The Opportunity Gap at the Heart of India’s Megacities
From IT corridors to gig platforms, urban job markets remain stratified by caste, religion and gender. It’s time to make inclusion a core goal of labour policy.
View as PDF
Jyoti Thakur, National Council of Applied Economic Research, Delhi (NCAER)
Karthick V, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangaluru (ISEC)
SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth | SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities | SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
Institutions: Ministry of Labour and Employment | Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment
In India’s largest cities, a Muslim woman with a university degree is still more likely to be shut out of a white-collar job than her equally qualified peers from other faiths, men or women. This is not what B.R. Ambedkar envisioned when he called cities “emancipatory zones” where caste hierarchies would dissolve. In fact, labour force data from six major cities tell a different story: segregation in employment by caste and religion remains as entrenched as ever, and in some ways sharper than the divide between men and women.
This is not only a question of social justice; it is a structural brake on productivity – one that urban labour policy must release to realise the full potential of India’s cities.
When Identity Outweighs Gender
Globally, gender is often the most significant dividing line in the workplace. In Paris or Toronto, women are more likely to be clustered in certain jobs than any ethnic or religious group. In Mumbai or Chennai, it is your last name, community or faith that decides which doors open.
Labour force data from Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Chennai, and Bengaluru reveal strikingly high segregation scores for several marginalised groups. On the Gini index - where zero means perfect integration and one means complete separation - the score is 0.51 for Dalits and 0.49 for Muslims, compared with just 0.20 for gender segregation overall.
The disadvantage is sharpest at the intersections, where gender overlaps with caste, religion, or minority status. Women from marginalised communities – for example, Dalit and Muslim women – face both, a narrower range of jobs and systematic exclusion from higher-status roles. They are also less likely to be in the workforce at all, creating a “double bind” of low participation and high segregation. Even within these communities, smaller sub-groups are further channelled into different kinds of jobs, adding yet another layer to the pattern of exclusion.
Often seen as more integrated, Christians, Sikhs, and smaller minority groups also record higher segregation levels – reminding us that workplace exclusion is not confined to the largest marginalised communities.
The Machinery of Exclusion
Why do these gaps persist in cities that are growing richer and more diverse? The answer lies in the way urban labour markets are structured. For many marginalised groups, it is informal and precarious work that dominates, offering little scope for upward mobility.
Hiring often depends on personal networks, neighbourhood ties or alumni groups, favouring those already connected to advantaged circles. This “social capital” acts as an invisible gate, shutting others out. Discrimination has also evolved: credential inflation, language preferences, and notions of “cultural fit” serve as polite filters, achieving the same result as overt bias.
Migration patterns reinforce the divide. Newcomers without urban networks or sector-specific skills are often funnelled into insecure work, locking them into low-mobility tracks. When these structures meet gender bias, the disadvantages multiply.
Ultimately, the exclusion is as much about information as opportunity. It is the difference between hearing about a bank’s front-desk opening through a well-placed contact and never knowing the vacancy existed at all.
The New Economy isn’t a Level Field
India’s technology and service sectors have changed the face of urban employment, opening doors for some from historically excluded groups, particularly English-speaking, first-generation graduates. For a subset of Dalit and Muslim youth, these roles represent opportunities their parents never had.
But entry does not guarantee mobility. Many such jobs, especially in the gig economy, replicate the insecurity of the informal sector: no benefits, no career ladder, and few protections. Without targeted support for advancement and stability, these new sectors risk becoming waiting rooms rather than springboards, simply repackaging an old pattern of limited opportunity.
Old barriers are adapting to new sectors – making policy intervention urgent.
Turning Evidence into Change
Segregation persists even after accounting for education, occupation, and city effects, making it clear that growth alone will not dissolve the exclusion problem. The solution lies in dismantling the structures that keep it in place. Reducing informality, expanding social protections and enforcing labour standards would create more secure jobs for those now clustered in precarious work.
Training programmes should connect directly to vacancies, backed by mentorship, internships, and soft-skill support for first-generation professionals. Public narratives that spotlight diverse success stories can help shift perceptions, while disaggregated city-level data can reveal where barriers are falling and where they are not.
Segregation by caste, religion, and gender is not only a matter of fairness; it constrains economic potential. When talent is shut out of higher-productivity work, the entire economy operates below capacity. The true measure of India’s urban success will not be the height of its skylines, but the breadth of its opportunities – and how far they reach.
View as PDF
Authors:
The discussion in this article is based on the authors' working paper on the subject, accessible at NCAER website. Views are personal.