Author: PURNASRI BS, a student of symbiosis law school,nagpur
Abstract:
The rapidly growing gig economy, defined by digitally mediated short-term contracts and freelance labor, poses a serious challenge to conventional labor law models. This article discusses the shaky legal position of gig workers in India, who are usually treated as independent contractors and thereby denied fundamental labor rights like minimum wage, social security, and job security. The critique explores the determinants of this susceptibility, such as algorithmic regulation and lack of collective bargaining rights. Relying on the incipient understanding in the Code on Social Security, 2020, continued judicial oversight typified by Indian Federation Of App Based Transport Workers (IFAT) v. Union of India & Ors., and influential global precedents such as Uber BV v Aslam, this article contends in favor of an overall legal framework. It advocates statutory recognition of a separate “worker” category, regulation of algorithmic management, promotion of collective bargaining, and the creation of portable social security benefits to provide a just and equitable future for this growing workforce.
Introduction:
The growing gig economy, characterized by short-term contracts and freelance labor largely enabled by digital platforms, has seen exponential growth worldwide, including in India. A gig worker, as per legal definition under Section 2(35) of the Code on Social Security, 2020, is a person who undertakes work or enters into a work arrangement and derives income from such work outside of the conventional employer-employee relation. This term covers a vast range of occupations, from ride-hailing and delivery staff to freelance writers and designers.
Even though they play a crucial role in the country’s economy, gig workers often find themselves working in a lacuna of proper legal protection. This is mainly due to their designation by the enabling platforms as “independent contractors” or “partners,” thus keeping them outside the ambit of traditional labor laws carefully crafted for the protection of employees. Accordingly, such workers are usually denied basic rights like the guarantee of a minimum wage, right to paid leave, access to wide-ranging social security benefits such as health insurance and pensions, the protection of workers’ compensation upon injury, and protection from arbitrary dismissal. The fact that there is no formal employer-employee relationship leaves them extremely susceptible to one-sided and frequently arbitrary intervention by the platforms, with narrow channels of effective recourse available through current legal systems.
Factors Aggravating the Shortage of Legal Protection
A number of interrelated factors contribute to aggravate this glaring shortage of legal protection for gig workers. The algorithmic regulation often imposed by the platforms on key elements of the work process, such as work assignment, pricing strategies, and performance measurement metrics, tends to obscure the traditional boundaries of autonomy historically tied to independent contractors. Algorithmic management can well mimic de facto employment, with high levels of control and guidance from the platform, without the attendant extension of employment benefits and protections. In addition, the common lack of collective bargaining rights further compromises the capacity of gig workers to organize and bargain for better terms and conditions of their engagement. The intrinsic precarity and uncertainty that mark gig work, with variable incomes and an overall atmosphere of job insecurity, are in sharp contrast to the relative stability and predictability usually enjoyed by persons in traditional employment relationships.
International and Indian Legal Developments
Meeting this goal requires a multi-pronged approach, taking relevant inspiration from developed international legal principles and progressive judicial rulings. The U.K. Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Uber BV v Aslam (2021) is emblematic of this, where the court labeled Uber drivers as “workers” with respect to basic employment rights like minimum wage and paid leave. This ruling places pivotal emphasis on the judicial necessity of considering the underlying reality of the working relationship, in terms of the level of control and dependence, instead of being solely dependent upon the contractual designations made by the platforms. This acknowledgement of a mid-position “worker” status, between “employee” and “independent contractor,” may prove a useful possible template for developing a complex legal category that accords certain necessary employee rights to gig workers without necessarily saddling them with the full range of traditional employment obligations.
Globally, there is a clear and increasing awareness of the need to modify current labor legislation to the specific nature and issues posed by the emerging gig economy. The efforts of the European Union towards bettering the working conditions of platform workers, such as particular suggestions of higher transparency in algorithmic management techniques and higher access to social security protections, indicate this developing world trend towards higher protection for gig workers. In a similar vein, certain jurisdictions, like the state of California in the United States (via the passage of Assembly Bill 5, though later amended through Proposition 22), have sought to reclassify specific types of gig workers as employees, though with mixed success and in the face of continued legal challenges and controversies over the scope and effect of such reclassification efforts.
The Indian Context and Judicial Scrutiny
Within the Indian context, though the implementation of the Code on Social Security, 2020, signifies an important breakthrough by categorically recognizing “gig workers” and “platform workers” as separate categories qualifying for specific social security schemes, the effective enactment of this statutory regime has been characteristically sluggish, and the same fails to deal comprehensively with the seminal and urgent matters of decent wages, reasonable work conditions, and basic job protection for these laborers. The continued consideration by the Supreme Court of India of petitions to grant blanket social security cover to gig workers, as witnessed in the high-profile Public Interest Litigation (Indian Federation Of App Based Transport Workers (IFAT) v. Union of India & Ors.), points to the growing judicial acknowledgment of the vulnerable and precarious nature of much gig worker employment. Recent hearings in this vital case, as of February 2025, show the Supreme Court’s concern over the undue delay in making the Social Security Code, 2020, effective. The court has requested the Union Government to speed up the vital exercise of framing and notifying the requisite rules and regulations under this Code to give much-needed and overdue protection to gig workers across the country. The matter remains under active consideration by the apex court.
Moving Towards a Comprehensive Legal Framework
- Moving forward, the establishment of a comprehensive and effective legal framework specifically tailored to the realities of gig work is an imperative. This framework could involve several key components:
- Legal acknowledgment of a separate “worker” category specifically for gig workers, affording them a minimal and non-negotiable package of basic rights such as a floor on the minimum wage, right to a paid sick leave, and compulsory accident insurance coverage, while at the same time recognizing the intrinsic flexibility that tends to define their employment arrangements.
- Efficient regulation of algorithmic management practices utilized by the platforms to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability in processes like work allocation, determination of prices, and performance assessment, hence preventing risks of arbitrary or discriminatory treatment.
- Enabling the exercise of collective bargaining rights for gig workers to empower them to organize and negotiate for better terms and conditions of their engagement, thus responding to the power imbalance between a single worker and the big platforms.
- Creating portable social security benefits that are not tied to a particular platform, so that there is continuity of coverage for gig workers who might work on several platforms or have unemployment spells.
- Creation of effective enforcement mechanisms that can guarantee consistent compliance by the platforms with the legal framework established and accessible and effective grievance redressal mechanisms for gig workers in case of violations of their rights.
Conclusion
The current inadequacy of legal protection for gig workers is a serious and increasingly urgent issue in the fast-changing employment landscape. Learning from best practices in global jurisprudence, like the compelling precedent of Uber BV v Aslam, and embracing proactive, forward-looking, and contextually appropriate legal frameworks that unequivocally recognize the distinct nature of gig work while firmly upholding basic labor rights, is absolutely essential to secure a fair, equitable, and sustainable future of work for this growing and increasingly important segment of the labor force. The ongoing denial of gig workers basic legal protections not only continues to perpetuate their inherent vulnerability and economic insecurity but also fundamentally erodes the fundamental principles of social justice and economic equity that underlie a fair and equitable society. The ongoing judicial intervention in cases such as the IFAT litigation provides a glimmer of hope for a more protective legal regime for gig workers in India.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) regarding Legal Protection for Gig Workers
1.What is a gig worker, exactly, under Indian law?
Answer: According to Section 2(35) of the Code on Social Security, 2020, a gig worker is a person who undertakes work or engages in a work arrangement and receives payment for such activities outside the normal employer-employee relationship. This includes different types of roles that are arranged primarily through digital platforms.
2. Why are gig workers usually not accorded the same legal protections as employees?
Answer: The chief reason is their designation by platforms as “independent contractors” or “partners” instead of as “employees.” This designation frees platforms from the burdens imposed by traditional labor legislation with regards to minimum wage, social security, paid time off, and protection from unjust dismissal, leaving gig workers in a gap of legal protection.
3. Are there any international legal developments or case laws available that provide possible solutions for safeguarding gig workers?
Answer: Yes. The UK Supreme Court decision in Uber BV v Aslam (2021) is an important precedent, designating Uber drivers as “workers” and making them subject to certain workers’ rights. Secondly, the European Union has also been aggressively discussing legislative initiatives aimed at enhancing platform workers’ working conditions and social security entitlement.
4. How can legal protection for gig workers be enhanced in India?
Answer: A number of steps could be taken, including:
- Legal recognition of a separate “worker” category with an elementary set of rights.
- Regulation of algorithmic management to make it fair and transparent.
- Enabling collective bargaining for platform workers.
- Creating portable social security entitlements.
- Introducing effective enforcement mechanisms.
5.Is the Code on Social Security, 2020, sufficient to protect gig workers in India?
Answer: Although the Code on Social Security, 2020, is a welcome move in the sense that it identifies gig and platform workers as separate categories of workers who can avail certain social security schemes, it fails to cover important aspects such as fair wages, working conditions, and job security. Its enactment has also been delayed, and the sufficiency of its provisions continues to be a matter of debate and judicial examination, as exemplified by the IFAT v. Union of India case.
References:
- The Code on Social Security, 2020, Act No. 36 of 2020 (India).
- Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 51.
- Indian Federation Of App Based Transport Workers (IFAT) v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 704 of 2020 (Supreme Court of India) (pending).
- The Unorganized Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008, Act No. 33 of 2008 (India).
