Gig and platform workers represent the new face of labour precarity in India. Evaluate the adequacy of existing legal frameworks in protecting their rights.

Q. Gig and platform workers represent the new face of labour precarity in India. Evaluate the adequacy of existing legal frameworks in protecting their rights. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

The Code on Social Security, 2020 became the first Indian statute to define "gig worker" and "platform worker" — those earning outside a traditional employer-employee relationship [1]. This ended their legal invisibility, but recognition without enforceable collective rights makes the framework partially adequate at best.

Where the framework delivers - Statutory recognition: gig and platform workers are now a defined category, with schemes mandated for life and disability cover, accident insurance, health and maternity benefits, and old-age protection [2]. - Dedicated financing: aggregators must contribute 1–2% of annual turnover (capped at 5% of payments made to such workers) to a Social Security Fund, covering nine aggregator categories in Schedule 7 — ride-hailing, food delivery, e-marketplaces [1]. - Operationalisation: the four Labour Codes were brought into force on 21 November 2025, and an aggregator module on the e-Shram portal has onboarded 12 major aggregators, with over 5 lakh gig workers registered by November 2025 [2].

Where it falls short - No collective bargaining rights: gig workers remain outside the Trade Unions Act, 1926, which extends registration and immunity from civil suit only to workers in a recognised trade dispute [3]. The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 mechanism of a negotiating union (51% membership) presumes an employer they do not legally have [4]. - Classification gap: treated as neither employee nor independent contractor, they fall outside minimum wage, hours-of-work and dispute-resolution guarantees. - Welfare, not rights: benefits are scheme-based and discretionary rather than justiciable entitlements. - Global commitments: India has still not ratified ILO Conventions 87 and 98 on freedom of association and collective bargaining [5].

Verdict: the framework is adequate as a first-generation social security instrument but inadequate as a labour rights charter. Extending the freedom guaranteed by Article 19(1)(c) to platform work — through a clear employment-status test, algorithmic transparency, and a statutory bargaining forum with aggregators — would align India with SDG 8 on decent work and convert recognition into real protection.

(~320 words)

Sources: 1. PRS Legislative Research — The Code on Social Security, 2020 — definitions of gig/platform worker; aggregator contribution of 1–2% of turnover capped at 5% of payments; Schedule 7 aggregator categories 2. PIB — Social Security for Gig and Platform Workers, Ministry of Labour & Employment — Labour Codes in force from 21.11.2025; e-Shram aggregator module, 12 aggregators onboarded, 5.09 lakh gig workers registered 3. India Code — The Trade Unions Act, 1926 (Act No. 16 of 1926) — registration of trade unions and immunity from civil suit in furtherance of a trade dispute 4. PRS Legislative Research — The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 — sole negotiating union at 51% membership; negotiating council at 20% 5. ILO NORMLEX — Up-to-date Conventions not ratified by India — India has not ratified Conventions No. 87 and No. 98