India's labour market, given its workforce size, still remains far more informal than that of the US, the European Union or China. It has much to learn from other economies, yet must implement solutions that fit its unique circumstances. India especially needs an effective long-term labour regulatory framework based on collaboration rather than the current top-down approach. Labour regulations seek desirable outcomes yet are repeatedly used as political tools to push one agenda or another. Often, regulations fail to consider impacts on job creation and economic growth, or less restrictive alternatives. Regulations may be used to protect organised-sector incumbents at the expense of more widely shared prosperity in the future. In today's hyper-competitive global economy, labour regulations need to be viewed as instruments that seek cost-justified social benefits while improving the economic well-being of most workers.

On the basis of the above passage, the following assumptions have been made:

In today's global economy,

1. labour regulations are not effectively used to protect domestic industry.

2. worker-welfare concerns are generally ignored by governments while implementing labour regulations.

Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?