviser (Labour, Employment & Manpower)
Planning Commission, Government of India
January).j,2009
lChapters of this Report have been prepared by the Author to furnish the technical details required vide the
Planning Commission Order No.P-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008 (Appendix II).

Technical Note on Employment for the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007 – 2012)
INDEX
Page
Chapter 1
Chapter 2.
Chapter 3
Chapter 4.
Chapter 5.
Chapter 6.
Fore Word
Projections of Labour Force
Entrants to and Exits from the Labour Force
Employment Targets and Unemployment Projections
Trends in Wages
Employment Strategy for the Eleventh Five Year Plan
(Including the approach to formal and informal employment)
Removal of deficiencies in Data on Employment
– the Recommendations
Appendices
Appendix I
Appendix II
Statistical Appendix
Planning Commission Order No.
P-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008
I-XVII
7 - 14
15 - 23
24 - 37
39 - 43
44 - 60
Chapter 7
61 - 62
XVIII-XXI
3

List of Tables in Chapters
TableTitle
Chapter 2 Tables - Labour force Projections
2.1 Projections of increase in labour force at different stages of preparation of the
Eleventh Five Year Plan
2.2 Projections of Population, Participation in Labour Force (LFPR) and Size of
Labour Force Male, Female and Male+Female – three Variants placed before
the 11th Plan Working Group on Labour Force & Employment Projections
2.3 Increase in labour force decomposed into population size effect and labour
force participation effect
2.4a Increase in labour force participation rate of female persons
1993-94, 1999-2000 to 2004-05
2.4b Marginal labour force participation rate of female persons
2.5 Summary of the projections of increase in population and labour force:
2006-07 to 2011-12 and 2011-12 to 2016-17
Chapter 3 TablesEntrants to and Exits from the Labour Force
The need for a quantitative framework of the entrants to, and exits from the
labour force – certain illustrative instances from the planning process
Entrants to labour force - the various estimates of actuals and the projections
New entrants to labour force from persons aged 5 to 59 years during the 11th
Plan (2007-2012) and 12th Plan (2012-2017) periods
Exits from labour force from persons aged5 to 59 years during
the 11th Plan (2007-2012) and 12th Plan (2012-2017) periods
Entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-) during 2007-2012
by quinquennial age groups
Entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-) during 2007-2012
by quinquennial age groups
Basis of Estimate of the DGE&T of those who enter labour market every year
as given in the Draft of the Policy on Skill Development
Chapter 4 Tables - Employment Targets and Unemployment Projections
Employment Elasiticities by Current Daily Status (CDS) -1983 to 2004-05
Estimated and Projected 2006-07 to 2017
Employment Estimates 1983 to 2004-05 (CDS)
Estimates of Annual Growth Rate (%) in GDP at 1999-2000 prices 1977-78
to 2004-05 and Projections 2016-17
Estimate of Sectoral increase in Employment Opportunities 1983 to 1993-94
& 1993-94 to 2004-05 and Projections for and 2007 to 2012 & 2007 to 2017
(CDS)
Employment & Unemployment Projections 2006-07, 2011-12 and 2016-17
(CDS)
Basis of measuring Labour Force & Employment in the previous Five Year
Plans
Page
7
11-12
13
14
14
10
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5a
3.5b
3.6
16
17
20
21
22
22
23
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
26
27
28
29
30
33
4.5
4.6
4

List of Tables in Chapters
TableTitle
4.7 Incidence of Unemployment by the level of Household Consumer Expenditue
under the alternative measures for unemployment – UPSS & CDS: 2004-05
Chapter 5 Tables – Tends in Wages
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
Growth of Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India (at 1993-94 prices) -
1993-94 to 1999-2000 & 1999-2000 to 2004-05
Growth of Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India (at 1993-94 prices)
1983 to 2004-05
Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India 1993-94, 1999-2000 & 2004-05
(at 1993-94 prices)
Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India 1993-94, 1999-2000 & 2004-05
(at current prices)
All India Consumer Price Index Numbers for Agricultural Labourers
Chapter 6 Tables - Employment Strategy for the Eleventh Five Year Plan
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Number of Establishments enumerated in Economic Census classified by
workers Size Class – 1998 and 2005
Creation of Employment Opportunities in the Eleventh Plan 2007 – 2012 – the
base case and the intentions of the 11th Plan
Distribution of workers by type of employment – Formal and Informal and by
Sector- Organised and Unorganised -prepared by the NCEUS
The contrast between the employment strategy implicit in the Papers of the
NCEUS and the Planning Commission (LEM Division)
Page
35
41
41
42
42
43
45
47
49
53-55
List of Graphs and Charts
Graph / Chart
3.1
4.1
4.2
Title
Persons entering the labour force (+) and exiting
from labour force (-)
Unemployment rates of rural persons by
expenditure class on UPSS and CDS basis
Unemployment rates of urban persons by
expenditure class on UPSS and CDS basis
Page
19
36
37
List of Boxes
BoxTitle
4.1 Concepts and Definitions for Labour Force, Employment and
Unemployment
4.2 The Three Kinds of Estimates of the Unemployed
4.3 Measurement of Employment and Unemployment
Page
31
32
34
5

Appendix
Table
A2.1
Statistical Appendix
Title
Chapter 2 Appendix Tables - Labour Force Projections
Projected Population by Age & Sex, All India - Urban Areas: 2002-22
Projected Population by Age & Sex, All India - Rural Areas: 2002-22
Page
-
rr
III.
A 2.2
A2.3
A 2.4a
A 2.4b
N-
and Residence, All India, 2007 and 2012
Projected Labour Force Participation Rate (Current Daily Status) by Age and
\T
Sex, All India Urban, 2007 to 2022
Projected Labour Force Participation Rate (Usual Status) by Age and Sex,
'Y.
All India Urban, 2007 to 2022
Projected Labour Force Participation Rate (Current Daily Status) by Age and
Sex, All India Rural, 2007 to 2022
Participation Rate (Usual Status) by Age and Sex, All India Rural, 2007 to
2022
Estimated Labour Force (in 'OOOs) India, 2004-05All
Projected Labour Force by Age Group (current daily status) All India, 2007
Projected Labour Force by Age Group (current daily status) All India, 2012
Projected Labour Force (in 'OOOs) India, 2017All
"SIT
ProjectedPopulationand LabourForce(UPSS)by EducationalLevel,Sex
A2.5a
A2.5b
A2.6
A2.7
A2.8
A2.9
ff
-vm:
1X..
x:
:xL
A2.10
Estimateof all personsandthosein labourforceand Increasein LFPRof
FemalePersons(CombinedRuralandUrban)2000 and 2005
Chapter 3 Appendix Tables - Entrants to and Exits from the Labour
A3.1
A3.2
A3.3
A3.4
A3.5
A3.6
Force
Estimate of average annual entrants to and exits from labour force 2000-2005
RURAL MALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-)
during 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial age groups
RURAL FEMALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force
(-) during 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial age groups
URBAN MALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-)
during 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial age groups
URBAN FEMALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force
(-) during 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial age groups
Average Annual Increase in Population, Labour Force and those not in labour
force 1994-2000,2000-2005,1994-2005 & 2007-2012
-
.:xI[
n.
-)(1'1
"X5L
V\
2SYJl

Chapter 2
Projections of Labour Force1
The projections of labour force given in the Eleventh Plan document2, for the
Perspective Period (2007 – 2017) and for the Eleventh Plan Period (2007-2012) got
finalised through a three stage process described at Table 2.1.
Table 2.1- projections of increase in labour force at different stages of preparation
of the Eleventh Five Year Plan
Stage
I.
Approach to Eleventh Plan
basis of
measurement
current daily
statusb
increase in labour force (2007
to 2012)
65.00 million a
(52.00m in the baseline scenario)
II. Planning Commission Sub
Group on Labour Force &
Employment Projectionsc , and
the main Working Group on
Labour Force & Employment
Projections
III. Eleventh Plan Document
a
usual principal
and subsidiary
status
current daily
statusd
49.24 million
44.71 million e
A baseline scenario of 52 million was used to develop the projection of 65 million addition to labour force
during the Eleventh Plan period 2007-2012.
bApproach Paper to Eleventh Plan used the current daily status (CDS) basis for measuring unemployment.
cConstituted by the Planning Commission Working Group on Labour Force & Employment Projections.
dIn the Eleventh Five Year Plan, use of current daily status for measuring unemployment, as followed in the
10th Plan, is continued.
eIn the final Eleventh Plan document the projections of balance amongst labour force, employment and
unemployment were made on CDS basis in a 10 year perspective of population, labour force and work
force.
Reasons for review of the 65 million target suggested in the Approach to 11th Plan
2.The three key variables used in the analysis of past trends in labour force, and for
making projections for the future are:
1
Items 1 & 2 of the ‘Details to be included in the Technical Note on Employment(Planning Commission
Orders NoN-11016/1(10)2008-PC dated April 2, 2008 as amended vide Order No. ……….-LEM dated
…….., 2008as amended vide Order No…….. dated’ requires:
“1. How the Sub-Group (on Labour Force and Employment Projections) recommendations have been
used in deriving the projections of Population and Labour force in preparing the 11th Plan
Chapter?”
“2. Why the projections given in the Approach Paper were revisited?
2
‘Employment and Labour Policy,’ The Eleventh Five Year Plan, Volume I, Chapter 4, Table 4.15(A),
Table 4.15(B), and Annexure 4.1.
7

2.1 Population – classified by (i)age groups, (ii)male & female and (iii) rural& urban
2.2 Rates of participation in labour force classified as per above 3 categories, and:
2.2.1
2.2.2
measured on usual Principal and subsidiary status (UPSS) basis, or
measured on current daily status (CDS) basis
2.3 Labour force classified as at 2.2 above.
Table 2.2 shows the values of the above three variables corresponding to the three stages
of the 2007 – 2012 projection of the additions to labour force, viz.,
52.0 mill. (the baseline case used for 11th Plan Approach),
65.7mill. (11th Plan Approach Paper) and
49.2 mill. (11th Plan Sub Group and the main Working Group)
It will be observed from the ‘female block III’ of Table 2.2 that the 65million projection
for aditions to labour force was based on a premise of 30.6 million addition to female
labour force during the 11th Plan, which was13.7 million higher than in the baseline case.
This additionality of 13.7 million higher increase came from the jump projected in
participation in labour force by the female persons.
3.The increase in labour force of females by 30.6 million, as envisaged in the
Approach to 11th Plan, is decomposed between two kinds of effects (in Table 2.3):
(i)
(ii)
the population size effect, and
the labour force participation effect.
It will be observed that 2/3rd of the increase in female labour force (18.3 m out of 30.6m)
arises from the labour force participation effect. Such a projection of increase implied
that during the five year period 2007 – 2012, out of the increase of every 1000 female
persons, 833 would join the labour force. When contrasted with the prevailing LFPRfemale
(2007) of 287 per thousand, this projection of 833 marginal LFPRfemale during 2007 -2012
appeared unrealistic. As shown in Table 2.4b, the Approach Paper numbers extrapolated
the immediate past trends (2000 – 2005) of movements in female LFPR into the future,
and ignored the longer-term trend (1994-2005) (11years) when the marginal LFPR was
such that out of an increase of 1000 female persons only 311 joined the labour force.
Accordingly, the Approach Paper target of 65 million increase in aggregate labour force
required a review during the detailed exercises carried out for preparation of the 11th
Plan.
8

Projection of 49.24 million (UPSS basis) increase in labour force (2007 – 2012) by the
Working Group on Labour Force and Employment Projections (following from the work
of the Sub Group on Labour Force Projection).
4.Movements in the rates of participation in labour force through time arise from a
number of social and economic factors. However, noting that in the 11th Plan the major
new developmental initiative will be in terms of level of education and training3, the Sub
Group on Labour Force Projections established a relationship of age-group wise level of
education with the participation in labour force. Annexure Table A2.3 gives the
projections of labour force during the 11th Plan by the level of education for males and
females in the rural and also for the urban areas4. Total labour force is projected by the
Working Group (which accepted the recommendations of the Sub Group for reasons
given above) to increase from 492.61 million in 2007 to 541.85 million in 2012 (UPSS
basis) i.e., an increase of 49.24 million during the 11th Plan period.
5. Impact of the level of education on participation in labour force is a person
specific characteristic, and such effects can be measured only through person specific
measures of labour force. Usual Status measures are person specific. Hence, the Sub
Group on Labour Force Projections carried out the exercise on the basis of Usual
Principal and Subsidiary Status (UPSS) measurement. Accordingly, the Working Group
projection of 49.24 milion increase in labour force is on UPSS basis. For the
measurement of unemployment, the 10th Plan and the Approach to 11th Plan used the
current daily status (CDS) measure, which is not person specific, but being a measure of
person-days, it can capture the unemployed days of persons in labour force more
comprehensively than the usual status measures. As explained, indepth, later (Chapter 4,
Annexure 4.1), it was decided to use CDS measure for assessment of unemployment in
the 11th Plan, which required that the balance of labour force and employment be
established on CDS basis. Accordingly, the UPSS basis projections made by the Sub
Group had to be modified to CDS basis.
Projection of 44.71 million increase in Labour Force made in the 11th Plan (CDS Basis)
6.To measure unemployment, the 10th Plan and also the Approach to 11th Plan used
the current daily status (CDS) measure, which is not person specific, but being a measure
of person-days, it can capture the unemployed days of persons in labour force more
comprehensively than the usual status measures. For reasons explained, in-depth, later
(Chapter 4, Annexure 4.1), it was decided to use CDS measure for assessment of
In 2004 the resources for school education were augmented in a substantial measure through a cess on the
direct and indirect taxes, which was followed by an additional ‘Secondary & Higher Education Cess’ in
2008, and the implementation of ‘education sector’ plan has been put under rigorous monitoring – all these
are expected to result in a significantly higher growth path for the levels of education for the children and
the youth.
4More detailed scheme of computations, showing age group-wise and level of education-wise changes in
labour force participation rates for males and the females in rural and urban areas is given in the Report of
11th Plan Working Group on Labour Force and Employment
Projections.(
3
9

unemployment in the 11th Plan, which required that the balance of labour force and
employment be established on CDS basis. Accordingly, the UPSS basis projections made
by the Sub Group had to be modified to CDS basis.
7.To project labour force participation rates (LFPR), on CDS basis, it has been
assumed that the changes projected on UPSS basis will also be applicable on CDS basis.
However, the Sub Group while projecting decline in LFPR of females, noted that higher
level of education will also reduce fertility among the women, and this would increase
the participation in labour force by young women. The Sub Group did not estimate this
counterbalancing effect towards better participation by the female persons. In this Study,
the level of LFPR of young urban female persons has been maintained at the level
observed in 61st Round (2004-05). The LFPR’s on CDS basis for the period 2007-2017,
as used for the 11th Plan Exercise, are given in Annexures 2.4a, for Urban Areas and in
Annexure 2.5a for the rural areas. Projections of population in urban and rural areas, as
used for the 11th Plan exercise are given in Annexure 2.1 and Annexure 2.2, for urban and
rural areas, respectively.
8.The labour force on CDS basis for the period 2004-05 (estimate of actuals), and
the projections for 2007, 2012 and 2017 are given in Annexure 2.6 through Annexure 2.9.
The UPSS basis projections of labour force made by the Sub Group on Labour Force
Projections, and accepted by the main Working Group have also been reported in the
Eleventh Five Year Plan. Table 2.5 gives the summary of the results.
(‘000)
Table 2.5: Summary of the projections of increase in
population and labour force
2006-07
to
2011-12
2011-12
to
2016-17
addition to
population
79658
75271
addition to
UPSS
labour force
addition to
CDS
labour force
49180
44711
44600
40398
10

Table 2.2 : Projections of Population, Participation in Labour Force (LFPR) and Size of Labour
Force Male, Female and Male+Female – three Variants placed before the 11th Plan Working Group
on Labour Force & Employment Projections
2007 to 2012Item,ageVariant20072012
% perincrease/(unit)group
annum
decrease
I. male and female
0+
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
same in all
variants
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
II. male
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
same in all
variants
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
0+
male labour
force
(million)
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
1128.3
1128.3
1128.3
1208.0
1208.0
1208.0
79.7
79.7
79.7
1.374
1.374
1.374
population
(million)
15 - 59
0+
LFPR
(per thousand)
687.1
437
437
437
492.6
492.6
492.6
760.1
449
451
462
541.9
544.6
558.3
73.0
2.040
0+
Labour force
(million)
49.2
52.0
65.7
1.924
2.029
2.040
0+
male
population
(million)
15 - 59
584.0
584.0
584.0
625.4
625.4
625.4
41.4
41.4
41.4
1.381
1.381
1.381
356.3
393.6
37.2
2.007
0+
male
LFPR
(per thousand)
576
576
576
597
594
594
336.5
336.5
336.5
373.7
371.6
371.6
37.2
35.1
35.1
2.119
2.007
2.007
12

Table 2.2 : Projections of Population, Participation in Labour Force (LFPR) and Size of Labour
Force Male, Female and Male+Female – three Variants placed before the 11th Plan Working Group
on Labour Force & Employment Projections
2007 to 2012Item,ageVariant20072012
% perincrease/(unit)group
annum
decrease
III.female
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
same in all
variants
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
Sub Group
Approach
Paper 1
Approach
Paper 2
544.3
544.3
544.3
582.6
582.6
582.6
38.2
38.2
38.2
1.366
1.366
1.366
female
population
(million)
0+
15 – 59
330.8
366.6
2.075
0+
female
LFPR
(per thousand)
287
287
287
289
297
320
female
labour force
(million)
156.1
156.1
156.1
168.2
173.0
186.7
12.0
16.9
30.6
1.497
2.075
3.639
0+
13

Table 2.3 :Increase in labour force decomposed into population size effect and labour force participation effect
Male
effect of
change in
labour force
participation
3.
aggregate
increase in
male labour
force
=(2)+(3)
4.
effect of
popula-
tion
change
5.
female
effect of
change in
labour force
participation
6.
aggre-gate
increase in
female
labour
force
=(5)+(6)
7.
effect of
population
change
=(2)+(5)
8.
male + female
effect of
change in
labour force
participation
=(3)+(6)
9.
aggregate
increase in
labour
force
=(4)+(7)
10.
Variant
effect of
population
change
2.
1.
(million)
11th Plan Sub
Group on Labour
Force
ProjectionsLFP
Approach Paper
Variant 1 – the
base line scenario
Approach Paper
Variant 2
24.761
12.440
37.201
11.032
1.007
12.039
35.732
13.508
49.240
24.625
10.524
35.149
11.350
5.535
16.885
35.916
16.119
52.035
24.625
10.524
35.149
12.247
18.308
30.555
36.817
28.887
65.704
14

Table 2.4a - increase in labour force participation rate of female
persons1,2 1993-94, 1999-2000 to 2004-05
55th61stItem50th
34
RoundRound5Round
(1993-94) (1999-2000) (2004-05)
(per thousand persons)
female labour290263294
force
participation rate
(LFPR)6
(per cent(-10.04)(10.50)(1.54)
change)
[1994
to
2005]
[6 years]
[2000
to
2005]
[5years]
[1994
to
2005]
[11years]
Notes & Source:
1
combined for the rural and the urban areas
2
UPSS basis
3
NSSO Report No, 406, Table 1B; Pages 53 and 56.
4
NSSO Report No, 458, Table 2; Page A 17
5
NSSO Report No, 515, Table 20; Page A 77
6
Derived from NSS Reports data given in
Annexure Table A 2.10
Table 2.4b marginal labour force participation rate of female persons1,2
increase in female labour force per
thousand increase in female persons
199420001994
tototo
200520052005
[6 years][5years][11years]
marginal labour force
participation rate of female
persons1,2,6
Notes to Table 2.4a apply.
126
833
311
15

Chapter 3
Entrants to and Exits from the Labour Force5
The design of the programmes, the policies and the regulatory mechanism for the
labour market institutions requires a quantitative framework of the magnitude of entrants
to, and the exits from the labour force. Table 3.1 gives certain typical illustrations of such
requirements of the planning process. It could also be seen in this Table, that such
information is required at the level of the various age-groups.
2.A reasonably accurate estimate of the magnitude of the number of entrants to, &
exits from the labour force is, therefore, required. However, the next Table 3.2 reveals the
wide divergence among the various authorities in regard to the magnitude of the new
entrants to labour force. The range of variations is so large that the highest estimate is
double of the lowest in the range. In such a situation many estimates of the past actuals,
and multiple projections of the future are put out by the various experts and the
authorities6.
3.The Governments (including the State Governments) need a reasonably firm
quantitative perspective to frame programmes and policies for those entering and exiting
the labour force. Hence, there is a need to suggest a method for computing these. Such a
procedure for computation of entrant to, and also the exits from labour force is proposed
in this Technical Note7.
5
Item 5 of the ‘Details to be included in the Technical Note on Employment, vide the Planning
Commission Order No. P-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008 requires:
“5. New entrants to Labour Force – The basis as to why projections are different in 11th Plan Chapter
vis-à-vis the Report of the Working Group on Skill Development & Vocational Training for the
11th Plan.”
6
The following two illustrations are given in support of this position:
a. The Draft Policy on Skill Development estimates 12 million as the number of new entrants to
labour force (i.e., the labour market)every year at present. In this, a simplistic assumption is made
that the increase in size of labour force is equal to the number of new entrants to the labour
market. Refer to Table 3.6. This estimate is incorrect. As shown in Annexure Table 3.1, the correct
estimate of past actuals is 16.747 million per year during 2000 to 2005.
b. Even, the draft of National Employment Policy (on display at Website of the M/o L&E, and
downloaded on November 26, 2008, and which is being prepared for M/o L&E by the ILO Sub
Regional Office at Delhi), mentions 10 million as the number of new entrants to labour force every
year, for whom jobs would need to be generated ,which (as shown by the analysis in this Chapter),
again, is a misleading number. Such a ‘National Employent Policy’ would give a very wrong signal to
State Governments as to the magnitude of the task before them for job creation.
7
Procedure for calculations of the entrants to, and the exits from the labour force, at the level of the
various age groups is explained, alongwith the implicit algebra for the exercise, in Annexure 3.1 by
taking up the example of the period 2000 to 2005, and using the data collected from the 55th Round and
the 61st Round of the National Sample Surveys.
16

Table 3.1 – the need for a quantitative framework of the entrants to, and exits from the
labour force – certain illustrative instances from the planning process
Age
group
(years)
key economic
characteristics that need
to be measured among
the entrants to/ or exits
from this age group
list of plan programme (variables), policy or regulation that are
influenced in respect of:
entrants to
labour force
exits
from
labour
force
(4)
(1)
(2)
working employed at
regular wage in
urban areas in
occupations other
than hzarduous
working children in
the rural areas
number of first time
seekers of jobs in
labour market
new entrants to jobs in
the formal labour
market
(3)
-seating capacity in special schools, for-
-operation of district level employers fund to be
contributed to by the employers
-seats in vocational schools
-facilities are acquisition of skills
-career advice services
-seats for vocational training
-seats for apprentices in establishments
-special employment programmes for the youth
-new membership targets to be adopted by the
EPFO and also the ESIC
-enrolment to self financed pension schemes
-design of an unemployment insurance system to
facilitate job search and relocation
not
applicable
10-14
not
applicable
not
applicable
15-19
not
applicable
20-24
new entrants to jobs in
the informal urban
labour market
-unorganised workers, social security schemes for
o
o
o
health cover
pension cover
income support during job change
not
applicable
-urban housing for the poor labour households
-capacity to test, and grant recognition to skills
acquired in a non formal mode
the urban female new
entrants to jobs
- capacity for crèche services
not
applicable
17

Table 3.1 – the need for a quantitative framework of the entrants to, and exits from the
labour force – certain illustrative instances from the planning process
Age
group
(years)
key economic
characteristics that need
to be measured among
the entrants to/ or exits
from this age group
list of plan programme (variables), policy or regulation that are
influenced in respect of:
entrants to
labour force
exits
from
labour
force
(4)
(1)
40-45
(2)
the urban female re-
entrants to jobs
(3)
-retraining and placement in the 2nd career for
females
entrants to labour force
exits from labour force
55-60
workers in the formal
labour market
not applicable
-a least cost-cum-maximum benefit-job
separation system for the employers
and the employees funded by EPFO
and LIC / GIC etc.
-Central funded, and States supported,
old age pension, life cover and health
schemes.
60+
Poor 60+ workers
continuing in the
labour market in rural
areas
not applicable
18

Table 3.2 - entrants to labour force - the various estimates of actuals and the projections
Persons entering the labour
force
Source
Author
Estimate of
actuals &
(period)
Projection &
(period)
(million per year)
1. Eleventh Five Year
Plan, Chapter on ‘Skill
Development and
Training’
2. 11th Plan Working
Group on Skill
Development &
Vocational Training
3. National Policy on Skill
Development (Draft)(2008)
15 to 17a
(2002 to 2007)
7 to 8b
(2000 to
2005)
12.8c
(2000 to
2005)
Planning Commission
M/o Labour & Employment
(DGE&T)
M/o Labour & Employment
(DGE&T)
ILO Sub Regional Office for
South Asia, Delhi for M/o
Labour & Employment,
(DGE&T)
4. National Employment
Policy (First Draft)
(1.08.2008)
5. This Study
Notes:
10.0d
16.4e
a. This broadly corresponds to the 10 million target for enhancing training opportunities to new entrants to labour
force in the non agricultural sector. (Eleventh Plan,Vol I, Chapter 5 – Skill Development and Training, para.,
5.28; (2008))
b. One of the Terms of Reference of the Working Group on Skill Development & Vocational Training constituted
vide Government of India, Planning Commission Order was:
“To evaluate the feasibility of providing vocational skills to all entrants to labour force and the feasibility of
attaining this target by the end of Eleventh Plan and to suggest a strategy for accomplishing this objective;”
(Para 2(b) of the Order No.Q-20017/1/06/LEM/LP dated March 6 , 2006.)
The Report of the Working Group, prepared by the Ministry of Labour & Employment States:
“Facilities to impart skill development programmes for about 3 million persons per annum exist in the
country whereas the total labour force is about 400 million. Every year 7 to 8 million labour force enters the
market. Majority of it has not undergone skill development programmes.”
(Paragraph 5.7 of the Report of the11th Plan Working Group on Skill Development;prepared by DGE&T,
th)
19

Table 3.2 - entrants to labour force - the various estimates of actuals and the projections
Persons entering the labour
force
Source
Author
Estimate of
actuals &
(period)
Projection &
(period)
(million per year)
(2006))
c. The Draft of National Policy on Skill Development prepared by the Ministry of Labour states:
“The current capacity of the skill development system is inadequate to meet the requirement. Potentially, the
target groups for skill development comprise all those in the labour force, including those entering the labour
force for the first time (currently 12.8 million), the work force in the organised sector (26 million) and in the
unorganised sector (433 million) in 2004-05. The current capacity is only 2.5 million.” (Displayed on Website
of M/o L&E, DGE&T)
Table 3.6 gives the basis of calculations of DGE&T, M/o Labour & employment.
d. “National
Employment Policy; First Draft; 01.08.08
1.(The) Context (of National Employment Policy)………….
1.2 Although there has been a reversal of the declining trend in employment growth in the post-
2000 period, there has also been a simultaneous increase in unemployment rates as employment
growth has not kept pace with growth in labour supply. Unemployment rates have been high and
increasing, especially amongst certain groups – such as youth, women and young graduates.
Furthermore, about 10 million new entrants to the labour force are expected each year, for whom jobs
would need to be generated.(As downloaded on November 26, 2008 from
)
e. Chart 3.1,Tables 3.3, Table 3.5 and Annexures 3.2 to 3.5 give the quantitative basis for this result.
4.If the methodology by which these estimates are generated, is standardized, the
various formations of Government (including, the State Governments) can work with a
uniform set of numbers.
5.Results of the technical exercise on age-group wise estimates of past actuals, and
projections of persons entering the, and exiting from the labour market are presented in
Tales 3.3 to 3.6. These are based on analysis of population growth, its age structure, the
participation rates in labour force by gender, age and residence (rural or urban), which is
presented in Annexure 3.1 to Annexure 3.6.
4.The magnitude of new entrants to labour force would be a multiple of the net
increase in labour force. In the age group 15-19 years, alone this number would be
around 35 million in 11th Plan (Chart 3.1 & Table 3.5 a), which is 4 to 5 times the
estimate of entrants to labour force (across all age groups) made by the Ministry of
20

Labour & Employment 11th Plan Working Group on Skill Development, and whereas,
there would be a net decrease in labour force in this age group by 2081 million
(Annexure 3.2 through Annexure 3.5). Accordingly, the envisaged coordinated action for
Skill Development in the 11th Plan, should, in so far as the skill development of the new
entrants to labour force is concerned, aim at providing vocational training to16.4 million
persons (the children and the youth upto the age of 29 years) per year (or an outturn of 82
million over the five year period 2007-2012). Table 3.3 refers.
5.The exits from labour force during the 11th Plan would be around 15 million, (or 3
million per year) and another 16 million (as on 2012- the end of the 11th Plan) is the
number of those who would exit in the labour market after the age of 60 – but, at this age
the workers are vulnerable to a high degree of risk of income loss, illness, and life. (Table
3.4 and Table 3.5b). This sets the agenda for the Plan for providing social security cover
to the aged (including the poor) workers during the 11th Plan and beyond.
21

Chart 3.1- persons entering the labour force (+) and exiting from the labour force (-) during 2007 to
2012
40000
35000
30000
25000
th o u s a n d p e rs o n s ( U P S S )
20000
rural
male
rural female
15000
urban male
urban female
all persons
10000
5000
0
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
-5000
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
-10000
age group of persons
22

Table 3.3
new entrants to labour force from persons aged
5 to 59 years during the 11th Plan (2007-2012)
and 12th Plan (2012-2017) periods
area /age bandspersons entering the
genderfrom whichlabour force1
there are
net
entrants
into the
labour
force
2007 -2012 –
20122017
(years)(thousand
s)
rural male5 - 293768037543
rural female
sub-total
rural areas
urban male
urban
female
sub-total
urban areas
total
5 - 39
as above
17875
55555
17700
55243
5 - 44
5 - 39
21351
6071
21157
5992
as above
27422
27149
82977
memo items -
increase in size of labour force ( 0+)
82392
rural male
rural female
urban male
urban female
all
Notes
1UPSS
0+
0+
0+
0+
0+
21480
8078
15722
3961
49241
20199
6844
14121
3477
44641
23

Table 3.4
exits from labour force from persons aged
5 to 59 years during the 11th Plan (2007-2012) and
12th Plan (2012-2017) periods
age bands
from which
there are net
exits from
the labour
force
persons exiting from
the labour force1
area /
gender
rural male
rural female
sub-total
rural areas
urban male
urban
female
sub-total
urban
areas
total
(years)
30 - 59
40 - 59
2007 -2012 -
20122017
(thousands)
72787242
4740
5099
as above
45 - 59
12018
1655
12341
2057
40 - 59
1221
1460
as above
2886
14904
3517
15858
memo items -
60+ persons remaining in labour force at the end of period
rural male
rural female
rural areas
urban male
urban female
urban areas
all
Notes
1
60+
60+
60+
60+
60+
10510
3044
13554
446
305
751
14305
12421
3430
15851
510
288
798
16649
UPSS
24

Table 3.5a
entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-)
during 2007-2012 by quinquennial age groups
age of
persons
(years)
(1)
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
rural
male
(2)
103
2321
19113
14409
1734
-1137
-1030
-1109
-1015
-1365
-1623
rural
female
(3)
97
2467
9134
2857
1863
747
710
-1040
-815
-1536
-1349
urbanurbanAll
malefemalepersons
(in thousands) (UPSS)
(4)(5)(6)
38
607
5677
8491
4559
1308
451
220
-46
-519
-1100
39
367
1585
2363
489
766
462
-259
-514
-94
-354
277
5762
35509
28120
8645
1684
593
-2188
-2390
-3514
-4426
Table 3.5b
entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-)
during 2007-2012 by quinquennial age groups
age ofruralurbanAll
persons persons personsmalesfemales persons
(years)(in thousands) (UPSS)
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
200
4788
28247
17266
3597
-390
-320
-2149
-1830
-2901
-2972
77
974
7262
10854
5048
2074
913
-39
-560
-613
-1454
141
2928
24790
22900
6293
171
-579
-888
-1061
-1884
-2723
136
2834
10719
5220
2352
1513
1172
-1299
-1329
-1630
-1703
277
5762
35509
28120
8645
1684
593
-2188
-2390
-3514
-4426
25

Table 3.6
Basis of Estimate of the DGE&T of those who enter labour market
every year as given in the Draft of the Policy on Skill Development
NSS
estimate
of labour
forceLabour
fromforce
samplenormalised labourNSS
surveyRGI'sto RGI'sestimateforce
(UPSSofpopulation population (UPSS
basis)estimatepopulation estimatebasis)
('00
Nos)('00 Nos)('00 Nos)('00 Nos)(millions)
2004-05 41788639718974 109283004698836469.88
1999-
200037359969209880 100504604076978407.70
0.00
increase
2000 to
2005
avearge
annual
increase
442867
621858
62.19
0.00
88573
124372
12.44
26

Chapter 4.
Employment Targets and Unemployment Projections
Projections for employment and unemployment for the Eleventh Five Year Plan
(2007 – 2012) have been made in a ten year perspective (2007-2017) of population,
Labour Force and Employment. Technical details on projections of population and labour
force are given in Chapter 2.
2.The number of employment opportunities that should get created, in other words,
the demand for labour, has been derived from the perspective of growth in output, and the
employment elasticity with respect to GDP8.
3.Estimates of observed employment elasticity, for the period 1983 through 2004-
05 are given in Table 4.1. The data on output and employment over a span of 21 years as
used for estimating the employment elasticity is furnished in Table 4.2 (estimates of
growth in GDP), and Table 4.3 (estimates of growth in number of workers.)
Projections of employment elasticity
4.At the micro level, the real wages can increase, if there is a rise in productivity of
labour. A rise in productivity of labour, implies a reduction in employment elasticity.
Such a trend can be seen in most of the industries between the two periods 1983 to 1993-
94 and 1993-94 to 2004-05. (Table 4.1) In making projections of elasticity, at the level
of specific industries, a some increase in labour productivity has been assumed all
through the ten year perspective period (2006-07 to 2016-17).
5. In the case of agriculture, since the primary planning issue is the narrowing of the large
gap between agricultural workers and industrial workers, a sharp increase in productivity
of agricultural labour is a necessary condition. Accordingly, in making the projections of
employment, no increase in the number of agricultural has been projected for the 11th
Plan period, in other words zero employment elasticity. The reduction in the number of
agricultural workers in post-eleventh Plan period implies negative employment elasticity
during 2012 – 2017. Table 4.1 gives the projections of employment elasticity, industry-
wise, for the period 2006-07 to 2016-17.
8
The Eleventh Plan document states the limitations of ‘employment elasticity, as a methodology for
projecting employment as under:
“There are important qualifications to these projections which must be kept in mind, arising from the
limitation of employment elasticities as a projection tool. The concept of employment elasticity is at best a
mechanical device to project employment on the basis of projected growth of output and past relationships
between employment and output. These relationships can change as a result of changing technology and
change in real wages. The labour force participation rate is also subject to changes especially because of
possible changes in female participation rates in urban areas associated with advances in women’s
education. For all these reasons, the projected decline in the unemployment rate must be treated with
caution. It could well be that the projected increase in labour demand induces greater labour supply through
an increase in participation rates and also higher wages which moderate demand.”
27

6.Corresponding to the industry-wise growth in GDP, the projected increase in
employment opportunities is given, industry-wise, in Table 4.4. On the above basis, the
labour force, employment and unemployment projections are given in Table 4.5 for the
ten year period 2006-07, 2011-12 and 2016-17.
7. In preparing the overall – aggregate labour foce-workforce balance, in the Eleventh
Five Year Plan, use of current daily status, as followed in the 10th Plan, is continued. The
Note placed at Annexure 4.1 presents the reasons for doing so, in preference to the 'usual
principal and subsidiary status' measure. This Note also underlines the relevance of ‘usual
status’ measures for certain specific tasks.
28

Table 4.1
Employment Elasiticities by Current Daily Status (CDS -1983 to 2004-05 Estimated
and Projected 2006-07 to 2017
Industry
1983
to
1993-94
1993-94
to
1999-
2000
1999-
2000
to
2004-05
1993-94
to
2004-05
2006-07
to
2011-12
2011-12
to
2016-17
observed
Agriculture
Minining& Quarrying
Manufacturing
Elect.gas&water
supply
Construction
Trade,hotels &
restaurant
Transport,storage &
communications.
Financial,insurance,
real estate.&
businessservices
Comunity,social &
personal sevices
Total
0.63
0.68
0.50
0.53
1.25
0.76
0.61
0.00
-0.22
0.40
-0.29
0.74
0.70
0.60
0.41
0.31
0.60
0.71
0.84
0.63
0.42
0.15
0.00
0.49
0.04
0.79
0.67
0.50
projected
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.04
0.67
0.58
0.50
-0.10
0.00
0.35
0.04
0.55
0.44
0.39
0.64
0.69
0.51
0.66
-0.13
0.19
1.63
0.54
0.43
1.06
0.11
0.30
0.69
0.31
0.30
0.61
0.26
0.25
29

Table 4.2
- Estimated Employment by Current Daily Status (CDS)
(000's)
Industry
Agriculture
Minining& Quarrying
Manufacturing
Elect.gas&water supply
Construction
Trade,hotels & restaurant
Transport,storage&comm.
Fin.,insu.,real
est.&busi.services
Community.,social. &
personal services
Total
1983
156680
1582
26985
811
6125
16728
6906
1993-94
191580
2437
34835
1298
11385
25918
10119
1999-
2000
191551
2272
41028
1148
15000
37889
13721
2004-05
200396
2440
49669
1328
21437
48585
17758
1879
21792
239489
3403
32955
313931
4598
30987
338194
7715
35579
384909
Note: Industrial distribution of workers by CDS is not available for
1983 and 1993-94. Hence CDS workers have been distributed
across industries by the same distribution as available for UPS
workers.
30

Table 4.3
- Annual Growth Rate (%) in GDP at 1999-2000 prices
Industry
Agriculture*
Minining& Quarrying
Manufacturing
Elect.gas&water supply
Construction
Trade,hotels & restaurant
Transport,storage&comm.
Fin.,insu.,real
est.&busi.services
Comty.,so. & personal
sevices
GDP at factor cost
1977-78
to
1983-84
2.43
7.28
5.06
6.85
1.34
4.53
5.72
1983-84
to
1993-94
3.08
6.14
4.94
8.70
4.88
5.58
6.03
1993-94
to
1999-
2000
3.06
5.20
6.90
6.98
6.36
9.29
8.66
1999-
2000
to
2004-05
2.19
4.67
6.46
4.14
8.79
8.05
12.63
1993-94
to
2004-05
2.66
4.96
6.70
5.68
7.46
8.73
10.45
2006-07
to
2016-17
3.93
5.01
10.09
7.03
12.36
10.00
15.16
6.23
4.80
3.92
9.07
5.86
5.10
7.78
7.83
6.44
6.71
5.22
6.13
7.30
6.64
6.30
9.67
7.47
9.52
* Agriculture is three years moving average.
31

Table 4.4
- Projected Sectoral increase in Employment Opportunities (CDS)
('000)
1983 to
1993-94
(10.5
years)
1993-94
to
2004-05
(11
years)
8816
3
14835
30
10052
22667
7639
2007-
2017
Industry
2007-12
2012-17
Agriculture
Minining& Quarrying
Manufacturing
Elect.gas&water supply
Construction
Trade,hotels & restaurant
Transport,storage&comm.
Fin.,insu.,real
est.&busi.services
Comty.,so. & personal
sevices
Total
34900
855
7850
488
5260
9190
3213
0
1
11937
17
11922
17397
9025
-3967
2
12579
19
14448
17005
9738
-3967
3
24516
36
26370
34402
18763
1523
11163
74442
4313
2624
70978
3428
4344
58072
4044
4025
57893
7472
8370
115965
32

Table 4.5
- Employment and Unemployment
Projections 2006-07, 2011-12 and 2016-17 (CDS)
2006-07
2011-12
2016-17
Population (000)
Labour Force (000)
Employment Opportunities
(000)
Unemployed (000)
Unemployment rate (%)
1128313
438948
402238
36710
8.36
1207971
483659
460310
23349
4.83
1283242
524057
518203
5854
1.12
Growth in Population (% p.a.)
Growth in Labour Force
(%p.a.)
Growth in Employment
Opportunities (%p.a.)
1.43
2.02
1.37
1.96
1.22
1.62
2.73
2.40
Addition to Population (000)
Addition to Labour Force
(000)
Additional Employment
Opportunities (000)
35483
19301
79658
44711
75271
40398
58072
57893
33

Annexure 4.1
Measurement of Labour Force, Work Force & Employment – the Concepts9,10
I.The Alternative Measures of Labour Force and Employment – Concepts &
Definitions
The National Sample Survey Organisation (N.S.S.O.) has developed and
standardised the concepts and definitions of labour force, employment and
unemployment based on the recommendations of the Committee of Experts on
Unemployment Estimates set up by the Planning Commission in 1969 (Dantwala
Committee), (Box 4.1).
Box 4.1: Concepts and Definitions for Labour Force, Employment and Unemployment1
“ In the light of long experience in field surveys and the recommendations of the Committee of
Experts on Unemployment Estimates set up by the Planning Commission in 1969 (Dantwala
Committee). the National Sample Survey Organisation (N.S.S.O.) has developed and standardised
the concepts and definitions of labour force, employment and unemployment suitable to our socio-
economic conditions and adopted them in quinquennial surveys on employment and unemployment
since 1972-73 (27th Round). The various estimates are based on three concepts namely, Usual
Status, Weekly Status and Daily Status. These are explained below:—
i. Usual Status Concept: This concept is meant to measure the usual activity status—
employed or unemployed or outside the labour force of those covered by the
survey; thus the activity status is determined with reference to a longer period than
a day or a week*.
ii. Weekly Status Concept: Here the activity status is determined with reference to a
period of preceding 7 days. A person who reports having worked at least for one
hour on any day during the reference period of one week while pursuing a gainful
occupation was deemed to be employed. A person who did not work even for one
hour during the reference period but was seeking or available for work was
deemed to be unemployed.
iii. Daily Status Concept: Here activity status of a person for each day of the
preceding 7 days is recorded. A person who worked at least for one hour but less
than four hours was considered having worked for half a day. If worked for four
hours or more during a day, he was considered as employed for the whole day.
* The period of reference in the NSS 27th Round (1972-73) was a one year period
'spanning over' the past and future. The period was restricted to the preceding 365 days
in the NSS 32nd Round (1977-78).”
GOI, Planning Commission; Sixth Five Year Plan; Chapter 13: Manpower and
Employment, paragraph 13.3.
This draws upon, the work done by the author of this Report, in the Planning Commission (Labour,
Employment & Manpower Division), for the Eleventh Five Year Plan, for the Working group on Labour
Force & Employment Projections.
10
9
1
Item 3 of the ‘Details to be included in the Technical Note on Employment, vide the Planning
Commission Order No. P-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008 requires:
“3. Why Current Daily Status (CDS) approach for measuring employment-unemployment has been
preferred over the Usual Status (US) approach?”
34

The magnitude of incidence of unemployment differs substantially among the three
concepts of measurement. This is due to the differences in the nature of enquiry made
during the household survey on employment / unemployment in regard to disposition of
time of a person. (Box 4.2)
Box 4.2: The Three Kinds of Estimates of the Unemployed1
Unemployment rate is defined as the number of persons unemployed per 1000 persons in
the labour force. Three kinds of estimates for the unemployed are obtained following the
three different approaches. These are:
i) number of persons usually unemployed based on ‘usual status’ approach,
ii) number of persons unemployed on an average in a week based on the ‘weekly status’
and
iii) number of person-days unemployed on an average during the reference period of seven
days preceding the survey.
The first estimate indicates the magnitude of persons unemployed for a relatively longer
period during a reference period of 365 days and approximates to an estimate of chronically
unemployed. Some of the unemployed on the basis of this criterion might be working in a
subsidiary capacity during the reference period. The former is called as the usually
unemployed according to the principal status (p.s.) and the latter, the usually unemployed
excluding the subsidiary status workers (u.s. adjusted) which admittedly will be lower than
the former. The second estimate based on the weekly status gives the average weekly
picture during the survey year and includes both chronic unemployment and also the
intermittent unemployment, of those categorized as usually unemployed, caused by
seasonal fluctuations in the labour market. The third estimate based on the daily status
concept gives average level of unemployment on a day during the survey year. It is the
most inclusive rate of ‘unemployment’ capturing the unemployed days of the chronically
unemployed, the unemployed days of the usually employed who become intermittently
unemployed during the reference week, and the unemployed days of those classified as
employed according to the priority criterion of current weekly status.
1NSSO Report No. 409: Employment and Unemployment in India 1993–94: NSS 50 th
Round; Chapter 7.
The earlier Five Year Plans; Measurement concepts used in -
The basis of measurement, as used for presenting the estimates of labour force and
employment, and for making projections, during the various Five Year Plans are
indicated in Table 4.6. It will be seen that as the concepts and definitions and
measurement practices got refined through the successive surveys on employment and
unemployment, the basis of measurement of employment and unemployment, as used for
carrying out the Five Year Plan exercises also changed.
35

Table 4.6: Basis of measuring Labour Force & Employment in the previous Five
Year Plans
Five Year Plan
Basis of
Mesurement
Reference to the relevant
FiveYearPlan
Document
Remarks
Fifth
(1974 -1979)
Labourtime
disposition as per
current activity
i.e., the Current
WeeklyStatus
(CWS)
Fifth Plan, Chapter 2:
The Perspective, Para
2.36
This was the first Plan exercise after the
first household enquiry on employment
and unemployment done in the 27 NSS
Round (1972-73) following the methods
recommended by the Committee of
Experts on Unemployment Estimates
(1970).
Detailed work on estimation of labour
input at level of industrial sector was done
in preparation of the first Draft of the
Sixth Plan which was to cover the period
1978 – 1983. Labour input, was related to
sectoral output, in terms of standard
person years, and thus the projections of
employment were made in terms of
standard person years. However, as noted
in a later Plan document, the use of a fixed
labour input coefficient implied a unit
elasticity of employment with respect to
output, which is not borne out by the
actual observations.
Sixth Plan
(1980 – 1985)
Usual Principal
Status (UPS),
Sixth Plan, Volume II,
Chapter 13, Table 13.2
-Employment
projections made
intermsof
Standard Person
Years
Seventh Plan
(1985 – 1990)
Usual Principal
Status (UPS)
Seventh Plan, Volume
II,Chapter5:
Employment,
ManpowerPlanning
and Labour Policy,
Table 1.
Eighth Plan, Volume I,
Chapter6:
Employment
Perspective, Para 6.4.1
Eighth Plan
(1992 – 1997)
Current Weekly
Status(CWS)
waspreferred
over the UPS, in
making
projectionsof
employment.
Usual Principal
Status (adjusted
forthe
subsidiary
workers) i.e., the
Usual Principal
and Subsidiary
Ninth Plan
(1997-2002)
Ninth Plan, Volume I,
Chapter4,
Employment
Perspective, Para 4.8.
36

Five Year Plan
Basis of
Mesurement
Status. (UPSS)
Reference to the relevant
FiveYearPlan
Document
Remarks
Tenth Plan
(2002 – 2007)
CurrentDaily
Status (CDS)
Tenth Plan, Volume I,
Chapter5,
Employment
Perspective, Para 5.9.
CDS basis was adopted after considering
the recommendations made in the Report
of the Planning Commission ‘Special
Group on Creation of 10 million
Employment Opportunities per Year
during the Tenth Five Year Plan period.’
The Tenth Plan presented, in detail, the rationale for changing over to the ‘current
daily status’ basis of measurement Box 4.3.
37

Box 4.3: Measurement of Employment and Unemployment1
In the Ninth Plan, the calculations of employment and unemployment were
based on Usual Principal and Subsidiary Status basis (UPSS). The Report of the Special
Group2 has viewed current daily status (CDS) as a better measure to capture
unemployment and underemployment than the usual status, and therefore recommended
the use of CDS basis for estimation purpose.
The rationale for using CDS for measuring employment and unemployment is
the following:
i) The Approach Paper to the Tenth Plan recommended creation of gainful
employment opportunities for the entire additions to labour force during the
Tenth Plan and beyond. Therefore, policies and programmes to fill the gap
between requirement and availability of gainful employment opportunities are
to be worked out. At any point of time, there is a large unemployed and under-
employed workforce i.e., not having any gainful employment, although by
using the measurement on UPSS basis, several of them are declared employed.
This results in over-estimation of the level of employment. To avoid this,
largely, the Special Group suggested estimation of the extent of employment
and unemployment on CDS basis.
ii) According to the NSSO employment and unemployment survey report of
1999-2000 ‘The usual status approach adopted for classification of the
population is unable to capture the changes in the activity pattern caused by
seasonal fluctuations. But the estimate obtained by adopting the current weekly
or current daily status approaches are expected to reflect the overall effect
caused by the intermittent changes in the activity pattern during the year. The
latter (CDS) reflects also the changes, which take place even during the week.
The estimate of the employed based on current daily status gives average daily
picture of employment.’
Therefore the Special Group regarded the CDS measurement as the most appropriate
measure to have an estimate of the gap i.e., jobs to be created on gainful basis, in
order to bring out recommendations as to how they can be filled up by changes in
policies and programme.
1
2
Tenth Five Year Plan, Volume 1, Chapter 5: Employment Perspective, Paragraphs 5.8 to 5.10.
Special Group on Targetting Ten Million Employment Opportunities Per Year; Planning
Commission (May 2002).
38

II.Linking of Poverty with Unemployment under the alternative basis of
measurement – UPSS & CDS
In the UPSS basis of measurement, the estimate of unemployment of the better-
off persons (those having higher levels of consumer expenditure) turns out to be higher
than that of the poor. As per the CDS basis of measurement, the poor have a higher level
of unemployment than the rich. Table 4.7. illustrates this feature both for the rural and the
urban areas. UPSS unemployment rates of the rural rich are nearly double that of the
poor. And the CDS unemployment rates of the rural poor are 10 percentage points higher
than the UPSS unemployment rates of the poor. It may also be noted that in the CDS
measure the incidence of unemployment rises sharply as the income level (as measured
by the consumption expenditure here) falls; for example, the unemployment of urban
poor being 6 percentage points higher than the rich. The UPSS measure fails to establish
a monotonic relationship between unemployment and income. In other words, the CDS
measure of unemployment brings out the relationship between poverty and
unemployment, clearly.
Table 4.7:
Incidence of Unemployment by the level of Household Consumer
Expenditue under the alternative measures for unemployment – UPSS
& CDS: 2004-05
Unemployment Rate - Rural
Persons 2004-05
MPCE class
(Rs.)UPSS CDS
0-2351.3611.86
235-2701.0511.11
270-3201.2610.03
320-3650.988.76
365-4101.429.09
410-4551.599.23
455-5101.327.89
510-5801.727.92
580-6901.897.19
690-8902.016.68
890-11552.386.11
1155 & above3.656.65
Unemployment Rate -
Urban Persons 2004-05
MPCE class
(Rs.)UPSS CDS
0-3355.12 12.70
335-3953.33 10.84
395-4853.78 10.43
485-5803.45 9.01
580-6754.70 9.19
675-7906.28 9.97
790-9304.39 7.84
930-11004.85 7.71
1100-13804.63 6.40
1380-18804.55 6.48
1880-25405.29 6.43
2540 &2.74 4.08
above
39

unemployment rates of rural persons by expenditure
class of household 2004-05- UPSS
and CDS basis
2.5
12
2.3
CDS basis
11
2.1
UPSS basis
UPSS unemployment rate (%)
1.9
CDS unemployment rate (%)
10
1.7
9
1.5
8
1.3
7
1.1
0.9
235-270
270-320
320-365
365-410
410-455
455-510
510-580
580-690
690-890
890-1155
6
monthly per capita consumer expenditure class of the household (Rs.)
40

unemployment rates of urban persons by
expenditure class of household 2004-05 -
UPSS and CDS basis
6.5
11
10.5
6
10
UPSS unemployment rate (%)
9.5
UPSS basis
5
9
8.5
4.5
8
7.5
7
3.5
CDS basis
3
930-1100
1100-1380
1380-1880
1880-2540
335-395
395-485
485-580
580-675
675-790
790-930
6.5
6
CDS unemplyment rate (%)
5.5
4
monthly per capita expenditure class of the household (Rs.)
41

Person- specific characteristics
CDS measure being a person days measure (i.e., a time based measure), is not
amenable, straightaway, to study of person specific characteristics of the workers.
Current Weekly and the Usual Status measures study the activity status of a person over
the reference period (week or the year) (CWS, UPSS, and UPS) and, are therefore
amenable to study of person-specific characteristics. Hence, in presenting the person-
specific features of employed or unemployed persons the UPSS measures should be used.
III.
The choice between the alternative basis of measurement
Thus, for the purpose of making estimates of labour force, employment and
unemployment, for the entire economy, current daily status, is a better measure, because:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
in contrast with the usual status measures, it does not count ‘the
underemployed’ as ‘the employed’,
it is a better measure of gainful employment, and
it captures the quality of employment better than the UPSS
basis, by exhibiting a higher incidence of unemployment among
the poor than the rich.
One of the purposes of making an assessment of the developments in employment
situation is to understand the response of employment to output at the aggregate level of a
State, a Sector of production (agriculture etc.), or the Nation as a whole. In linking the
labour input with output, one should use such a measure that captures better, the gainful
employment. Here, again CDS is the better measure to estimate output elasticity of
employment.
However, for the study of employment / unemployment situation, for a specific category
or class of persons (educated, illiterate, women, minority, S.C./S.T., etc), the usual status
measure should be used.
And for the purpose of a deeper study of factors underlying the social well being of the
persons, the usual status measure needs to be used in conjunction with the current daily
and current weekly status measures.
The Eleventh Plan Working Group on Labour Force & Employment Projections
has recommended that the analysis of trends in labour force and employment should be
done on the basis of UPSS and CDS measures. The projections should be made on the
basis of CDS measure following the practice used in the 10th Plan.
42

Chapter 5 - Trends in Wages11
On the developments in wages of labour, the Approach to the Eleventh Five Year
Plan stated:
“5.3 Employment
Employment is an area which shows up where our growth process is failing on
inclusiveness. The number of workers is growing, particularly in non-agricultural
employment, but weaknesses appear in unemployment, the quality of
employment, and in large and increasing differentials in productivity and wages.
Data from the latest NSS round for 2004-05…… reveal the following:
……..
……..
Agricultural employment has increased at less than 1% per annum, slower than
population growth and much slower than growth in non-agricultural employment.
…………Also, although real wages of these workers continue to rise, growth has
decelerated strongly, almost certainly reflecting the poor performance in
agriculture. ……..”
2.The above statement on wages was made on the basis of NSS data on wages for
11 year period – 1993-94, 1999-2000 and 2004-05 (Table 5.1). This medium term trend
should also be seen as a part of the longer term developments over the past two decades.
The long term trends on wages are given in Table 5.2 for two periods that span over 21.5
years - 1983 to 1993-94 (10.5 years) and 1993-94 to 2004-05 (11 years), along with the
trends for the recent two sub periods of the medium term period of 11 years – 1993-94 to
1999-2000 (6 years) and 1999-2000 to 2004-05 (5 years). It will be observed from that
the deceleration in wages moderates between the two long sub periods 10.5 years (1983
to 1993-94 ) and 11 years (1993-94 to 1999-2000) i.e., over the long term of 21.5 years.
3.The Eleventh Five Year Plan document has therefore, stated the developments in
regard to wages, in a longer term retrospect of two decades spread over Period I (1983 to
1993-94) and Period II (1993-94 to 2004-05), as under:
“4.4The approach to the Eleventh Plan had identified the following specific
weaknesses on the employment front which illustrate the general failing just
discussed.
11
Items 4 of the ‘Details to be included in the Technical Note on Employment, vide the Planning
Commission OrderP-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008 requires:
“4. Analysis of wage trends – presented in the 11th Plan Chapter vis-à-vis the Approach Paper.”
43

•
…...
•Although real wages of casual labour in agriculture continue to rise
during 2000–2005, growth has decelerated strongly, as compared to the previous
quinquennium (1994–2000), almost certainly reflecting poor performance in
agriculture. However, over the longer periods 1983 to 1993–94 (period I) and
1993–94 to 2004–05 (Period II), the decline (in wages) is moderate for rural
male agricultural casual labour, from 2.75% to 2.18% per annum.
•Growth of average real wage rates in non-agriculture employment in
the period 1999–2000 to 2004–05 has been negligible. Seen over the longer
period of two decades (Period I and Period II), the (non-agricultural) wages
have steadily increased at over 2% per annum.
•In respect of entire rural male casual labour, the growth in real
wages accelerated from 2.55% (Period I) to 2.78% per annum (Period II)
(Annexure 4.6).”
4.This analysis has thus enabled a modification of the manner in
which the data on trends in wages was interpreted and presented in the
Approach to the Eleventh Plan.
44

Table 5.1 - Growth of Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India
(at 1993-94 prices) -1993-94 to 1999-2000 & 1999-2000 to 2004-05
(per cent per annum)
Rural Female
1993-941999-
to2000
1999-to
20002004-
2005
5.03
2.94
5.07
3.19
2.01
0.93
1.32
1.21
Rural Male
1993-941999-
to2000
1999-to
20002004-
2005
Public works
Casual Labour in
Agricultrue
Casual Labour in
Non Agricultrue
Casual Labour in
All Activities
Source :- NSSO
3.83
2.80
3.70
3.59
3.15
1.21
0.62
1.51
Table 5.2 - Growth of Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India (at 1993-
94 prices) 1983 to 2004-05
Rural Male
1993-941999-
to 1999- 2000 to
20002004-
2005
Public
works
Casual
Labour in
Agricultrue
Rural Female
1993-941999-
to 1999- 2000 to
20002004-
2005
1983 to
1993-94
1993-94
to 2004-
05
1983 to
1993-94
1993-94
to 2004-
05
3.83
3.15
2.28
3.81
5.03
2.01
4.10
3.83
2.79
Casual
Labour in
Non
Agricultrue
3.69
Casual
Labour in
All
Activities
1.21
2.79
2.18
2.93
0.93
3.07
2.10
0.62
2.38
2.34
5.06
1.32
4.08
3.47
3.591.513.002.78
Source :- derived from data in Tables 5.3, 5.4 & 5.5.
3.19
1.21
3.19
2.40
45

Table 5.3 - Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India 1993-94, 1999-2000 & 2004-05 (at
1993-94 prices)
Rural Male
1993-94
1999-
2000
2004-
2005
(per cent per annum)
Rural Female
2004-
1993-941999-20002005
18.52
15.12
17.46
15.33
24.87
17.99
23.49
18.51
28.02
19.01
25.41
19.90
Public works24.6530.8937.21
Casual Labour in
Agricultrue
21.5925.4827.38
Casual Labour in
Non Agricultrue
30.1537.4938.90
Casual Labour in
All Activities
23.1828.6531.34
Source:- Derived from data in Table 5.4 and Table 5.5
Table 5.4
Average daily Wage Earnings in Rural India 1993-94, 1999-2000 & 2004-05 (at
current prices)
(per cent per annum)
Rural Male
1993-94 1999-2000
2004-2005
Rural Female
1993-94 1999-2000
2004-2005
49.19
33.38
Public works24.6549.0465.3318.5239.48
Casual Labour
in Agricultrue
21.5940.4548.0715.1228.56
Casual Labour
in Non
30.1559.5268.3017.4637.29Agricultrue
Casual Labour
in All Activities
23.1845.4855.0315.3329.39
Conversion
Factor1.587604 1.755776931.587604
Source:- 1. Report No. 409 July 1993- June 1994 (Table No.57R Page No. A-319 & A-323
2. Report No. 458 July 1999- June 2000 (Table No.69R Page No. A-293 & A-297
3. Report No. 515 July 2004- June 2005 (Table No.49R Page No. A-444 & A-446
44.62
34.94
1.755777
46

Table 5.5 - All India Consumer Price Index Numbers for Agricultural Labourers
( Average of Months)
Base Year
1986-87
=100
Base Year
1960-61
=100
Base Year1993-
94
=100
1993-94*
1999-2000
2004-05
194.74
309.17
341.92
1114
1821
2014
100
163
181
* Base 1960-61=100
Source: Statement 5.3 at page S-63 Economic Survey 2004-05
Note: The CPI for agricultural laboueres with 1986-87 (July 1986 to June 1987) base was introduced w.e.f.
November, 1995. The earlier series on base 1960-61 (July 1960 to June 1961) was simultaneously
discontinued. The conversion factor from the new to the old series is 5.89.
47

Chapter 6: Strategy for Creation of Employment Opportunities12
(Including the approach to formal and informal employment)
I.
6.1
CREATION OF EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES
The Employment Challenge
An agenda for handling the planning issues on employment should take note of
the major problems faced by the large employment providing sectors, which also affects
those persons who derive their wage or other kinds of income from these sectors as
workers. The Approach to 11th Plan has focused on these problems from the perspective
of workers:
i) The failures in agricultural sector have increased the burden of providing work
opportunities to a large number of workers that migrate from agriculture, and for the
dependents, the women folk who are left behind to carry on somehow.
The crisis in agriculture:
“One of the major challenges of the 11th Plan will be to reverse
the deceleration in agricultural growth from 3.2% observed between
1980 and 1996-97 to a trend average of around 2.0% subsequently.
This deceleration is the root cause of the problem of rural distress that
has surfaced in many parts of the country and reached crisis levels in
some. Low farm incomes due to inadequate productivity growth have
often combined with low prices of output and with lack of credit at
reasonable rates, to push many farmers into crippling debt. Even
otherwise, uncertainties seem to have increased (regarding prices,
quality of inputs, and also weather and pests) which, coupled with
unavailability of proper extension and risk insurance have led farmers
to despair. This has also led to widespread distress migration, a rise in
the number of female headed households in rural areas and a general
increase in women’s work burden and vulnerability. In 2004-05, women
accounted for 34% of principal and 89% of subsidiary workers in
agriculture, higher than in any previous round of the National Sample
Survey.” (Para 1.6.2 of Approach to 11th Plan).
ii) Large differential in per worker incomes between the organized and the unorganized
segments of labour market, make the lower income workers in non agricultural sectors as
vulnerable to risk as the marginal farmers are:
The dualistic economy:
12
Items 6 of the ‘Details to be included in the Technical Note on Employment, vide the Planning
Commission OrderP-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008 requires:
“6. Issue of formal vs. informal employment – NCEUS recommendations versus the stand taken in the
11th Plan Chapter.”
48

“The dualistic nature of our economy, with large differences in
productivity between agriculture and non-agriculture on the one hand
and within the non-agriculture sector between the organized and unorganized
sectors poses problems, especially since the dualism appears to have
intensified over the last decade or so. Labour productivity in the organized
sectors was already 4 times that in unorganized non-agriculture in 1993
and this ratio increased to 7 times by 2004. During the same period, the share
of the organized sector in total non-agricultural employment declined
from 20% to 13%. Part of this was due to downsizing of the public sector
which reduced employment by 1.3 million. However, employment
growth was negligible (in fact negative after 1998) even in the private
organized sectors, despite an average growth of GDP of nearly 10% per
annum after 1993 in this sector. The reason is that capital intensity in the
organized sector increased rapidly, so that the real capital stock per
worker is now three times what it was in 1993. On the other hand, with its
60% higher workforce now than in 1993, unorganized non-agriculture
has absorbed over 60 million new workers, mostly after the late-1990s.
But this sector has been unable to increase significantly either its capital -
labour ratio or labour productivity. These two disparate private sectors in
non-agriculture, unorganized and the organized now produce about 50%
and 25% of all non-agricultural value-added respectively, with 87% and
4% of the non-agricultural workforce. These trends show is that while
employment in the unorganized non-agricultural sector has expanded it is
generally low quality employment constrained by low productivity.
Millions of self-employed in the unorganized sector, (particularly home-
based women doing putting out work and artisans, but also many in
other manufacturing sub-sectors and in retail trade) have levels of
labour productivity no higher than in agriculture and their number is
increasing rapidly. They are as vulnerable to shocks as farmers.”
(Para 5.3.5 of the Approach to 11th Plan)
i)
The large size enterprises that have high productivity and thus can
provide a better quality of employment opportunities to those seeking
work in non agricultural activities i.e., manufacturing and services
activities are not increasing, rather decreasing in number. (Table 6.1)
Table 6.1: Number of Establishments enumerated in Economic
Census classified by workers Size Class – 1998
and 2005
worker size
class of
establish
-ment
1 to 5
6 to 9
10 & above
total
economic census
1998
economic
census 2005
number of establishments
change 1998
to 2005
28497606
1001513
849769
30348888
39764918
1430483
631588
41826989
11267312
428970
-218181
11478101
49

iv)In this backdrop, there have been certain adverse developments in the recent years.
The Approach to the Eleventh Plan had identified the following specific weaknesses on the
employment front which illustrate the general failing just discussed.
•
•
•
The rate of unemployment has increased from 6.1% in 1993–94 to 7.3% in 1999–
2000, and further to 8.3% in 2004–05.
Unemployment among agricultural labour households has risen from 9.5% in 1993–
94 to 15.3% in 2004–05.
Under-employment appears to be on the rise, as evident from a widening of the gap
between the usual status and the current daily status measures of creation of
incremental employment opportunities between the periods 1994 to 2000 and 2000 to
2005 (Annexure 4.1).
While non-agricultural employment expanded at a robust annual rate of 4.7% during
the period 1999–2000 to 2004–05, this growth was largely in the unorganized sector.
Despite fairly healthy GDP growth, employment in the organized sector actually
declined, leading to frustration among the educated youth who have rising
expectations.
Although real wages of casual labour in agriculture continue to rise during 2000–
2005, growth has decelerated strongly, as compared to the previous quinquennium
(1994–2000), almost certainly reflecting poor performance in agriculture. However,
over the longer periods 1983 to 1993–94 (period I) and 1993–94 to 2004–05 (Period
II), the decline is moderate for rural male agricultural casual labour, from 2.75% to
2.18% per annum.
Growth of average real wage rates in non-agriculture employment in the period
1999–2000 to 2004–05 has been negligible. Seen over the longer period of two
decades (Period I and Period II), the wages have steadily increased at over 2% per
annum.
In respect of entire rural male casual labour, the growth in real wages accelerated
from 2.55% (Period I) to 2.78% per annum (Period II) (Chapter 5; Table 5.2 of this
Report)
Real wages stagnated or declined even for workers in the organized industry although
managerial and technical staff did secure large increase.
Wage share in the organized industrial sector has halved after the 1980s and is now
among the lowest in the world.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
6.2
Towards meeting the Employment Challenge
i)
The problems of the largest segment of workers can be addressed
through the output growth in the agriculture sector:
“It is vital to increase agricultural incomes as this sector still
employs nearly 60% of our labour force. A measure of self-sufficiency is also
critical for ensuring food security. A second green revolution is urgently
needed to raise the growth rate of agricultural GDP to around 4%. This is
not an easy task since actual growth of agricultural GDP, including forestry
and fishing, is likely to be below 2% during the 10th Plan period. The
challenge therefore is to at least double the rate of agricultural growth and
to do so recognize demographic realities — particularly the increasing role of
women.”(Para 1.6.5 of Approach to 11th Plan)
50

ii)
iii)
iv)
The number of workers in agriculture should reduce, so that per worker
incomes can rise here.
The growth of non agricultural employment needs to be stepped up: to
over 6%
Generation of non-agricultural employment should match the
requirements in terms of location and by type (such as the level of skill,
the wage or self employment, etc.). This is a major challenge.
In the development agenda for non agricultural activities, the labour
intensive activities should be at the prime focus of the policies and
programmes..
v)
6.3 Imperatives for the strategy from projections of Employment and Labour Force
i)
The baseline scenario for creation of employment opportunities
and the required scenario for the 11th Plan, as implicit in the
approach to 11th Plan, are presented in Table 6.2. This sets the
agenda for the outcomes of the employment strategy for the 11th
Plan.
Table 6.2: Creation of Employment Opportunities in the Eleventh Plan 2007 – 2012 – the base
case and the intentions of the 11th Plan
Sector
Baseline case (i.e.
no Plan)
(million)
1. Agriculture
2. Non- Agriculture, of which
10.0
55.0
0.0
(-) 10.0
65.0
Approach to 11th Plan;
Para 1.6.5
Approach to 11th Plan;
para 1.6.5;
55m (baseline)+10m
(shift from agicultue to
non agricultural
activities)
Eleventh
Plan
intentions
Remarks on
Source, etc.
(+) 10.0
2.1 Unorganised private
establishments1
Rural 0.0
Urban 50.0
2.2 Private Organised
Establishments
2.0
50.0
50.0
Rural 25.0
Urban 25.0
10.0
(+) 8.0
5.0
(+) 2.0
65.0
(+) 0.0
Appr to 11th Plan; para
5.3.17
Rural (+) 25.0
Urban (-) 25.0
Approach to 11th Plan;
paras 5.3.6 & 5.3.7. Para
5.3.7
Approach to 11th Plan;
paras 5.3.14 & 5.3.15.
Para 5.3.15
Approach to 11th
Plan;para 5.3.3
2.3 Public Establishments
3.0
Total (1+2)
65.0
51

ii)
The employment strategy for the 11th Plan should be such as to yield the
following employment outcomes:
•
•
•
•
At least 10 million more agricultural workers should find gainful
employment in non agricultural activities than in the normal trends
scenario.
In the unorganized sector, micro and village enterprises in rural areas
should provide non-farm employment to at least 25 million more
persons, compared to the baseline scenario, during the Plan.
Private organized establishments should absorb 8 million more
workers, over and above 2 million, which in any case would occur
under normal growth in the baseline scenario.
Government and public establishments should absorb, at least 2
million more workers over and above the normal growth of 3 million
through the ongoing programmes in education and health.
iii) Employment outcome of the strategy cannot and should not always be seen
in terms of more of the same kind of employment.The types of
employment outcomes required at sectoral levels vary from sector to
sector. Broadly these are of the following types:
•
•
•
•
Better wage levels and better income of the self employed workers
Reduction in the uncertainty in the level of income
Improvement in the physical environment of work
Better ability to cope with the risks to life and health i.e., a better risk
cover – social security
52

II.
ISSUE OF FORMAL VS. INFORMAL EMPLOYMENT – NCEUS
RECOMMENDATIONS VIS-A-VIS THE STAND TAKEN IN THE 11TH
PLAN CHAPTER
At a joint meeting of the NCEUS with the Internal Planning Commission in
October 2007, the substantive issues posed were:
A. Informalisation of employment in the organised sector
B. Feasibility of separation of organised sector from the unorganised sector in
respect of output and employment
C. Strategy for creating employment opportunities
A.
Informalisation of employment in the organised sector
1. Relevant extracts from NCEUS draft chapter are:
26 Unorganised (informal) workers
26.1The workers without any employment or social security benefits provided
by the employers are categorized as unorganised or informal workers. They
consist of those working in the unorganised sector or households excluding
regular workers with social security benefits and the workers in the organised
sector without any employment or social security benefits provided by the
employers.
26.2 The estimates of unorganised and organised employment both in organised and
unorganised sectors were worked out for the years 1999-2000 and 2004-05 and
these are given in table 16. As per these estimates, about 45.7% of the employees
in the organised sector were unorganised workers during 1999-2000 and it
increased to 46.6% by 2004-05. There was also organised employment in the
unorganised sector to the extent of about 0.4 per cent of the unorganised sector
workers both in 1999-2000 and 2004-05. Out of the total work force, 91.2% were
unorganised workers in 1999-2000 and it increased to 92.4% in 2004-05. While
the ………
Table 6.3: (Table 16 of NCEUS Paper):
Distribution of workers by type of employment – Formal and Informal and by Sector-
Organised and Unorganised -prepared by the NCEUS
(million)
Sector
Informal
Unorgansed
341.28
(99.60)
Organised
20.46
1999-2000
Formal
1.36
(0.40)
33.67
Total
342.64
(100)
54.12
Informal
393.47
(100)
29.14
2000-2005
Formal
1.43
(1.36)
33.42
Total
394.90
(100)
62.57
53

(37.80)
Total
361.74
(91.17)
(62.20)
35.02
(35.02)
(100)
396.76
(100)
(46.58)
422.61
(92.38)
(53.42)
34.85
(7.46)
(100)
457.46
(100)
Comments
2.
Wage workers among the household members answered NSSO questions,
in the 61st round (2004-05), as to whether the employers provide the
following types of benefits to them:
I. Eligible for:
1. Only pf/pension (i.e., gpf, cpf, ppf, pension, etc.)
2. Only gratuity
3. Only health care & maternity benefits
4. Only pf/pension and gratuity
5. Only pf/pension and health care & maternity benefits
6. Only gratuity and health care & maternity benefits
7. PF/pension, gratuity, health care & maternity benefits
8. Not eligible for any of above social security benefits
II. Method of payment received by the wage workers:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
3.
Regular monthly salary
Regular weekly payment
Daily payment
Piece rate payment
Others
In the 55th round (1999-2000) all usual status workers (note here ‘all’
includes self employed workers too) were asked whether:
I. they had the benefit of:
1. GPF
2. PPF
3. CPF
4. A combination of above
5. None of above
II. No question was asked on method of payment to wage workers
4.
It may be noted from 2 and 3 above:
54

I. The difference in regard to the nature of benefits in respect of which
the question was asked from the workers
II. The variation in regard to the category of workers who were asked
the question – wage workers in 2004-05 and all usual status workers
in 2004-05, and
III. Hence, it is not possible to compare the data of 1999-2000 and 2004-
05 in regard the benefits given by employers to the workers.
5.
Note from 2(II) and 3(II) above the additional question asked in 2004-05
on method of payment to the wage workers. Response to this question
enables to determine whether the ‘payment of wages act is attracted or not.
This should be the starting point for determining whether a worker is in
‘formal’ employment, and not the availability of pf benefits.
NSSO itself, in its April 2007 report no. 519(61/10/7) on ‘informal sector
and conditions of employment in India’ cautions against comparing the
social security benefits data from the two rounds as under:
1.1.3 The NSSO during the 55th round survey (July 1999- June 2000), for the first time,
collected more or less similar types of information, through employment – unemployment
survey, in respect of workers engaged in the non-agricultural enterprises in the informal
sector and the estimates on them are available in nss report no. 4603. Moreover, in the
55th round, the information on non-agricultural enterprises in the informal sector was
also collected directly from the enterprises by canvassing a separate schedule of enquiry
(schedule 2.0). This schedule was canvassed for the informal sector enterprises, which
covered all unincorporated enterprises in the non-agricultural sector which operated on
either proprietary or partnership basis. However, there were significant differences –
regarding the methods of data collection, the approach followed and the concepts used in
these two above mentioned surveys. All the data in schedule 10 were collected through
household surveys and the informants were generally members of households to which
workers belonged. On the other hand, in schedule 2.0, the respondents were generally
owners/ managers of enterprises from whom all information on workers was obtained.
Further, in schedule 10, information on workers and on various features of enterprises
having a bearing on their work like location of work place, maintenance of written
accounts, etc. Were collected whereas in schedule 2.0, the emphasis was more on such
details of the enterprises as their receipts, operating expenses, assets owned etc., and
very few items of information were exclusively on workers. Even in terms of coverage of
the non-agricultural sector, it was much more extensive in schedule 10. It may be noted
that in the NSS 61st round no attempt has been made to collect data from the informal
sector enterprises through schedule 2.0.
3
6.
NSS Report No. 460: non-agricultural workers in informal sector based on employment – unemployment
Survey, 1999-2000.
7.
NSSO1 has warned that the sample size of wage workers is too small to
make estimates of ‘informal / formal’ employment, even at the all india
level, based on the data collected from the 2004-05 round.
55

1
NSSO April 2007 Report No. 519(61/10/7) On ‘Informal Sector And Conditions Of
Employment In India’ (Part I, Chapter1).
8.
Enterprise-cum-household survey data (1999-2000) should not be
compared with households based data (2004-05), with extreme caution,
because the respondents for 1999-2000 were generally/ managers of
enterprises from whom all information on workers was obtained, whereas
in 2004-05 the informants were generally the members of the households
to which the workers belonged. (extracts at item 6 above refer.)
Hence, the conclusions drawn by the NCEUS, in paragraph 26.2, table 16
above, that the proportion of informal employment workers in organised
sector increased from 37.8 (1999-2000) to 46.58 (2004-05) is without a
sound quantifiable basis.The Planning Commission, noting the
reservations expressed by the NSSO, may not support the use of such
estimates by the Government.
9.
B. Feasibility of separation of organised sector from the unorganised sector in respect
of output and employment:
Comments:
1.To estimate output national accounts system distinguishes between the
‘registered’ and the ‘unregistered’ establishments. However, this classification
is not the same as used for classifying the workers as ‘informal’ and the
‘formal’. An ‘enterprise based classification of output’ should not be juxtaposed
with a ‘house-holds based classification’ of workers, to link up output and
employment.
2.NSSO 2004-05 enquiry identifies certain ‘institutions – establishments &
households’ – partnerships, employer households, trusts/ societies, own account
enterprises, so on. The starting point for a further dis-aggregation of output (and
its association with workers) should be the release of ‘institution’ based
accounts by NSSO, as is done for the ‘public sector accounts’ by the cso1.
1.
Note here that 60 to 70 per cent of what the NCEUS computes as ‘formal-organised’ output
and employment is the ‘output and employment of the public sector.’ hence the focus of
enquiry by the NCEUS (y/l type as is done in tables 22 to 28 of NCEUS paper) should be the
measures to improve the ‘labour productivity’ (not the total productivity) of the public sector
establishments, and its ramifications for the design and implementation of the labour
regulations.
C.
Strategy for creating employment opportunities
Comments:
56

•
How the Planning Process should respond the following normal (i.e. The
baseline) scenario of developments in the employment situation:
O Agricultural employment, measured in terms of ‘main workers -
cultivators’ is reduced by 18 lakh per year between 1991 and
2001 – the decline being more pronounced in the states that are
larger and have lower per capita income.
O Increase in poor self employed workers:
Proportion of poor among all the usual status workers declined
by about 3 percentage points between 2000 and 2005, but
in case of urban self-employed workers it increased by
half a per cent, resulting in a net increase in 3 million
poor self employed workers in urban areas.
In rural areas, while the proportion of poor among the self
employed workers (usual status) declined by 2 percentage
points, the larger base of 2005 resulted in an increase of
poor self – employed workers by 3 million since the year
2000.
A net decrease of poor among the wage workers (casual &
regular) by 5 million during 2000-2005, which however
got offset by an increase of 6 million poor self employed
workers, resulting in a net increase of 1.3 million poor
workers during 2000 – 2005.
•
•
Average worker size of economic establishments, is reducing as per the
economic census.
Only about 1 per cent of the establishments hire 10 or more workers
Table 6.4 - The contrast between the employment strategy implicit in the Papers of
the NCEUS and the Planning Commission (LEM Division)
The Issue
Agricultural employment
NCEUS
Accept reduction in
agricultural employment in
favour of better income of
workers
LEM Draft Chapter
Same as NCEUS, but plan for the
absorption of labour released
from agriculture into the non-
agricultural sector, with emphasis
on promoting formal employment.
57

The Issue
Basis of dis-aggregation of
economic activities for the
design of an employment
strategy
NCEUS
Organised and unorganised
enterprises and the workers
LEM Draft Chapter
First the Labour intensive
activities be distinguished from
the capital intensive ones, and
then proceed with further stages
of sub-classification
Rural self employment
In the states which have a
high share of agricultural
employment (60 % +),
promote self employment in
non agricultural activities, in
the rural areas.
Facilitate migration of workers to
activities and locations, which
have higher wage:
(i) by skill development,
(ii) focus at productivity &
income from the activities that are
more labour intensive, and
(iii) strengthen rural
infrastructure base.
Urban self employment
Special programmes for
micro and small
establishments employing 9
or less workers
Preferential treatment to
establishments in labour intensive
occupations.
Self-employment be promoted in
the establishments that hire more
workers.
Scale of preference should
increase with the number of
workers hired by an
establishment.
Organised and unorganised
The duality exists, and be
(i) it is not feasible to
58

The Issue
enterprises and employment
NCEUS
fostered by the public policy.
LEM Draft Chapter
compartmentalize output
and employment into
organized and unorganized.
The two are an ‘integrated
whole’, and thus inseparable.
(ii) workers of the unorganised
enterprises prosper by
linking business of the
unorganised enterprise with
an organized enterprise
Promotion of wage employment
NCEUS does not prescribe
any special support for wage
employment.
Promote regular wage
employment that is ‘formal’.
Foster regular wage employment
by strengthening the enterprises
in the labour intensive
occupations.
Fiscal incentives to the enterprise
linked with the size of
employment on its payroll.
Labour laws
A formal stand is not taken,
as yet, by NCEUS on labour
laws
With the objective of increasing
the share of ‘formal’ wage
employment, pursue a
simplification of, and a better
implementation of selected labour
laws that provide for ‘employer-
employee formally acknowledged
relationship’ (irrespective of the
terms of such relationship,
provided, of course that such
relationship be not a bonded labour
relationship) and also focus at
(third party) social security cover
to (unorganised) workers, and
(thus) reduce the risks and
hazards faced by the ‘average’
worker, who migrates from
agriculture to industrial sector.
59

The Issue
NCEUS
LEM Draft Chapter
Contract labour and ‘fixed term’
employment be accepted in the
interest of promoting formal –
regular wage employment.
Promote contribution by the
employer or the business provider
to a third party social-security
cover such as the PFRDA and
accept its impact on the
rationalisation / reforms in the
functioning of EPFO and ESIC,
which do not recognize a worker
if the name is not forwarded by an
employer.
III. The stand on unorganised and informal workers in the 11th Plan
The Eleventh Plan Chapter on Employment and Labour Policy states as under:
“4.74 Even as steps are taken to increase the volume of formal or regular employment,
it is also necessary to take steps to improve the quality of employment in the unorganized
sector. NCEUS in its August 2007 Report has summarized, in the form of a 13-point
Action Programme, the main recommendations for the workers of Enterprises in the
Unorganized/Informal Sector. These are presented in Box 4.2. (Annexure 6.1 here.)
4.75Unorganized sector enterprises mostly hire most workers who get released, or
relocated, from crop agriculture (due to the reasons discussed earlier), and seek wage
employment in the manufacturing or services sector. Any significant improvement in
their income and quality of employment is feasible only if the institutional environment
in the labour market makes it feasible for the formal sector to reach out to such workers
on a decentralized basis rather than through a centralized plan programme. The large
coverage (in terms of absolute numbers) through Provident Fund (43 million), Employee
State Insurance (33.0 million) a variety of welfare funds (5.0 million), for beedi workers,
for example) has been possible because the institutional framework created through the
various Acts13 (P.F., E.S.I., Beedi Workers Welfare Fund, etc.) recognized a relationship
of those employed on regular wage, with either the employer, or the specific formal
commodity market that provides work to (that is, absorbs the output of labour put in by)
the unorganized enterprises’ workers.
4.76As already argued, the creation of a formal relationship between the worker and
the hiring establishment, in the regular wage employment mode, is a critical factor in
improving the quality of employment of the workers hired by the unorganized
enterprises. In this context, the work being done by NCEUS14 on (i) the ‘employment
13
Of course, many of these organizations have to reorient their pattern of working to the new realities of the
market for wage labour in which the role of public sector is diminishing and the average number of workers hired
by the private enterprises is reducing consequent upon changes in technology leading to improvement in the
productivity of labour.
14
The relevant terms of reference of NCEUS are:
60

strategy’ to be pursued in respect of, and through the, unorganized enterprises, (ii) the
regime of labour regulations to attract the unorganized enterprise to give a formal
recognition to the multitudes of workers hired by them, and (iii) to enable them to gain
access to ‘social security’, is of paramount importance.”
•
•
•
Suggest elements of an employment strategy focusing on the informal sector;
Review Indian labour laws, consistent with labour rights, and with the requirements of expanding growth of
industry and services, particularly in the informal sector, and improving productivity and competitiveness;
and
Review the social security system available for labour in the informal sector, and make recommendations for
expanding their coverage.
61

Annexure 6.1
A Thirteen Point Action Programme for the Enterprises in Unorganised / Informal
sector
NCEUS in its August 2007 Report has summarized in the form of a 13-point
Action Programme the main recommendations for the workers of Enterprises in
Unorganised / Informal Sector:
A.Protective Measures for Workers
1.Ensuring Minimum Conditions of Work in the Non-agricultural and Agricultural
Sectors:
Commission has recommended two comprehensive Bills for agricultural workers
and non-agricultural workers respectively the aim of which is to ensure minimum
conditions of work, including a statutory national minimum wage, for all workers.
2.
Minimum Level of Social Security:
The Commission has proposed a universal national minimum social security
scheme, as a part of the comprehensive legislations, covering life, health and disability,
maternity and old age protection which should be provided to workers in the sector both
in the agriculture and non-agriculture sectors. The scheme and the accompanying Bill
mandate specific obligations on the Government through creation of a clear entitlement
for the workers. The Bills also propose the broad financing mechanisms for the scheme.
B.
3.
Package of Measures for the Marginal and Small Farmers
Special Programme for Marginal and Small Farmers:
The Commission has recommended that during the Eleventh Plan period, the
government should revive a targeted programme focusing on small and marginal farmers,
with an initial thrust on areas where the existing yield gap is also considered to be high.
For this purpose a special agency or coordinating mechanism may be set up if required.
The objective of the Government’s intervention would be to promote state and area
specific interventions which could improve the condition of marginal and small farmers.
4.
Emphasis on Accelerated Land and Water Management:
Since land and water management is the key to equitable and sustained growth in
rural livelihoods and particularly affect marginal and small farmers more than bigger
farmers, the Commission has recommended that the programmes of land and water
management be given immediate priority and must be significantly upscaled .
5.
Credit for Marginal-Small Farmers:
The Commission’s analysis has brought out the unsatisfactory state of credit for
marginal and small farmers. It has, therefore, recommended that (a) Ten per cent of the
priority sector quota be allocated to marginal-small farmers; (b) credit to this segment be
separately monitored by RBI; (c) steps be taken to expand the outreach of credit
62

institutions in rural areas; (d) necessary directives may be issued and a credit guarantee
fund may be placed with farmers so that marginal-small farmers without collateral may
access institutional credit.
Farmers’ Debt Relief Commission:
The Commission has examined the credit and debt situation of farmers in areas of
agrarian distress. A special problem in these areas is that small and marginal farmers
have limited recourse to institutional credit and are compelled to take recourse to non-
institutional sources of credit. The Commission is of the view that the Central
Government could provide guidelines and assistance to other states experiencing agrarian
distress, both natural and market related, for setting up Farmers Debt Relief
Commissions. It is recommended that the Government, as part of the relief package,
could extend assistance to the State Commissions on a 75:25 basis. The Debt Relief
Commissions, as part of their award, should also examine and institute measures which
ensure the entitlement of the marginal/small farmers to institutional credit. These
measures would complement the measures already announced by the Government.
C.
7.
Measures to Improve Growth of the Non-agricultural Sector
Improve Credit Flow to the Non-agricultural Sector:
a.The Priority Sector Lending Policy should be revised and a quota for micro and
small industries should be set at 10 per cent. Within this, a 4 per cent target to be set with
respect to micro enterprises with capital investment (other than land and building) up to
Rs. 5 lakhs. Since the priority sector quota for agriculture (including 10 per cent
recommended for the small and marginal farmers) is 18 per cent, and another 10 per cent
as suggested above for small and micro enterprises, this would leave a quota of 12 per
cent from the total priority sector allocation of 40 per cent, which, in the Commission’s
view, should be allocated for socio-economically weaker sections, for purposes of
housing, education, professions etc. with a loan ceiling of Rs. 5 lakhs.
b.Measures should be taken to overcome the problem of shrinking outreach in rural
areas.
c.The RBI should issue guidelines for monitoring of credit flow to the micro-
enterprise sector, with capital investment up to Rs. 5 lakhs and between Rs. 5 lakhs to 25
lakhs.
d.The cost of credit to the non-agricultural sector should be affordable and should
be kept on par with the agricultural sector.
8.
Encouraging SHGs and MFIs for Livelihood Promotion:
Micro credit has grown over the years as a major instrument in reducing financial
exclusion. In view of the constraints still facing the expansion of micro-finance and
SHGs, especially in poor states, the Commission has recommended measures to (a)
encourage their growth in backward areas; (b) incentivise micro-finance institutions to
63

expand and diversify their portfolio; (c) strengthen major Government micro-credit
programmes such as the SGSY; (d) examine and remove restrictive regulations on the
growth of micro-finance.
9.
Creation of a National Fund (NAFUS):
The Commission analysis of the constraints on the sector and the existing role of
institutions such as SIDBI and NABARD has highlighted the need for an exclusive
agency take care of the integrated requirements of the entire sector covering both
financial and promotional requirement. The Commission therefore recommends an
agency be created for the development of the sector which shall be called National Fund
for the Unorganised Sector (NAFUS). The NAFUS will be a statutory body with an
initial corpus of Rs. 5000 crore which will be funded by Central government, public
sector banks, financial sector institutions and other government agencies. Details of the
Fund are being submitted separately to Government as part of the Commissions’
(NCEUS) Report on credit.
10.
Up scaling Cluster Development through Growth Poles:
The Commission has piloted “Growth Poles” for the sector, based on a concept of
developing a cluster of clusters in project mode with public-private partnership. As part
of this Action Plan, the Commission recommends that twenty-five growth poles (one in
each state) be supported during the 11th Plan. The Commission also recommends that
‘Growth Poles’ should be given the same incentives currently being offered to Special
Economic Zones. This will facilitate the sector infant enterprises and thus have a
stimulating multiplier effect on the economy.
D.
11.
Measures to Expand Employment and Improve Employability
Expand Employment through Strengthening Self-employment Programmes:
More than 60 per cent of the workers are engaged in self-employment. The
Commission has reviewed the four major self-employment generation programmes
namely, and recommends that the target for employment generation under these should
be raised to 50 lakhs per year. It also recommends a major rationalization and
strengthening of these programmes.
12.
Universalise and Strengthen NREGA:
The Commission strongly endorsed the approach of providing a minimum
guarantee of employment through the National Rural Employment Guarantee
Programme. It recommends that the programme be extended to all districts ahead of
schedule, in the third year itself. Since the Government has already succeeded in scaling
up the programme to 330 poorest districts in two years, and the uncovered districts are
not high-need districts, the financial implications of doing this will not be high. It also
recommends a number of other measures to strengthen this programme.
64

13.
Increasing the Employability through Skill Development:
The Commission has reviewed the skill development initiatives presently been
undertaken in the country for the sector workers. It has also reviewed the, “Skill
Development Initiative” (SDI) of the DGET, which has been approved recently by the
Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs for implementation at an approximate per
worker cost of Rs. 5000 crore. The Commission further recommends that the DGET
scheme as approved could be expanded and strengthened through a supplementary on-
job-training cum employment-assurance programme for an additional sum of Rs. 5000
per person to be provided as one time payment as incentive to any employer who is
willing to provide on job training for skill enhancement for at least one year to the trained
worker.
65

Chapter 7 - Removal of deficiencies in Data on Employment
– the Recommendations15
I. Regular and more frequent inflow of Facts and Data on Employment Situation, its
Analysis and Interpretation of facts, the need for a full scale NSSO Survey on
Employment / Unemployment every year:
1.Collection and dissemination of employment data from the households is a critical
input to understand the employment outcomes, across locations and through time, the
impact of economic policies and programmes of the Central and the State Governments.
At present a thin sample of households is canvassed every year, which cannot be used for
State-wise analysis of employment / unemployment situation, and for study of situation
of employment / un-employment / under-employment of specific groups of persons in the
labour force, because the sample size is too small.
2.Planning Commission had recommended to the Department of Statistics in 2003
that a full scale household enquiry on employment and unemployment should be
conducted every year. Such an enquiry is done at present through a large scale sample
survey of households once in five years. NSSO has been considering this proposal
through its various technical fora. Carrying out a full-scale annual survey of households
on the subject of employment & unemployment by NSSO is essential.
II.
A regionally differentiated approach to employment planning
1.A differential approach across regions is required in growth and employment
plans and formulation of the related policies. Elements of this are perceptible in the
region specific programmes and policies, including the District specific programmes such
as the NREGA.
2.At present labour and employment issues receive little or no priority in the
deliberations on State Plans. There is need to carry out the regional analysis of labour
and employment issues, in a quantitative manner immediately, prior to the MTA of 11th
Plan, so that a regionally differentiated approach to employment in the future Planning
exercises may be devised. This would provide a factual base for a dialogue with the State
Governments on the developmental efforts made.
3.Compilation, processing and release of State Sample Surveys Data on
Employment & Unemployment are in a state of utter neglect in most of the States.
15
Items 7 of the ‘Details to be included in the Technical Note on Employment, vide the Planning
Commission OrderP-12099/6/08/LEM/ERS dated May 27, 2008 requires:
“7. Recommendations for removing the deficiencies observed in data on employment, unemployment,
wage etc.”
66

4.While National level surveys on employment and unemployment bring out a
comprehensive picture of the characteristics of labour force and patterns in employment
and unemployment, the real action to address the labour and employment issues is taken
at the level of States and Districts Administration. This requires availability of objective
information, duly supported by quantifiable facts at the level of sub regions within a
State. However, the most of the State Planning Departments and the State Statistical
Bureaus do not process the survey schedules filled up at the level of households as a part
of the State Sample of Employment and Unemployment Surveys. In its absence, certain
very broad conclusions for State and sub-State level employment situations are available
to support programme and policy planning at the level of States. This impedes the ability
of the planning process to address the labour and employment planning issues in a
regionally differentiated manner.
5.The State Governments should accord a high priority to processing of State
sample data of employment and unemployment surveys.
III.
Enterprises based data on workers
Establishment level data on changes in the number of workers employed is
collected by the State Governments’ District level Employment Exchanges, under the
technical supervision of the Central Government Office of the Director General of
Employment & Training. This data assumes importance in the following context:
i)
ii)
iii)
Now most of the forma jobs are provided by the non public i.e., the
private sector establishments.
Many of these establishments are in the emerging and fast growing
areas of the economy.
The emerging industries also face sharp fluctuations in business and
adjust the strength of the workers accordingly. There is a need to
capture such fluctuations as early as possible, to enable a response
from the public policy, if required.
The young job seekers should have a reliable information on buoyancy
or otherwise in the job prospects by the nature of occupations.
iv)
The enterprise based data on changes in the strength of workers in the establishments
covered by the DGE&T system, should be available, in public domain, on a district-wise,
industry-wise and occupation wise basis, in a near on line mode.
67

Appendix I
The Statistical Appendix

Appendix I
The Statistical Appendix

1


Annexure Table A 2.1. Projected Population by Age & Sex, All India - Urban Areas: 2002-22
Age•
Group
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
2002
Persons Males
27067
29107
31171
31166
29428
26587
23882
21398
18348
14953
11588
8749
19710
14163
15225
16449
16569
15565
13896
12385
11201
9831
8164
6333
4659
9795
Females
12904
13882
14722
14597
13863
12691
11497
10197
8517
6789
5255
4090
9915
Persons
27104
28492
30800
32893
32525
29312
26055
23185
20209
16837
13306
10088
22203
Males
14357
14904
16264
17381
17067
15429
13630
12115
10712
9096
7246
5427
11062
2005
Females
12747
13589
14535
15512
15457
13883
12425
11070
9497
7740
6060
4661
11142
2007
Persons Males
26953
27810
30293
34145
35063
31535
27791
24591
21725
18429
14799
11259
24312
14408
14536
15994
17939
18266
16682
14631
12822
11405
9863
8030
6102
12128
2012
Females Persons Males
12545
13274
14299
16206
16797
14853
13160
11769
10320
8566
6769
5157
12184
27951
27797
29123
33555
38405
37360
32849
28568
24954
21807
18227
14373
30440
14948
14833
15389
17639
19810
19493
17486
15111
13052
11441
9701
7740
15384
2017
Female! Person~ Males
13003
12964
13734
15916
18595
17867
15363
13457
11902
10366
8526
6633
15056
30788
28762
29065
32267
37654
40589
38577
33550
28871
24981
21525
17676
38418
16476
15361
15660
16986
19455
20986
20245
17920
15303
13056
11237
9344
19597
2022
Females Persons Males
14312
13401
13405
15281
18199
19603
18332
15630
13568
11925
10288
8332
18821
32721 17504
32346 17274
31000 16814
34529 18464
39397 20192
41747 21677
42982 22471
39988 21138
34276 18388
29176 15477
24874 12946
21051 10919
48564 24713
Females
15217
15072
14186
16065
19205
20070
20511
18850
15888
13699
11928
10132
23851
214674
148319 328705 172806164690313009138919293154 154235Total
Note: Projected population refers to April 1 of each year.

Sources: (1)Planning commission ( LEM Division) computations forthe 11th Plan and

(2)Report of the Sub Group on Labour Force Projections (November, 2006)
155899 365409 192027 173382 402723 211626
191097 452651 237977
1I:.


Annexure Table A2.2 - Projected Population by Age & Sex, All India - Rural Areas: 2002-22
Age-
group
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
2002
Persons Males
92960
93321
89260
75956
64080
57821
53222
47974
41044
33805
27177
22219
53257
48084
48443
46858
40120
33131
28920
26444
24273
21225
17665
14110
11156
26197
2005
Males
47316
47648
47221
42841
35796
30379
27150
24924
22401
19106
15511
12167
28325
2007
Persons Males
88208
90191
91322
85484
71062
60896
55540
51381
46391
39505
32187
25334
62107
46467
46775
47285
44981
37947
31472
27605
25344
23295
20271
16678
12998
30045
411163
2012
Females Persons Males
41741
43416
44037
40503
33115
29424
27935
26037
23096
19234
15509
12336
32062
388445
86758
85651
88189
87339
80219
67660
58514
53663
49784
44807
37800
30230
71948
842562
45712
45244
45598
45299
42632
36151
30076
26479
24368
22332
19245
15499
34748
433383
2017
Females Persons Males
41046
40407
42591
42040
37587
31509
28438
27184
25416
22475
18555
14731
37200
409179
82727
84419
83792
84418
82311
76900
65330
56710
52138
48250
43075
35743
84705
880518
43571
44597
44137
43705
43043
40871
34772
28983
25548
23449
21309
18019
41010
453014
2022
Females Persons Males
39156
39822
39655
40713
39268
36029
30558
27727
26590
24801
21766
17724
43695
427504
77179
79817
81657
77787
76469
77162
73365
62771
54751
50330
46318
40789
100685
899080
40643
42160
42898
41073
40110
40278
38745
33185
27756
24459
22334
19983
48701
462325
Females Persons
44876
44878
42402
35836
30949
28901
26778
23701
19819
16140
13067
11063
27060
90600
91879
90675
81315
68037
59675
54660
49975
44040
36946
29923
23957
58141
Females
43283
44231
43454
38474
32241
29296
27510
25051
21639
17840
14411
11789
29816
Females
36536
37657
38759
36714
36359
36884
34620
29586
26995
25871
23984
20806
51984
436755
379036 799608779821400786752096 386626 365470Total
Note: Projected population refers to April 1 of each year.

Sources: (1)Planning commission (LEM Division) computations for the 11th Plan and

(2)Report of the Sub Group on Labour Force Projections (November, 2006)
II[

Annexure Table A2.3 - Projected Population and Labour Force (UPSS) by Educational Level, Sex and Residence, All India, 2007 and 2012
Educational level
Urban Males
Urban Females
Rural Males
Rural Females
Per cent
Distribution
. labour Popula . labour Popula . labour Popula . labour Popula . Labour
ForcetionForcetionForcetionForcetionForce

Total Males
Total Females
Total, both sexes
Popula . labour Popula
tionForcetion
2007

Illiterate

Up to primary
Middle
Secondary
Higher Secondary
Diploma/Certificate
Graduate and above
Population / Labour
Force
LFPRO+
column sum-all/eve/s
of education
. labour Popula . Labour Popula
ForcetionForcetion
32071
49670
28566
21510
14953
4655
21380
172805
172805
12490
22945
20296
15202
9664
4027
17938
102562
594
102562
44867
43542
23442
16277
11283
1971
14519
155900
155901
9064
5687
3533
2260
1715
1118
5051
28429
182
28428
141602
145041
62893
31207
16355
3016
11050
411163
411164
71496
69392
45152
23220
12050
2657
9950
233917
569
233917
201059
115972
40120
17464
8502
1422
3905
388445
388444
78306
25514
12899
5658
2517
955
1852
127702
329
127701
173673
194711
91459
52717
31308
7671
32430
583968
583969
83986
92337
65448
38422
21714
6684
27888
336479
576
336479
245926
159514
63562
33741
19785
3393
18424
544345
544345
87370
31201
16432
7918
4232
2073
6903
419599
354225
155021
86458
51093
11064
50854
171356

123538

81880

46340

25946

8757

34791

492608

437

492608

37.2
31.4
13.7
7.7
4.5
1.0
4.5
100.0
34.8
25.1
16.6
9.4
5.3
1.8
7.1
100.0
156129 1128313
287
156129
1128314
2012

Illiterate

Up to primary
Middle
Secondary
Higher Secondary
Diploma/Certificate
Graduate and above
Poputation I Labour
Force
LFPR 0+
column sum-all levels

of education

32418
53468
33116
24181
17409
5685
25749
192027
192026
12549
26074
24347
17342
11605
4923
21444
118283
616
118284
44398
45739
27424
19150
14286
2610
19776
173382
173383
8826
6159
4196
2666
2220
1484
6838
32390
187
32389
131167
151486
75170
37224
20417
3784
14136
433383
433384
65730
75422
54686
28152
15356
3339
12712
255397
589
255397
188376
123622
52170
23764
12745
2197
6306
409179
409180
73511
29124
16986
7831
3843
1469
3015
135780
332
135779
163585
204954
108286
61405
37826
9469
39885
625410
625410
78279
101496
79033
45494
26961
8262
34156
373681
597
373681
232774
169361
79594
42914
27031
4807
26082
582561
582563
82337
35283
21182
10497
6063
2953
9853
168168
289
168168
396359
374315
187880
104319
64857
14276
65967
1207971
1207973
160616

136779

100215

55991

33024

11215

44009

541849

449

541849

32.8
31.0
15.6
8.6
5.4
1.2
5.5
100.0
29.6
25.2
18.5
10.3
6.1
2.1

8.1
100.0
Source:Reporl of the Sub Group on Labour Force Projections (November, 2006)
1Y


Annexure Table A2.4a:
ProJected Labour Force Participation Rate (Current Daily Status) by Age and Sex, II India Urban, 2007 to 2022
61st round
Age-
Group
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
All ages
Males
Females
Males
2007
Females
Males
2012
Females
Males
2017
Females
Males
2022
Females
0
3
50
370
755
944
979
975
973
962
926
802
348
561
0
2
28
116
216
221
256
288
266
229
225
190
84
150
0
3
48
365
756
943
979
976
973
962
926
803
346
585
0
2
28
116
216
221
256
288
266
229
225
190
84
154
0
3
39
357
756
943
979
976
974
962
926
802
341
607
0
2
28
116
216
221
256
288
266
259
225
190
84
159
0
2
30
348
755
942
979
977
975
962
926
802
337
617
0
2
28
116
216
221
256
288
266
259
225
190
84
160
0
2
22
339
754
942
979
978
976
962
925
802
332
618
0
2
28
116
216
221
256
288
266
259
225
190
84
158
Annexure Table A2.4b:

ProJected Labour Force Participation Rate (Usual Status) by Age and Sex, All India Urban, 2007 to 2022

61st round
Age-
Group
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Males
Females
Males
2007
Females
Males
2012
Females
Males
2017
Females
Males
2022
Females
00
33
3553
144381
769250
261957
987308
984340
983317
976269
939259
832218
366100
15+792244
All ages178570
Note : Rate per 1,000 population
0
3
51
376
770
956
987
985
983
976
939
833
364
802
594
0
3
33
139
249
261
306
338
315
268
259
215
98
246
182
0
3
42
368
770
956
987
985
984
976
939
832
359
805
616
0
3
30
129
248
261
303
333
313
264
258
211
94
242
187
0
2
33
359
769
955
987
986
985
976
939
832
355
807
626
0
3
26
120
247
261
300
328
310
261
257
207
90
239
188
0
2
25
350
768
955
987
987
986
976
938
832
350
801
627
0
3
23
111
246
261
297
323
307
257
256
203
85
234
186

Anncxu('c Tablc A2.5a

PI'ojeeted Labour Force Par-tieiplltion Ratc (Cu'Tcnt Daily Status) by Age and Sex, All India RUI'al, 2007 to 2022

61 st ('ound
Agc- G.•oup Males
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
All agcs
0
2
58
486
853
950
959
963
954
949
928
890
599
531
Fcmalcs
0
2
52
231
295
365
413
467
457
459
405
376
186
237
Malcs
0
2
53
473
851
950
960
963
954
949
928
890
601
545
2007
Fcmalcs
0
2
47
216
288
360
404
464
452
455
402
372
185
233
Malcs
0
1
42
447
845
949
960
964
955
949
928
891
605
565
2012
Fcmalcs
0
1
38
190
276
344
389
452
443
446
395
364
181
236
Males
0
1
30
420
839
949
961
964
955
949
929
891
609
584
2017
Fcmalcs
0
1
28
165
264
329
374
440
434
437
388
355
178
238
I\hlcs
0
1
19
393
833
948
961
965
955
950
929
891
613
600
2022
Females
0
1
19
140
252
313
359
428
425
428
381
347
175
237
Note: LFPRs for urban lemales are no( pr"iected to decline helm' the level observed in 61 s( (2004-05) rOllnd of NSSO 1<11" reasons staled in Chapler 3.
Annexure Table A2.5b
Rate (Usual Status) by Age and Sex, All India Rural, 2007 to 2022
Participation
Gist Round (2004-05)2017202220072012
Age - Group MalesFemales MalesFemalesMalesFemales MalesFemalesFemales Males
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
15+
All ages
0
3
70
529
891
982
988
991
985
982
963
931
645
859
555
0
3
75
331
435
530
593
642
627
616
562
509
254
494
333
0
3
65
516
889
982
989
991
985
982
963
931
647
864
569
0
3
70
316
428
525
584
639
622
612
569
505
253
493
329
0
2
54
490
883
981
989
992
986
982
963
932
651
860
589
0
2
61
290
416
509
569
627
613
603
552
497
249
476
332
0
2
42
463
877
981
990
992
986
982
964
932
655
859
608
0
2
51
265
404
494
554
615
604
594
545
488
246
462
334
0
2
31
436
871
980
990
993
986
983
964
932
659
858
624
0
2
42
240
392
478
539
603
595
585
538
480
243
450
333
Note : Rate per 1,000 population

Source: Report of the Sub Group on Labour Force Projections (November, 2006)


Annxure Table A 2.6 - Projected Labour Force (CDS) (in 'OOOs) All India, 2004-05
61 st round
Age-
group
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Rural
Males
Females
Persons
Males
Urban
Females
Persons
Males
Total
Females
Persons
0
95
2739
20821
30534
28860
26037
24002
21370
18131
14394
10829
16967
214780
0
88
2260
8887
9511
10693
11362
11699
9889
8189
5837
4433
5546
88393
0
184
4998
29708
40045
39553
37399
35701
31259
26320
20231
15262
22512
303172
0
45
813
6431
12886
14565
13344
11813
10423
8751
6710
4352
3849
93981
0
27
407
1799
3339
3068
3181
3188
2526
1773
1363
886
936
22493
0
72
1220
8230
16225
17633
16525
15001
12949
10523
8074
5238
4785
116474
0
140
3552
27252
43420
43425
39381
35814
31793
26882
21105
15181
20816
308761
0
116
2667
10687
12850
13761
14542
14887
12415
9961
7200
5319
6482
110886
0
256
6219
37939
56270
57186
53923
50701
44208
36843
28305
20500
27298
419647
Total

Annexure Table A 2.7 - Projected Labour Force (CDS) (in 'OOOs) All India, 2007
Age-group
Rural
Males
Urban
Males
Total
Males
Females
Persons
Females
Persons
Females
Persons
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Total
0
94
2506
21276
32293
29898
26501
24406
22223
19237
15477
11568
18057
223537
0
87
2070
8749
9537
10593
11286
12081
10439
8751
6235
4589
5931
90348
0
180
4576
30025
41830
40491
37787
36487
32663
27989
21712
16157
23989
313885
0
44
768
6548
13809
15731
14324
12514
11097
9488
7436
4900
4196
100854
0
27
400
1880
3628
3283
3369
3389
2745
1962
1523
980
1024
24209
0
70
1168
8428
17437
19014
17693
15904
13842
11450
8959
5880
5219
125063
0
137
3274
27824
46102
45630
40825
36921
33320
28725
22913
16468
22253
324391
0
113
2470
10629
13165
13875
14655
15471
13185
10713
7758
5569
6955
114557
0
251
5744
38452
59267
59505
55479
52391
46505
39438
30671
22037
29208
438948

Annexure Table A 2.8 - Projected Labour Force (CDS) (in 'OOOs) All India, 2012
Age-grour Rural
Males
Urban
Males
Total
Males
Females
Persons
Females
Persons
Females
Persons
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Total
0
45
1915
20249
36024
34307
28873
25526
23271
21193
17859
13810
21023
244095
0
40
1618
7988
10374
10839
11062
12287
11259
10024
7329
5362
6733
94917
0
86
3534
28236
46398
45146
39935
37813
34531
31217
25189
19172
27756
339012
0
44
600
6297
14976
18382
17119
14748
12713
11006
8983
6207
5246
116323
0
26
385
1846
4017
3949
3933
3876
3166
2685
1918
1260
1265
28324
0
70
985
8143
18993
22331
21052
18624
15879
13691
10901
7468
6511
144647
0
90
2515
26545
51000
52689
45992
40274
35984
32199
26842
20017
26269
360418
0
66
2003
9834
14391
14788
14995
16163
14425
12709
9248
6622
7998
123241
0
156
4518
36379
65391
67477
60987
56437
50409
44908
36090
26639
34267
483659

Annexure Table A 2.9 - Projected Labour Force (CDS) (in 'OOOs) AI/India, 2017
Age-group
Males
Rural
Females
Urban
Females
Total
Females
Persons
Males
Persons
Males
Persons
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Total
0
45
1324
18356
36113
38787
33416
27940
24398
22253
19796
16055
24975
263457
0
40
1110
6718
10367
11854
11429
12200
11540
10838
8445
6292
7778
98610
0
84
2434
25074
46480
50640
44845
40139
35938
33091
28241
22347
32753
362067
0
31
470
5911
14689
19769
19820
17508
14920
12560
10405
7494
6604
130181
0
27
375
1773
3931
4332
4693
4501
3609
3089
2315
1583
1581
31809
0
58
845
7684
1.8620
24101
24513
22009
18530
15648
12720
9077
8185
161990
0
75
1794
24267
50802
58555
53236
45447
39319
34813
30202
23549
31579
393638
0
67
1486
8490
14298
16186
16122
16701
15149
13927
10760
7875
9359
130419
0
142
3280
32757
65099
74741
69357
62149
54468
48740
40962
31424
40938
524057

Annexure Table A 2.10 .

Estimate of all female persons and those in labour force

and Increase in LFPR of Female Persons (Combined Rural

and Urban)

NSSO estimate of female persons by
Activity Status
50th Round
(1993-94)
1
I. Activity Status (Item)
55th Round
(1999-2000)
('00)
2
61st Round
(2004-05)
3
11 - 81
(labour force)
1089270
3758591
1180038
4480464
1394029
4737442
11 - 99
(all persons)
Source:
1: NSSO Report No, 406, Table 1B; Pages 53 and
2:NSSO Report No, 458, Table 2; Page A 17
3:NSSO Report No, 515, Table 20; Page A 77
56.

Annexure Table' A 3.1 - estimate of average annual entrants and exits from labour force at the level of labour force
2000 - 2005
LFPR of persons
NSS Estimate of in the next below LFPR for the
persons - UPSS quinquennial age age group
basis as per 51st group as per 55th as per 51st
Round (2004
Round (2004-05)Round (1999­
05)
2000)
persons in this
age group who
persons in this Entrants to /
had already
age group whoexits from
entered the
are in the labour labour force
labour force in
force in (2004­during
1999-2000 and
2005)2000 to 2005"
are continuing
as such
Age Group
annual
average
2000 -2005b
1

(years)
2

3

(million)
ENTRANTS TO LABOUR FORCE
4

5

(per '000 persons)
6

(million)
7

9

10 to 14

15 to 19

20 to 24

25 to 29

30 to 34

35 to 39

40 to 44

45 to 49

113.206
95.085
86.005
76.049
72.491
70.145
57.087
49.811
I. sub total (10 to 49 )619.879
EXITS FROM LABOUR FORCE
50 to 54
37.701
55 to 59
29.887
60+69.883
II. sub total (50+ )137.471
III. entrants less exits(10+) .
(I) - (II)757.350
memo items
6
82
382
603
690
722

746

756
66

393

619

715

742

775

770

763

0.679
7.797
32.854
45.858
50.019
50.645
42.587
37.657
268.095
7.472
37.368
53.237
54.375
53.788
54.362
43.957
38.006
342.566
6.792
29.571
20.383
8.517
3.770
3.718
1.370
0.349
74.470
1.528
6.650
4.584
1.915
0.848
0.836
0.308
0.078
16.747
-0.127
-0.282
-3.976
-4.386
12.362
744
714
647
729

672

394

28.050
21.339
45.214
94.603
362.698
27.484
20.084
27.534
75.102
417.668
-0.566
-1.255
-17.680
-19.501
54.969
ot04
5 to 9

all persons
".,
101.536
113.010
Abbreviations used

LFPR: labour force participation rate
RGI : Registrar General of India
"[{col (4) - col (3)}* {col(2)/1000}]
b
971.896
Normalised to RGI's estimate of population (2005 January 1) 1092.83 million
.xn:


Annexure Table A 3.2 - RURAL MALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-) during 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 ~ quinquennial age groups
increase/
labour labour force decrease inlabour force
labour
partici­ force partici• partici­
force
pation rate pation rate pation rate
during the
201220172007
period
2007-2012
LFPR o?a1a+5 LFPR12a1a+5 LFPR 17a1a+5
(8)(9)(10)
age group
population
2007
population
2012
population
2017
labour
force
2007
labour
force
2012
labour
force
2017
increase/ entrants to entrants to
decrease / exit from / exit from
in labourlabourlabour
forceforceforce
during the duringduring
period2007 to2012 to
2012-2017 20122017
(a) to (a+5)
(1 )
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Total (0+)
0-4 years
sub total 5 to 29
years
sub total 30 to
59 years
60+
Total (0+)
PO?
(2)
a/a+5
P 12 a1a+5
(3)
P1?
(4)
a1a+5
LF or"/a+5
(5)
0
119
3066
23226
33732
30890
27293
25128
22951
19907
16064
12108
19435
233917
0
91032.5
123450
19435
233917
LF o12 a/a+5
(6)
5LF 17a1a +
(7)
0
96
1862
20231
37734
40076
34418
28756
25192
23039
20537
16794
26862
275596
0
99999
148736
26862
275596
(11 )
-13
-626
-1047
3904
4575
2461
1136
1069
2029
2478
2333
3183
21480
(12)
-10
-578
-1948
99
4611
4665
2493
1173
1103
1995
2353
4244
20199
(13)
103
2321
19113
14409
1734
-1137
-1030
-1109
-1015
-1365
-1623
10510
(15)
46467
46775
47285
44981
37947
31472
27605
25344
23295
20271
16678
12998
30045
411163
46467
208460
126191
30045
411163
45712
45244
45598
45299
42632
36151
30076
26479
24368
22332
19245
15499
34748
433383
45712
214924
137999
34748
433383
43571
44597
44137
43705
43043
40871
34772
28983
25548
23449
21309
18019
~1010
453014
43571
216353
152080
41010
453014
0
106
2440
22179
37635
35465
29753
26263
24019
21936
18542
14441
22618
255397
0
97825
134954
22618
255397
0
3
65
516
889
982
989
991
985
982
963
932
647
0
2
54
490
883
981
989
992
986
982
963
932
651
0
2
42
463
877
981
990
992
986
983
964
932
655
1756
17791
15555
2441
-1047
-997
-1071
-980
-1399
-1748
12421
5 to 29 yrs
30 to 59yrs
5 to 59 yrs
60+ yrs
6793
11505
18297
3183
2174
13782
15956
4244
37680
-7278
30402
10510
37543
-7242
30301
12421
lim
2QIf

Annexure Table A 3.3

RURAL FEMALE• entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (•durina 2007•2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial age grou ps

increase/
labour
forcelabourlabour decrease
in labourrf .forceforce
pa t"ICI- pa rfICI-.rt"ICI­.
forcepa
pa Iont".
ratepa Ion patlan rate during the
period2007 rate 2012 2017

2007-2012
LFPR o7ale LFPR 12ala- LFPR 17aJa+5
age group
population
2007
population
2012
population labour force labour force
2017
20072012

labour
force
2017

entrants
increase/entrants to
to I exit
I exit fromdecrease
from
in labourlabour
labour
forceforce
force
during theduring
during
period2012 to
2007 to
2017
2012-2017

2012

aJa+5
(a) to (a+5) P07
P 12 aJa+5
P 17
ala+5
LFo7aJa+5
LF o12
a/a+5
LF17a/a+5
(1 )
0-4

5-9

10-14

15-19

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55-59

60+

Total

0-4 years
sub total 5

to 39 years
sub total

40 to 59

60+
Total 0+

(2)
41741
43416
44037
40503
33115
29424
27935
26037
23096
19234
15509
12336
32062
388445
41741
190495
124147
32062
388445
(3)
41046
40407
42591
42040
37587
31509
28438
27184
25416
22475
18555
14731
37200
409179
41046
194134
136799
37200
409179
(4)
39156

39822

39655

40713

39268

36029

30558

27727

26590

24801

21766

17724

43695

427504

39156

195487

149166
43695
427504
(5)
0
116
3078
12790
14180
15438
16326
16627
14374
11776
8665
6229
8101
127700
0
45602
73997
8101
127700
(6)
0
97
2583
12212
15647
16043
16185
17036
15587
13559
10240
7316
9273
135778
0
465~2
(7)
0
86

2038

10796

15877

17786

16924

17046

16065

14740

11864

8654

10746

142622

0

46583

85293

10746

142622

(8)
0
3
70
316
428
525
584
639
622
612
559
505
253
(9)
0
2
61
290
416
509
569
627
613
603
552
497
249
(10)
0
2

51

265

404

494

554

615

604

594

545

488

246

(11 )
-19
-495
-578
1467
605
-141
409
1213
1783
1575
1087
1172
8078
(12)
-11
-545
-1416
230
1743
739
10
478
1181
1624
1338
1473
6844

(13)
0

97

2467
9134
2857
1863
747
710
-1040
-815
-1536
-1349
3044
(14)

1941

8213

3665

2139

881

861

-971

-847

-1695

-1586

3430

79923
9273
135778
5 to 39

yrs

40 to 59

yrs

5 to 59

yrs
60+ yrs
1248
5658
6906
1172
750
4621
5371
1473
17875
-4740
13135
3044
17700

-5099

12601

3430

~

Annexure Table A 3.4
URBAN MALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-) during 2007•2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial
ag~rouPS
entrants entrants to
to ! exit ! exit from
fromlabour
forcelabour
duringforce
during 2012 to
2007 to2017
2012
age group
population
2007
population
2012
population
2017
labour
force
2007
labour
force
2012
labour
force
2017
increase! increase!
labour
forcelabour labour force decrease decrease
in labour in labour
partici- force partid partici­
forceforce
pation rate pation rate pation rate
during the during the
200720122017
periodperiod
2007-20122012-2017
(a) to (a+5)
(1 )
P
07
ala+5
P
12
ala+5
P
17
a/a+5
LFo7a/a+5
(5)
LFo12a/a+5
LF17a/a+5
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Total
(2)
14408
14536
15994
17939
18266
16682
14631
12822
11405
9863
8030
6102
12128
172806
(3)
14948
14833
15389
17639
19810
19493
17486
15111
13052
11441
9701
7740
15384
192027
(4)
16476
15361
15660
16986
19455
20986
20245
17920
15303
13056
11237
9344
19597
211626
LFPR 07 a/a+E LFPR 12a/a+5 LFPR
17
a/a+5
o
39
808
6753
14072
15951
14439
12626
11214
9628
7542
5080
4410
102562
(6)
o
38
646
6485
15244
18631
17259
14890
12846
11168
9109
6442
5526
118283
(7)
o
(8)
o
3
(9)
37
523
6095
14954
20050
19985
17669
15074
12743
10548
7775
6952
132407
o
3
(10)
(11 )
o
2
-1
(12)
-1
(13)
o
(14)
485
5449
8469
4806
1354
410
184
-103
-620
-1334
510
51
376
770
956
987
985
983
976
939
833
364
42
368
770
956
987
985
984
976
939
832
359
33
359
769
955
987
986
985
976
939
832
355
-162
-268
1172
2680
2820
2264
1632
1540
1567
1362
1116
15722
-123
-390
-290
1419
2726
2779
2228
1575
1439
1333
1426
14121
38
607
5677
8491
4559
1308
451
220
-46
-519
-1100
446
0-4 years
sub total 5 to
44 years
sub total 45
to 59 years
60+
Total 0+
14408
122275
23995
12128
172806
14948
132813
28882
15384
192027
164761
1419161
336371
0
75902
22250
0
86039
26719
5526
118284
0
94387
31066
6952
132405
5to 44yrs
45 to 59yrsl
5to 59 yrs
60+yrs
10137
4469
14606
1116
83481
43471
126951
1426
21351
-1665
19686
446
21157
-2057
195971
2116261
4410
102562
19100
510
:nv
-xY.


Annexure Table A 3.5

URBAN FEMALE - entrants to labour force (+), and exits from labour force (-) durin!:! 2007-2012 and 2012-2017 by quinquennial age groups

age group
population
2007
population
2012
population
2017
labour
force
2007
labour
force
2012
labour
force
2017
..entrants
Increase! Increase! t! eXI't entrants too.
labourdecrease decrease f! eXit from
forcelabour labour force in labour in labour I rbomlabour
a ourpartici- force partici partici­
forceforcefforce
pation rate pation rate pation rate d unng th e d' ted orcehd'•
unng.unng
200720122017
periodperiodunng2012 to .
2007-20122012-2017 2007 to2017
2012
(a)
to (a+5)
(1)
JP07 a/a+5
P
12
ala+5
P 17
a/a+5
LFo781a+5
LF
o12
a/a+5
LF1781a+5
LFPR a/a+E LFPR ala+5 LFPR17a1a+5
o712
I
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(1~)
(14)
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Total
0-4 years
sub total 5 to
39 years
sub total 40
to 59 years
60+
Total 0+
12545
13274
14299
16206
16797
14853
13160
11769
10320
8566
6769
5157
12184
155899
13003
12964
13734
15916
18595
17867
15363
13457
11902
10366
8526
6633
15056
173382
14312
13401
13405
15281
18199
19603
18332
15630
13568
11925
10288
8332
18821
191097
14312
113851
o
40
474
2247
4180
3883
4022
3980
3253
2294
1753
1108
1194
28429
o
39
407
2059
4610
4669
4649
4484
3721
2739
2200
1399
1413
32390
o
40
350
1835
4495
5119
5494
5132
4207
3107
2647
1723
1687
35837
o
3
33
139
249
261
306
338
315
268
259
215
98
o
3
o
3
o
-1
1
30
129
248
261
303
333
313
264
258
211
94
26
120
247
261
300
328
310
261
257
207
90
-67
-188
430
786
627
504
468
445
447
-57
-224
291
219
3961
-115
450
845
648
486
,368
447
324
274
3447
39
367
1585
2363
489
766
462
-259
-514
-94
-354
305
311
1428
2436
509
825
483
-277
-614
-92
-477
288
12545
100358
30812
12184
155899
13003
107896
37427
15056
173382
o
18826
o
20917
10059
o
22465
11684
1687
35836
5 to 39 yrs
2091
1651
3742
219
1548
1625
3173
274
6071
-1221
4850
305
5992
-1460
4532
288
441131 8408.171
40 to 59yrs
5to 59 yrs
60+ yrs
18821\11941413
191097\ 28427.99 32388.89
xu


Annexure Table A 3.6 :

Average Annual Increase in Population, Labour Force and those not in

labour force - 1994-2000, 2000-2005, 1994-2005 & 2007-2012

(OOO's)
Item

1

1994 to
2000
(6 years)
2
2000 to1994 to

(520052005

years)(11 years)
3
Estimated
2007 to 2012

5

Proiected

Population
Labour Force
Persons out of labour
force
18562
5114
13448
17557
10954
6603
18105
7769
10337
15932

8942

6990

memo items
2007

population
LFPR
Labour

Force
7.85
17 year old persons
22 year old persons
23.92
21.2
0.328
0.542
11.49

~fo. P- [2099/6/08/LEMIERS

Government of India

Planning Commission

CLEM Division)

Yojana Bhawan, Sansad Marg,

New Delhi- I 1000 I.

Dated: May 27, 2008.

CORRIGENDUM
Subject: Hiring the services of Shri ShaiIendra Sharma, formerly Adviser
(Labour, Employment & Manpower), Planning Commission.
Reference Order No.N-llOI6/I(IO)/2008-PC dated the 2 nd April, 2008 on the
subject cited above. In the order under reference the number of the Order may be
read as "P-12099/6/08ILEM/ERS" instead of "N-II 0 16/l (l O)/2008-PC".
(K. Ramachandran)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
To
Pay & Accounts Officer, Planning Commission.
Copy to:
I. Accounts-I Section, Planning Commission
2. Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Planning Commission.
3. Shri Shailendra Shanna, Fonnerly Adviser (LEM), rio A-M, Sector-26,
NOIDA.
4. Under Secretary (Admn-I), Plarming.Commission.
5. Genera! I Section / PC Library/Computer Services Division / Protocol Unit,
Planning Commission.
6. J.F. C~ll, Planning Commission.

No. N-I1016jl(10)/2008-PC

Government of India

Planning Commission

(Plan Coordination Division)

Yojana Bhawan, Parliament Street,
New Delhi-110aOl, dated the 2 0d April, 2008
ORDER
Subject : Hiring the services of Shri Shailendra Sharma, formerly
Adviser (Labour, Employment & Manpower), Planning Commission.
Sanction of the President is hereby conveyed to hire the services of Shri
Shailendra Sharma on a job contract basis for a period of four months to carry out
the items of work listed in the Annexure to this Order on a consolidated lump-sum
amountofRs.l,OO,OOO/- (Rs. One lakh only).
The payment shaH be made to Shri Shailendra Sharma in lump-sum after
successful completion of the work.
3.Professional Tax @ 10% as prescribed under Section 194100 of the Income
Tax Act read with clauses (A) and (B) shall be deducted at source by DDO, Planning
Commission before releasing the payment.
2.
Copies of all correspondences shall be sent by 5hri Sharma to Director (PC
Division) and Joint Adviser CLEM Division) of the Planning Commission, as this
financial assistance is being provided under the Central Plan Scheme "50th Year
Initiatives for Planning", being administered by the Plan Coordination Division of
the Planning Commission..
This job contract shall commence on the date Shri Sharma conveys his
acceptance of this offer. He will have his headquarters at New Delhi. The assignment
does not carry any perquisites by way of HRA CCA DA, Residential Accommodation,
and Residential Telephone Facilities, etc
4.
5.
6.He shaH not, except with the previous sanction of the Planning Commission
or in the bonafide discharge of his duties as aforesaid, publish a book himself or
through a publisher or contribute an article to a book or compilation of articles or
participate in a radio broadcastj TV telecast or contribute an article or write a letter
to a newspaper pseudonymously or in the name of some other person, if such book,
article, broadcast or letter relates to a subject, which is connected with the work
aforesaid, not only during the period of job contract but also thereafter. Any
information gathered during the course of the job contract as aforesaid shall not be
divulged to anyone,who is not authorized to have the same.
P.T.O.

7.The exp~nditure will be debitable to the following Head of Account of the
Planning Commission:
Demand No.
Major Head 3475
00.800
52
52.00.28
71
Other General Economic Services
Other Expenditure

50th Year Initiative for Planning.

Payment for Professional and Special Services
This issues with the approval of the Sanctioning Committee and with the
concurrence of the Financial Adviser vide Dy. No. 3766 dated 24.03.2008.
8.
Q..A-JIt­
(K. Ramachandran)
Under Secretary to the Government of India.
Tel. No. 23096733
To
Pay & Accounts Officer. Planning Commission.
Copy to:
Y
.'Accounts-I Section, Planning Commission
2. Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Planning Commission.
.Shri Shailendra Sharma, Formerly Adviser (LEM), rio A-64, Sector-26,
NOIDA.
4. Under Secretary (Admn-I), Planning Commission
5. General I Section/PC Library/Computer Services Division/Protocol Unit,
Planning Commission.
6. I.F. Cell, Planning Commission.

Annexure to Order No. N-I1016/1(10)/200S-PC dated 02.04.2008
Items of Work covered in the Job Contract
Broad details of the Technical Note on employment to be prepared for
Eleventh Five Year Plan
The technical note will broadly include the folloWing details:
, 1.
How the Sub-group recommendations have been used in deriVing the
projections of Population and Labour Force in preparing the 11 th Plan
Chapter?
Why the projections given in the Approach paper were revisited?
Why Current Daily Status (CDS) approach for measuring employment ­
unemployment has been preferred over the Usual Status (US) approach?
Analysis of wage trends- presented in the 11th Plan Chapter vis-a-vis the
Approach Paper..
New entrants to Labour Force - The basis as to why projections are
different in 11 th Plan Chapter vis-a-vis the Report of the Working Group on
Skill Development & Vocational Training for the 11 th Plan,
Issue of formal vs. informal employment- NCEUS recommendations versus
the stand taken in 11 th Plan Chapter.
Recommendations for removing the deficiencies observed in the data on
employment, unemployment, wage etc.
"2.
, 3.
4.
, S.
6.
7.