Women in India earn less than men in several major employment categories, but there is no single percentage that captures the entire wage gap. The latest official figures in the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation’s PLFS Annual Report 2025 show average earnings by employment status; they are not comparisons of men and women doing the same work under the same conditions. A separate IMF estimate puts the gender earnings gap at 37 percent using a different method and a different period. These figures describe different things and should not be treated as interchangeable.
What the latest official figures show
The Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) separates workers into regular wage or salaried work, self-employment, and casual labour. Its 2025 annual report, released by India’s Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation on 27 March 2026, reports the following average earnings for men and women:
| Employment category | Men | Women | What the figure represents |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regular wage/salaried work | ₹24,217 | ₹18,353 | Average earnings in this employment category in 2025; not a controlled comparison of equal work. |
| Self-employment | ₹17,914 | ₹6,374 | Average earnings among self-employed workers in 2025; not evidence of a same-job wage penalty. |
| Casual labour, excluding public works | ₹455 per day | ₹315 per day | Average daily earnings in this category in 2025. |
These are category averages, not a measure of what a particular woman would earn if she were a man doing an otherwise identical job. Each can reflect differences in occupation, industry, working time, experience, location, and other characteristics, as well as differences in pay. The figures are nominal earnings for the categories and period reported; they do not, by themselves, explain why the averages differ.
Why there is no single “gender wage gap” figure
Raw earnings gaps describe observed averages
A raw gap compares the earnings of women and men in a defined population without first making the groups alike on other factors. It can be reported using mean or median earnings. The result depends on the workers included and the earnings unit: hourly, daily, or monthly. A national average for all workers is not the same statistic as a comparison limited to salaried employees, or one comparing hourly pay.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
Raw measures are useful for describing the overall earnings difference people experience across a labour market. But where women and men are concentrated in different kinds of work, hours, or parts of the wage distribution, the raw figure combines those differences with pay differences within comparable jobs.
Adjusted or factor-weighted measures answer a different question
The International Labour Organization’s Global Wage Report 2024–25 explains that a factor-weighted approach can compare more homogeneous groups using characteristics such as age, education, and working time, then weight the gaps across those groups. This can make comparisons more informative where employment participation is low or wage distributions are irregular or clustered.
Such a measure is not automatically an estimate of discrimination alone. The result depends on the factors included, how groups are defined, and the weighting method. Adjustment can help separate parts of an observed difference; it cannot make every relevant difference measurable or establish a single cause.
Rank #2
The IMF’s 37 percent estimate is not a PLFS 2025 category gap
The IMF’s India 2024 Article IV staff report, published in 2025, cites a 37 percent gender earnings gap estimated using PLFS microdata from July 2017 to June 2024. That is a model-based estimate for its stated period and method. It is not the percentage difference between the 2025 PLFS category averages above, and it should not be read as a controlled estimate of unequal pay for the same work.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Why PLFS 2025 is difficult to compare with earlier annual reports
From January 2025, the PLFS changed its sampling methodology and shifted from a July–June survey year to a January–December calendar year. The Ministry’s 2025 annual report cautions that its annual estimates may not be strictly comparable with estimates in earlier annual PLFS reports. A reader comparing a 2025 figure with an earlier annual result should account for both the survey redesign and the changed reference period rather than assume the series is continuous on identical terms.
How work, sector, and location shape observed differences
Average earnings can vary because women and men are not distributed identically across employment status, occupation, sector, hours, and location. Barriers to entering or remaining in paid employment also affect who is counted among workers. Those patterns matter to the raw gap, but they do not on their own establish why any particular worker is paid less.
Employment status and working time
The PLFS categories illustrate why combining workers into one number can obscure important differences. Regular salaried work, self-employment, and casual labour involve different ways of earning and different measurement units in the figures reported here. In particular, self-employment averages should not be described as wages for equivalent jobs, and daily casual-labour earnings should not be compared directly with monthly or hourly measures.
Sector and location
The World Bank’s India Country Economic Memorandum 2024 reports lower earnings for women than men in many sectors and in both regular wage/salaried employment and self-employment, while the size of the difference varies by sector and location. Its analysis describes rural and urban patterns and notes an exception in modern market services for urban women. These are patterns in the memorandum’s data and definitions, not claims about every worker or proof of one common cause.
Occupation and sector composition can affect the overall average even if pay within a particular job is similar. Conversely, an overall average cannot rule out unequal pay within comparable work. To assess the latter, a study needs a well-defined comparison of workers and jobs and a method that accounts for relevant differences; the PLFS category averages alone do not supply that comparison.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What policy can address
Addressing the earnings gap involves both wage-setting and the conditions that shape women’s access to paid work. The policy sources discuss complementary approaches; they do not establish a specific effect size for each intervention.
Wage-setting and enforcement
The ILO India Wage Report examines minimum wages, collective bargaining, wage trends, and implementation challenges. It frames effective wage policy as one way to address exceptionally low wages, meet workers’ and families’ needs, and support equitable development. These tools concern wage standards and bargaining power; they do not alone resolve differences in employment opportunities or care and mobility constraints.
Access to employment
The IMF staff report identifies possible measures that include addressing discriminatory employment and compensation practices, improving enabling services and time-saving infrastructure, addressing safety concerns, improving public transport, and advancing skilling and active labour-market policies. These are policy proposals in the report, not evidence that any one measure will eliminate the observed gap by itself.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Best Value
The ILO Decent Work Country Programme for India 2023–2027 provides a broader institutional framework. It is an ILO programme with tripartite constituents, aligned with national priorities and the UN 2030 Agenda, rather than an evaluation of a particular wage-gap intervention.
How to compare two wage-gap statistics fairly
Before treating two figures as evidence that the gap rose or fell, check whether they describe the same population and measure:
- Earnings unit: Are the figures hourly, daily, or monthly?
- Summary statistic: Do they compare means or medians?
- Adjustment: Is the gap raw, adjusted, or factor-weighted, and which characteristics enter the method?
- Worker group: Does the comparison cover all workers or a specific employment status, sector, occupation, or formal/informal group?
- Location: Are the workers rural, urban, or drawn from both?
- Reference period and survey design: Do the figures cover the same dates and use a comparable survey method? This is especially important when comparing PLFS 2025 with earlier annual reports.
If any of these differ, the statistics may still be useful, but they are answering different questions. State the definition and period alongside the number rather than presenting it as a universal measure of equal pay.
Further reading
The ILO’s India Wage Report provides additional context on wages, minimum-wage policy, and collective bargaining in India. Its publication date is 20 August 2018, so it is useful for policy context rather than as the latest annual estimate of the gender gap.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
