Concept Of Moonlighting In India

Moonlighting refers to the practice of taking up a secondary job besides the regular one. Normally, it is acquired for additional income or for any other self-developing interest. India has seen a lot of concern these days related to moonlighting. Essentially, this increase happened in connection with the boom of working away from the office as triggered by the onset of the coronavirus pandemic. This phenomena opens up many complex questions about the work-life balance, employment contracts, legal considerations and changes in the work environment according to the new wave of digitization. This article delves into all the intricacies of moonlighting in India, the causes, the legal framework, the ethical implications, and views of different stakeholders (including employees, employers, or the government).

The Rise Of Moonlighting In India

Primarily, the Indian workforce is known for being entrepreneurial in spirit and hustling mentality, whereby one takes some side hustles or freelance to add more money to their bags. With the rise of technology and gig platforms, combined with remote working, moonlighting is now very rampant and more evident. There are many reasons behind the growth of moonlighting:

• Economic Pressures: Inflation, stagnant wages in some industries and rising cost of living in urban centres, push workers to seek ancillary sources of income.
• Remote Work Culture: The shift from work from office to work from home during the pandemic blurred the lines between personal and professional life. With work-from-home flexibility, most employees got the opportunity to engage in additional words without constraint or compromising the primary office hours.
• Boom of the Gig Economy: Upwork, Freelancer, and Fiverr are some of the popular platforms that make freelancing accessible in the domains of IT, content creation, digital marketing, consulting, among others. This has therefore made it somewhat easier and appealing to moonlight, especially for tech-savvy professionals.
• Pursuit of passion projects: For others, moonlighting is a way to ventilate interests or hobbies that their primary job did not leave room for. An example may include an IT professional who chooses to moonlight freelance photography or writing.

Moonlighting: Legal And Contractual Considerations

Moonlighting raises very big legal and contractual questions in India where labour laws are still adapting to the changing work environment. Traditionally, most employment contracts in India prohibit employees from engaging in any form of outside employment. However, with the changing times, these laws are undergoing a change as more employees seek flexibility and autonomy in managing their careers.

Moonlighting has following legal and contractual considerations:

• Employment Contracts: Most organisations include provisions in the employment contract that prohibit employees from any other form of paid employment during one's employment tenure. The main reasons that necessitate such provisions are to avoid conflicts of interests, intellectual property infringement, and misappropriation of corporate resources.
• Labour Laws in India: Indian labour laws are concerned with operating hours and conditions of employment but hold no word about grey areas like moonlighting, which might be embedded in the white-collar, IT, or gig economies. Under these laws, emphasis is chiefly placed on the protection of employee rights, like guaranteed wages, periods off work, and social security. It therefore gives an ambiguous answer to the position regarding multiple employments.

Following are some of the statutes dealing with dual employment:

• Factories Act, 1948: Section 60 of the Factories Act restricts any adult worker from working in any factory on any day on which he has already been working in any other factory.
• Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954: Section 9 of the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act restricts any person from engaging in double employment.
• Industrial Employment (Standing Order) Rules, 1946: Clause 8 of Schedule I-B of this Rule prohibits any workman to take any employment in addition to his job in the establishment, which may adversely affect the interest of his employer.
• Draft Model Standing Orders for Service Sector, 2020: Clause 22 of this Draft Model Standing Order prohibits any worker from taking employment in addition to his job in the industrial establishment, which may adversely affect the interest of his employer.

• Non-Compete Clauses: Companies prohibit, prevent, and deter employees from working with competitors or businesses which would undermine the competitive advantage of their employer. It has resulted in conflicts where the employees moonlight in the same industry, potentially leading to legal action or termination.
• Intellectual Property and Confidentiality Issues: The moonlighting problem usually rises in industry sectors like IT, whereby access to intellectual property is important, and can raise questions related to data security and secrecy. Individuals working with two companies in similar industry type might unintentionally or intentionally disclose sensitive information, thus breaching the contract as well as infringing on the intellectual property rights.

Landmark Judgements Related To Dual Employment

Niranjan Shankar Golikari vs. The Century Spinning And Mfg. Co. Ltd (1967)

Following are the grounds on which the Court upheld the validity of non-compete clause:

• Negative covenants during employment are not restraints of trade: The Court distinguished between the restraints that are applied during employment and those applied after the employment is over. The Court concluded that negative covenants that prevent employees from working for competitors while they are still employed are not generally regarded as restraints of trade.
• Reasonableness of the restriction: The Court found the restriction in the contract reasonable as it was limited in scope because it applied only to work similar to what the appellant did for the respondent company, and was limited in time, applying only during the term of the contract.
• Protection of the interests of the employer: The Court recognised the respondent’s legitimate interest in protecting its trade secrets as well as the investment it made in the training of the appellant. In this case, the Court held the enforcement of the non-compete clause necessary to protect these interests.

Therefore, the non-compete clause was declared valid and enforceable by the Supreme Court and issued an injunction to prevent the appellant from working for the competitor for the remainder of his contract term.

Manager, M/S. Pyarchand Kesarimal Ponwal Bidi Factory vs. Omkar Laxman Thange & Ors (1968)

This case established that an existing contract of service with one master prevents the employee from working simultaneously for another master unless the contract allows it or the master consents. This principle is based on the concept that a contract for service, being a personal agreement, cannot be transferred unilaterally. The Court emphasises this by stating that “a general rule in respect of the relationship of master and servant is that a subsisting contract of service with one master is a bar to service with any other master unless the contract otherwise provides or the master consents.”

Ethical Concerns Surrounding Moonlighting

There is hardly as much complexity to the ethical argument on moonlighting in India as there is to the legal one. The stakeholders (employees, employers, and the overall business ecosystem) hold diverse perspectives on the issue of moonlighting. These are as follows:

• Employee Viewpoint: From the viewpoint of an employee, moonlighting is often seen as an essential route to financial security or a way to pursuance of passion projects. The labour market usually exerts great competition for open positions, where work requirements can sometimes be surpassed by the benefits that it can provide. Side jobs can significantly help employees feel more satisfied and secure. However, it can inadvertently lead to burnout, stress, and deterioration in work-life balance.
• Employer Viewpoint: Employers typically do not support the practice of moonlighting. Their biggest concern is divided attention, less productivity, and leakage of intellectual property. They also feel that people who moonlight are not fully committed to their regular job. It impacts the team morale and the organisation's overall performance in the market. Organisations that spend a lot of money on the training and development of employees feel that moonlighting undermines their return on investment.
• Business Ethics: Moonlighting also raises broader issues related to loyalty, commitment, and trust between employers and employees. Employees often dedicate their time to earning more money by prioritising side gigs that pay better than full-time jobs. This further creates ethical concerns when performance problems arise sooner or later.

The Role Of Technology In Enabling Moonlighting

The whole digital revolution and technological advancement has eased moonlighting significantly. In fact, with the online platforms available, one can take up freelance projects, consultancy work, or remote jobs. Some of the major technological enablers are as follows:

• Freelancing Platforms: With help from Upwork, Freelancer, Fiverr, and more such websites, freelancing projects have become available to any person in the world with specific skills for short-term projects. This makes moonlighting all the more accessible.
• Remote Work Tools: With different time zones and projects, one is able to work using tools such as Slack, Zoom, and Google Workspace. This makes it easier for those engaging in multiple jobs.
• Payment channels: Digital payment channels such as PayPal, Payoneer, and UPI systems in India, have made the process of receiving a payment for freelance and part-time work streamlined for employees to manage various income inflows.

Moonlighting In The IT Industry

One such sector wherein moonlighting has been a subject of much debate is the Indian IT industry. The Indian IT sector like the big IT firms (like Infosys and Wipro) has taken strict action against employees who were found to be indulging in moonlighting in the last quarter of 2022. Wipro's chairman Rishad Premji even went up to the extent of calling it “cheating—plain and simple.”

On the other hand, the crackdown by the IT giants has been met with a mix of support and criticism. While employers emphasise the importance of loyalty and absolute dedication to the company, some employees argue that since the work culture in the industry is demanding and pays them meagerly with relatively small pay hikes, they look for additional work.

Many Indian tech professionals think that companies need to rethink their policies for greater flexibility, not just for employees but for the overall business, as global economies are embracing a gig-based model.

Stance Of Government On Moonlighting

As moonlighting becomes common, the Indian government is now beginning to debate how it can regulate such a trend that is now more prevalent. Thus far, the government has taken a backseat, thus not placing some strong regulations on moonlighting, instead leaving this to companies in employment contracts and internal policies.

However, more debates arise in relation to the increased rise of gig and platform work - reviewing existing laws regarding labour protection to protect the rights of workers, especially the masses and those moonlighting. The newly introduced Codes on Wages and Social Security extend greater benefits in terms of minimum wage and social security to a more extended proportion of workers. This may eventually provide a more defined shape for moonlighting.

The Future Of Moonlighting In India

The trend of moonlighting is likely to further increase in India. The factors which are promoting moonlighting are the need for better financial security, a rise in the gig economy, and changes in preferences for work. As organisations become more hybrid and flexible, it is possible that companies may relax restrictions around moonlighting if there are no conflicts of interest.

However, some companies might regulate and monitor further to restrict or prevent employees from engaging in such moonlighting. The Indian corporate scenario will likely witness a legal and regulatory push towards formalising moonlighting policies.

Conclusion

The practice of moonlighting in India is a highly complex and multi-dimensional challenge given economic, social, and technological factors. While it raises opportunities for income diversification as well as personal gratification, it also raises several legal, ethical, and organisational issues that should be given much thought. Employers and employees must emerge from these challenges through proper disclosure and open communication due to the evolving nature of the work in the 21st century. Hence, the road ahead is an attempt to strike a more balanced and flexible framework that identifies the realities of modern work and protects the interests of all the parties involved.