On December 18, 2025, the Delhi government ordered organisations in the capital to shift at least half of their workforce to remote working as part of emergency measures to address hazardous air pollution levels. The directive applies across government bodies and private establishments, with employers expected to ensure on-site attendance caps at 50 percent until air quality improves. This was formalised through a circular published last night, prompting HR, workplace safety, and facilities teams to urgently interpret how to operationalise the mandate while balancing productivity needs. Some essential services and frontline roles were purportedly exempt, but most office-based functions now face significant workplanning and attendance rule changes on extremely short notice.
HR Katha
For employees, emotions have run high. Many office workers welcomed the move as a relief and health-preserving step — especially parents of young children and those with respiratory issues. Others expressed anxiety about how productivity expectations will be managed or judged while remote. Many mid-level managers feel pressured because performance metrics and client commitments weren’t recalibrated with the policy, leading to fears of micromanagement or punitive evaluations. HR teams are experiencing a spike in internal queries, ranging from remote attendance tracking, expense reimbursement for home setups, and air-quality break policies to guidance on client communications. The sudden shift also rekindles work-life balance tensions as personal and professional boundaries blur under emergency conditions, with remote workers reporting both appreciation and burnout concerns.
From a compliance lens, the directive raises immediate HR governance issues. Employers must align workplace policies with government orders affecting working location parameters, which is unusual territory outside traditional labour statutes. While labour codes do not directly mandate remote work, this emergency directive creates a quasi-statutory requirement that HR must honour to avoid appearing non-cooperative with public safety directives. Attendance systems, payroll, performance KPIs, workplace safety protocols (e.g., air-quality breaks), and ergonomics policies must be reviewed and documented. HR must also ensure clarity around special allowances or reimbursement policies for remote working tools, and update employee communication SOPs to keep records of compliance with governmental health orders. Leadership should treat this as a risk and welfare imperative, demonstrating that environmental health directives are as binding as safety and wage obligations in maintaining statutory and moral compliance.
How should HR balance remote work mandates with measurable productivity expectations?
What policies should be put in place now to deal with future environmental work directives?
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
7HR Katha
For employees, emotions have run high. Many office workers welcomed the move as a relief and health-preserving step — especially parents of young children and those with respiratory issues. Others expressed anxiety about how productivity expectations will be managed or judged while remote. Many mid-level managers feel pressured because performance metrics and client commitments weren’t recalibrated with the policy, leading to fears of micromanagement or punitive evaluations. HR teams are experiencing a spike in internal queries, ranging from remote attendance tracking, expense reimbursement for home setups, and air-quality break policies to guidance on client communications. The sudden shift also rekindles work-life balance tensions as personal and professional boundaries blur under emergency conditions, with remote workers reporting both appreciation and burnout concerns.
From a compliance lens, the directive raises immediate HR governance issues. Employers must align workplace policies with government orders affecting working location parameters, which is unusual territory outside traditional labour statutes. While labour codes do not directly mandate remote work, this emergency directive creates a quasi-statutory requirement that HR must honour to avoid appearing non-cooperative with public safety directives. Attendance systems, payroll, performance KPIs, workplace safety protocols (e.g., air-quality breaks), and ergonomics policies must be reviewed and documented. HR must also ensure clarity around special allowances or reimbursement policies for remote working tools, and update employee communication SOPs to keep records of compliance with governmental health orders. Leadership should treat this as a risk and welfare imperative, demonstrating that environmental health directives are as binding as safety and wage obligations in maintaining statutory and moral compliance.
How should HR balance remote work mandates with measurable productivity expectations?
What policies should be put in place now to deal with future environmental work directives?
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Best HR Practices - Great Place to Work.doc
HR COMPLIANCE CHKLIST1.xls