ISRO Staff Bodies Seek Written Clarity on Privatisation and Future Role
ISRO employee bodies have formally sought written clarity from the Space Commission on privatisation, launch vehicle roles, and workforce impact.
In a first since India opened its space sector to private industry, nine employee bodies representing staff at ISRO centres have jointly raised formal concerns about the direction and basis of the transition. In a representation dated September 4, they have asked the chairman of the Space Commission for a written clarification.
The representation argues that private participation in defined commercial activities can coexist with a strong, publicly owned ISRO. However, it says a policy that reduces ISRO to a residual R&D boutique while launch vehicle realisation and launch infrastructure operations move out of public hands cannot be accepted without debate.
The bodies call ISRO's technology a national asset and insist that any transfer must be transparent and accountable. They state that serving employees have an earned right to be informed, consulted, and protected, and that policy of this magnitude should be explained by the Department itself.
The representation is signed by the ISRO Staff Association, SHAR Employees Association, ISAC Employees Association, ISRO Staff Association-LPSC, ISRO Staff Association-BBU, NRSA Employees Union, Space Employees Association-BBU, ISRO Staff Association-IPRC, and SAC Employees Welfare Association.
The employee bodies have sought clarity on a reported statement by IN-SPACe chairman Pawan Goenka that ISRO may eventually stop manufacturing launch vehicles. They ask whether this represents an approved decision of the government, Space Commission, or Department of Space, and if so, what authority approved it.
They also ask what ISRO's future mandated role will be, specifically whether design, development, realisation, integration, testing, and launch of PSLV, LVM-3, SSLV, and successor vehicles will continue as ISRO functions. They question whether any decision has been taken to exclude public sector undertakings from the proposed transfer of PSLV/LVM-3 production, and the justification for such exclusion.
Further, they seek written details on the institutional framework under which publicly developed technology, test facilities, launch complexes, and know-how built with taxpayer funds are being opened to private operators. They also ask for clarity on the respective roles of NSIL and IN-SPACe in such transfers.
The representation notes that ISRO was built as a national scientific institution with public funds, public purpose, and a public workforce. It says launch-vehicle design, realisation, integration, testing, and launch operations are core competence, institutional memory, and strategic capability, not merely manufacturing contracts.
The employee bodies express fear that a gradual withdrawal of ISRO from launch-vehicle and satellite realisation could render existing employees surplus, redeployed, or without meaningful work while private contractors perform the same tasks using publicly developed technology. They also warn that regular recruitment to Group A, B, and C posts may decline, denying opportunity to meritorious youth who see ISRO as a public career of honour.
The representation concludes by congratulating ISRO on the success of the GSLV-F17/EOS-05 mission and says it is submitted in a constructive and democratic spirit. The bodies are expected to act based on the written response.