India's VB-G RAM G Employment Drops 43% to 70 Crore Person-Days in April-July
Updated
Updated · The Hindu · Aug 18
India's VB-G RAM G Employment Drops 43% to 70 Crore Person-Days in April-July
1 articles · Updated · The Hindu · Aug 18
Summary
70 crore person-days were generated under MGNREGA and VB-G RAM G in April-July 2026, down 43% from the average of the previous two years and marking a sharp hit to rural job creation.
July alone fell more than 40% from a year earlier even if the final total reaches 9 crore person-days, extending a slump that began during the delayed and confused shift from MGNREGA to VB-G RAM G.
10 of 19 major states recorded declines of 60% to 85%, while Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand saw employment generation nearly grind to a halt.
The collapse came despite a ₹95,692 crore Union allocation and a projected total budget near ₹1.5 lakh crore, which should have supported higher employment with wages broadly unchanged in real terms.
The weak launch raises doubts over whether planned spending can be achieved, with facial-recognition attendance and Centre-state cost sharing seen as added risks to wage payments and rollout.
Why did a scheme promising more rural jobs suddenly trigger a massive 43% collapse in employment generation?
With millions losing summer wages, will the rushed rollout of VB-G RAM G spark a rural economic crisis?
Are mandatory digital checks and new funding models secretly designed to phase out India's rural employment guarantee?
From MGNREGA to VB-G RAM G: The 2026 Rural Employment Collapse, Fiscal Strain, and the Future of Social Security in India
Overview
The July 2026 launch of the VB-G RAM G rural job scheme led to a historic drop in employment generation, as the new 60:40 Centre-state funding split forced states to shoulder much higher costs. Many poorer states struggled to pay their share, causing sharp declines in rural jobs and increased distress migration. The scheme also replaced the demand-driven model with a centralized, budget-capped system, reducing local control. Mandatory digital attendance and biometric systems created further barriers, especially in areas with poor connectivity, leaving many workers unpaid. As states diverted funds to match the Centre, other welfare programs suffered, deepening rural distress.