The Code on Social Security, 2020 extends coverage to gig and platform workers for the first time. Critically examine whether its institutional design can deliver universal social security.

Sections 113–114 of the Code on Social Security, 2020 bring gig and platform workers into India's social security law for the first time [1]. The design is a real step forward. However, it depends on schemes and is run from the Centre, so it builds a framework for coverage rather than guaranteeing universal social security.

Strengths of the design

• Legal recognition: "gig worker", "platform worker" and "aggregator" are now defined in law. The government can notify schemes for life, disability, health, maternity and old-age cover [1].
• Shared funding: the Centre, States and aggregators can all fund schemes. Aggregators pay 1–2% of annual turnover into the fund [4].
• Digital access: registration on e-Shram, together with PM-JAY health cover, makes it possible to identify gig workers and reach them with benefits [3].
• A voice in the system: the National Social Security Board gives gig workers dedicated seats on an equal footing with aggregators [2].

Weaknesses that limit universality

• Schemes, not entitlements: EPF and ESIC give rights fixed by law. Under the Code, benefits depend on what the government chooses to notify, and there is no enforceable minimum [1].
• Funding cap: an aggregator's payment cannot exceed 5% of what it pays workers [4]. So the fund grows only as fast as worker payouts, and any extra cost falls on government budgets.
• Centralised, advisory board: the Union Labour Minister chairs it and the Centre nominates every member [2]. Workers hold only a few seats and do not elect them, which weakens tripartism (government, employers and workers deciding together).
• Federal gap: social security and labour welfare are on the Concurrent List [5]. Yet States, which deliver the schemes, have no guaranteed role in designing them.
• Scale: the gig workforce was 7.7 million in 2020–21 and is projected to reach 23.5 million (4.1% of the workforce) by 2029–30 [6]. Gig workers are not legally "employees", so workplace protections do not apply to them automatically.

Way forward

• Let trade unions put forward worker representatives, and give States seats on the board by rotation.
• Measure coverage by benefits actually received, not by the number of e-Shram registrations.
• Adopt NITI Aayog's suggestion that platforms provide paid sick leave, health access and insurance [6].

Overall, the Code builds the legal framework, but its funding model and the way its board is run fall short of universality. Making the board more representative, co-designing schemes with States and turning schemes into legal entitlements would bring it closer to Articles 41 and 43 [5] and to SDG target 1.3 on social protection for all.