Bengaluru CEO says he won't hire men from UP, Bihar, Rajasthan, MP; faces backlash

A social media post by Karthik SG, founder and CEO of ToBengaluru, has triggered widespread criticism after he announced that his company would not hire male candidates from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

The controversy erupted after Karthik shared a post on X stating that following what he described as a lengthy internal discussion, the company had decided not to recruit men from the four states.

"We will not hire any male candidates in our company who come from these 4 states in north India," he wrote, before listing Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh.

The post quickly drew strong reactions online, with many users accusing the founder of promoting regional stereotyping and discriminatory hiring practices.

Posts cited safety concerns and workplace culture

In follow-up posts, Karthik attempted to explain the rationale behind the decision.

He said the company works with young children and argued that safeguarding was a priority. He also claimed that men from the identified states came from a culture with "no respect towards women and children" and "no value of human life".

Karthik further stated that the decision was linked to concerns around employee background verification, claiming police checks were not always reliable.

His comments appeared to be linked to recent reports of crimes against women, including a Bengaluru case referenced by users responding to the discussion.

Social media users challenge the decision

The remarks prompted immediate backlash across X.

Several users argued that hiring decisions should be based on individual qualifications, conduct and background checks rather than a candidate's state of origin.

Among the most widely shared responses was a post from entrepreneur Aditya Arya, who criticised the approach and said screening should focus on competence and character rather than entire populations.

Other users pointed out that crime occurs across India and questioned whether regional identity could reasonably be used as a proxy for workplace risk.

Some commenters also argued that excluding candidates from specific states could amount to discriminatory hiring practices.

A few users supported Karthik's position, saying organisations working with children should take extensive precautions during recruitment. However, criticism appeared to outweigh support across the discussion thread.

Debate expands beyond one company

The episode has reignited a broader debate around regional bias in recruitment and employment practices.

Similar controversies have surfaced in recent years when companies or recruiters have been accused of excluding candidates based on language, geography or regional identity. Such incidents have often drawn criticism from industry professionals and social media users who argue that employment decisions should focus on skills and suitability for the role rather than birthplace or regional background.

Neither the social media posts nor the screenshots circulating online indicate whether the hiring position has been formally implemented as company policy.

For now, the controversy continues to play out online, with discussions focusing on workplace safety, hiring ethics, regional stereotypes and the limits of employer discretion in recruitment decisions.