If moonlighting were a pandemic, it would have had a solution by now or been eradicated because the whole world moonlights. The entire gig economy in the US, the UK, and the EU runs on people taking up two jobs or more and working on wages to make ends meet. This happens not only in blue-collared but white-collared jobs as well. The way moonlighting has been blown out of proportion in India today is ridiculous. For the uninitiated, moonlighting is working two jobs. It is seen as infidelity, not with your romantic partner but with your employer. In the case of adultery, Indian laws do not criminalise it anymore because it is "their life." The same will befall the judgment with moonlighting as legal systems warm up to the crisis.

Although we claim to be free people, the truth is that our employment at the skeleton is a master and servant relationship. This master-servant relationship assumes that one cannot sign a contract with another master without the explicit consent of the former. The day every employee understands this, the game will change. In India, IT businesses like Wipro, Tata, and Infosys crying foul over moonlighting, is outrageous. While Tata and Infosys have limited their stance to mere warnings in public appearances and emails so far, Wipro terminated 300 employees suspected of moonlighting. This is a rushed and poor judgment that deserves deeper speculation. In fact, this instance alone will help us understand the situation a lot better.

For insiders like us, it is clear that Wipro's move of firing 300 employees is not for moonlighting but cost-cutting. Wipro called it so to deflect its shareholders and the market at large to avoid signalling any incoming dip in its financials. You could connect the dots to the massive layoffs in India in 2022, when companies like Meesho, Byju's, Netflix, Lido, Microsoft, et al., laid off people to restructure their costs. There is no denying that people didn't moonlight; they probably worked at two jobs or more, but how is that unethical or unfair if specific charges against these employees couldn't be established? Yes, there is some speculation that these 300 moonlighters have been tracked through their Provident Fund (PF) deposits by Wipro's competitors. If all these 300 workers were working with 300 competitors of Wipro or just one, did any gig worker work post-office hours? How have the gig or part-time people been tracked? Have they been tracked through surveillance? If Wipro is fearful of its competitors, its competitors are also fearful of Wipro; that's the competitor mindset. So how have they been employed? Did the moonlighters get PF for part-time work?

In the space of technology, India has come a long way. Indian technologists in the IT sectors are the first preference for startups and enterprises working in the Industry 4.0 space. India's tech talent is helping India revive its brand image essential for the future of India. Now when this workforce loses its morale, isn't it systematically pushing them to mental illnesses? Isn't it only now that Indian corporates are trying to go mainstream with mental health?

Let's clarify that private companies or those listed on the stock market are not government jobs. They do not guarantee lifetime employment like government jobs. Barring people from working two jobs if they can without violating the contractual demands of the first company, is deplorable. Founders and hiring executives shouldn't expect employees to be passionate about their bottom line when they cannot respect or trust them completely. In India, thinking of money or making money has always been considered too aggressive. People have been labelled as money-minded, but if people do not think of their financial security, who will? And here, by barring employees from their side hustles, private companies are interfering in their financial life while paying poorly to their employees and giving meagre annual hikes through salary appraisals.

In the startup era, founders work two jobs while they build their startups until their hustle balloons up to demand attention full-time. I bet that management executives across companies engage in passive income sources. If the chief spokesperson of Wipro has said that moonlighting is an ethical issue, they have to explain if opaque salary structures are ethical. How do they discriminate against talent for salary compensation based on their academic and market situations?

I am glad that I am not alone in this conversation. Former CFO of Infosys, TV Mohandas Pai, Tech Mahindra's CEO CP Gurnani, Swiggy's Head of Human Resources Girish Menon and CRED's Kunal Shah are optimistic about moonlighting. These leaders clearly see that the future of India banks on the hustle economy. What incentives are businesses considering if they want to strictly limit workers from working two jobs? With 15 years of a career with Fortune 100 and 500s and small and medium businesses as a marketing and communications professional strategising brand communications, I say that it is time for companies to outgrow their irrational approach toward moonlighting as it is impossible to prevent. If businesses insist on preventing their employees from moonlighting, they will lose talent miserably because exceptional people don't sit at 9-5 jobs. They dwell in many ideas and practices to render a holistic approach to their prime jobs.

The best way to hire people for businesses would be to set clear expectations. At present, dual employment is a sub-clause in the offer letter, and it has led people to understand that they can work side jobs and hustle for extra income to support their ambitions and give a better life to their families. Going forward, companies should flesh out this "dual employment" sub-clause and start the interview process with this being the first point of discussion. This prevents both the employer and the candidate from wasting their time.

I understand it is difficult for legacy firms or startups to see their employees work two jobs. But the work culture is changing. The workplace today is highly educated or informed, and may I say that people have or are on the way to realising that their jobs are not their identities. Unlike previously, people now realise that companies are not doing any favours to employees by hiring them; it is all transactional. Where it is transactional, people won't care for the sentiments of the founder unless it is mutually beneficial. So founders and HRs need to bring transparency and freedom to profitably and securely work with their "moonlighters."

Linda Ashok is a poet, digital consultant, and technology and business journalist with StartuptoEnterprise.com. Views expressed here are the author’s own.