Manpower Entrepreneurs’ Protest: Causes and Demands
Foreign employment entrepreneurs have announced the suspension of all processes for sending workers abroad starting from September 17, demanding 15 specific points. The government has taken action against these entrepreneurs over allegations of using Indian airports for sending workers, with disputes over service fees at the center of the issue. Labor experts warn that closing manpower agencies could increase risks of fraud and human trafficking through brokers, emphasizing the need for government intervention.
Kathmandu, August 11 – Following increased governmental action against manpower entrepreneurs, they have decided to halt sending Nepali workers abroad from September 17, presenting a 15-point list of demands. The dispute revolves mainly around two issues: the use of airports outside Nepal, particularly Indian airports, to dispatch workers, and the service fees charged by entrepreneurs. Long-standing policy challenges, weak regulatory oversight, costly airfares, inadequate labor diplomacy, and financial burdens on workers are key underlying causes.
Government action regarding workers sent via India is a central agenda item. Nepalese law prohibits using Indian airports for sending workers and requires relevant authorities to be notified if such use is necessary. Entrepreneurs have been penalized for violating this regulation. However, labor expert Rameshwar Nepal notes that the government failed to monitor enforcement for an extended period and only recently began taking corrective measures. Questions arise as to why regulatory bodies neglected oversight despite widespread use of Indian airports. Nepal says, “Though penalties after violations are necessary, it is important to question why regulators delayed enforcement for so long.” He adds this problem has surfaced during the current administration and should not be attributed solely to the previous government.
Nevertheless, the state’s actions cannot be dismissed solely based on entrepreneurs’ claims. The department had already issued directives concerning sending workers via India and has fined some organizations violating these rules. This highlights a conflict between entrepreneurs’ assertions that government actions are baseless and the state’s responsibility to enforce laws against violations.
Entrepreneurs justify choosing Indian airports due to high ticket prices. According to Dik Bahadur Khatri, President of the Nepal Foreign Employment Entrepreneurs Association, airfares for Nepali workers have risen sharply, with entrepreneurs perceiving this as an artificially created scarcity. Ticket prices have reportedly tripled, increasing financial pressure on workers, thus pushing the use of Indian airports.
Labor expert Dr. Meena Paudel states that sending workers through India contravenes Nepalese law, which mandates dispatch through domestic airports. While government agencies can intervene if workers face mistreatment by employers abroad, absence of documented exit records due to Indian transit may complicate investigations. The department warns that unofficial routes facilitate brokers in showing visas for alternate countries, charging higher fees, and assigning different jobs, thereby increasing risks of exploitation.
Entrepreneurs call for an environment where laws can be complied with. President Khatri asserts that the protest stems not only from government actions but also reflects decade-old appeals to regulate and dignify the foreign employment industry. He cites conflicts arising when old practices collide with new policies, stressing the need for policy reforms.
Service fee disputes: Cost to entrepreneurs or burden on workers? Another key demand is to establish scientific criteria for service fees, currently fixed at around NPR 10,000 but often supplemented unofficially. Labor expert Rameshwar Nepal agrees fees should be updated over time but stresses they must not excessively burden workers. He suggests that employer countries, destination states, and the government also have roles to play in resolving fee-related disputes, beyond focusing solely on how much entrepreneurs pay.
Dr. Meena Paudel emphasizes that while manpower entrepreneurs operate privately and must face penalties for legal violations, the state’s regulatory role is equally crucial. She advocates a balanced approach of dialogue and reform rather than harsh enforcement without consultation.
A primary concern for Dr. Paudel is the adverse impact on workers during manpower agency closures. Given the large daily outflow of workers, the September 17 suspension will directly affect many, risking increased illegal migration and higher exposure to human trafficking and fraud due to broker dependence.
According to official data, in fiscal year 2025/26, over 792,000 workers received labor permits, with approximately 268,000 dispatched through manpower companies. About 700 to 800 workers depart daily via these agencies, raising apprehensions over negative effects on youth if the shutdown prolongs.
The controversial demand to suspend individual labor permits is also raised by these entrepreneurs, but labor experts oppose it. Their argument is that any individual authorized by the employer and destination country must be able to travel abroad freely, a principle termed ‘freedom of mobility.’
“Not all demands are wrong, but not all are acceptable,” notes the entrepreneurs’ 15-point list. Experts consider demands for scientifically set service fees, cheaper airfares, strengthened labor agreements, improved complaint mechanisms, and enhanced labor diplomacy as reasonable. However, the insistence on allowing worker dispatch via India and increasing service fees contradicts worker interests, they say.
State’s supervisory role? Khatri highlights the need for policy reforms, stating the government must establish solid foundations for operations before penalizing violations. He points out that the current NPR 10,000 service fee exemplifies a failing system unable to sustain itself effectively, advocating that fees should be linked scientifically to workers’ salaries.
Regarding negotiations, the entrepreneurs’ association submitted their 15 demands to the government on July 23. The government has pledged to work towards a prompt resolution, but formal talks remain inconclusive. Ministry spokesperson Pitambar Ghimire noted that discussions are ongoing as needed. Khatri noted that although the initial memorandum was presented to the department, the government has yet to engage in substantial dialogue. He urged the government to expedite policy updates.
