Union Labour Ministry sets up social security Boards for unorganised, gig, platform workers

1. At a Glance

• On 30 Oct 2026 the Union Labour Ministry notified two statutory bodies under the Code on Social Security, 2020: the National Social Security Board for Unorganised Workers (40 members) and the National Social Security Board for Gig & Platform Workers (22 members) [1].
• Both Boards design, monitor and recommend targeted welfare schemes. One covers traditional unorganised workers and the other covers gig and platform workers [1].
• The Code is the first Indian law to bring gig and platform workers into social security, alongside the long-standing unorganised workforce [6][4].
• UPSC relevance: labour codes, the gig economy, welfare of vulnerable sections, federalism (Centre and State roles), and how statutory bodies are designed.

2. Why in the News

• 30 Oct 2026 (Friday): the Labour Ministry notified the constitution of both Boards. The Hindu reported it in its 31 Oct 2026 print edition (Chennai, p. 18) [1].
• Union Minister for Labour & Employment Mansukh Mandaviya chairs both Boards. The Union Labour Secretary is vice-chairman of both [1].
• This comes after the Social Security Code was operationalised, which PIB publicised through explainers in late 2025 [3][4].

3. Background & Evolution

• Rationale: most of India's workforce is informal, and gig/platform workers fall outside the traditional employer–employee relationship. This leaves them without access to EPF/ESI-type protection [6][5].
• 2020: Parliament enacted the Code on Social Security, 2020 [2][5].
• It provides for a National Social Security Board for unorganised workers.

• The same Board may also act as the Board for gig & platform workers [2].

• 2020 Bill design (PRS): the gig-related composition included [2]:

• 5 aggregator representatives, nominated by the Centre
• 5 gig/platform worker representatives
• the DG, ESIC

• 5 State government representatives

• Mar 2023: PIB reiterated that the Code envisages social security benefits for gig and platform workers [6].

• Nov 2024: PIB noted that a committee was formed to suggest a framework for gig/platform worker benefits [5].
• Nov 2025: PIB published explainers presenting the Code as a move "towards universal and inclusive social protection" and as "formalising and safeguarding India's gig & platform workforce" [3][4].
• Oct 2026: the government chose two separate Boards rather than one Board doing both jobs, which the Code also allows [1][2].

4. Core Static Facts

Functions of the Boards [1]:

• Recommend suitable schemes for different sections of unorganised, gig and platform workers.
• Advise the Union government on administering the Social Security Code.
• Monitor welfare schemes for these workers.
• Review record-keeping done at the State level.
• Review spending from the fund and account.
• Carry out any other functions the Centre assigns.

5. Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Economic

• The aggregator levy (1–2% of turnover, capped at 5% of worker payouts) makes platforms pay part of welfare costs without creating an employer–employee relationship [2][3].
• Including aggregator companies on the Boards brings industry into scheme design. That could make compliance easier, but it also risks regulatory capture [1].

Social

• Gig workers and traditional unorganised workers (home-based, agricultural, construction and similar) get separate Boards. This recognises that their needs differ [1].
• Covering maternity, health and disability benefits helps women and other vulnerable informal workers [3].

Legal / Constitutional

• The Boards are statutory bodies under the Code on Social Security, 2020 [1][2].
• Social security is in the Concurrent List (Entry 23, List III), so both the Centre and the States act on it. This explains why States sit on the Boards and why Boards review State-level record-keeping [1]. (The Entry number is a constitutional fact and is not in the retrieved sources.)
• The Code allowed one Board to serve both groups. Notifying two Boards is a policy choice made within that discretion [2][1].

Ethical / Governance

• Representation of several stakeholders (unions, civil society, aggregators) supports participatory governance [1].
• Reviewing expenditure from the fund builds accountability into how the levy money is used [1].
• Concern: the Boards are recommendatory and advisory. The Union executive keeps decision-making power and sets the procedural rules [1].

Administrative

• Meeting at least three times a year is a low frequency for monitoring a fast-growing sector [1].
• Implementation depends on State-level records and registration, so Centre–State coordination is critical [1][3].

6. Recent Developments (last 12–18 months)

• Nov 2025: PIB backgrounder "Code on Social Security, 2020: Towards Universal and Inclusive Social Protection" [3].
• Late 2025: PIB release "Labour Reforms: Formalising and Safeguarding India's Gig & Platform Workforce" [4].
• 30 Oct 2026: both National Social Security Boards notified, with 40 and 22 members [1].

7. Prelims Hooks

• The National Social Security Board for Unorganised Workers has 40 members [1].
• The National Social Security Board for Gig & Platform Workers has 22 members [1].
• Chairperson of both Boards: Union Minister for Labour & Employment [1].
• Vice-chairperson of both Boards: Union Labour Secretary, not the DG of ESIC or EPFO [1].
• The Boards must meet at least thrice a year [1].
• The Boards' rules of procedure are prescribed by the Union government [1].
• Parent statute: Code on Social Security, 2020 [2].
• Aggregator contribution: 1–2% of annual turnover, capped at 5% of payments to gig/platform workers [2][3].
• The Social Security Fund is financed by Central and State government contributions, plus aggregator contributions [3][2].
• The DG, ESIC was among the members proposed for the gig-worker Board in the 2020 Bill [2].
• The Code allows the unorganised workers' Board to also act as the gig workers' Board [2].
• Board functions include reviewing State-level record-keeping and expenditure from the fund [1].

8. Why Advisory Boards Alone May Not Change Much on the Ground

• The Boards can suggest schemes, but cannot start them
• The Boards recommend, advise and monitor. The Union government decides whether a scheme is actually notified and funded [1][2].
• The Centre also writes the Boards' rules of procedure (how meetings run and how decisions are taken) [1].

• So a Board can call for a pension scheme in every meeting, and nothing has to happen unless the Ministry acts.

• The chair who receives the advice is also the person who gives it

• The Labour Minister chairs both Boards and the Labour Secretary is vice-chair [1].

• The same Ministry that is meant to act on the advice is leading the body that gives it. That makes it hard for the Board to criticise the Ministry's own delays in public.

• The balance of seats leans towards government and industry

• In the 2020 design, aggregators (platform companies like food-delivery or ride-hailing apps) got 5 seats nominated by the Centre. Workers also got 5, and governments and officials such as the DG, ESIC took the rest [2].

• Workers can be outvoted by government and aggregator members put together. This is how regulatory capture can happen: the companies that pay the levy also help shape the schemes paid for by that levy.

• The law gave no deadline, and it took six years to set up the Boards

• The Code was passed in 2020. A committee to suggest a gig-worker framework was set up only by Nov 2024, and the Boards were notified in Oct 2026 [2][5][1].
• Meeting just three times a year, the Boards may not keep up with a workforce that is growing very fast (see next section) [1][7].

9. A Small Workforce Today, Three Times Bigger by 2030

• The gig Board is planning for a group that will soon be much larger
• NITI Aayog estimated 77 lakh (7.7 million) gig workers in 2020–21. That is only 1.5% of India's total workforce [7].
• It projects 2.35 crore (23.5 million) by 2029–30, about 6.7% of the non-farm workforce [7].

• Schemes designed for today's numbers will be under-funded within a few years unless money grows with the workforce.

• The levy grows with the sector, but only up to a cap

• Aggregators pay 1–2% of turnover, but never more than 5% of what they pay workers [2][3].

• Because of the 5% cap, the money collected moves with worker payouts, not with platform profits. If a platform earns more from ads or fees but pays workers less, the levy can fall.

• The Fund depends on government money too

• The Social Security Fund also needs Centre and State contributions [3].
• Poorer States may find it hard to pay their share. Workers in those States could end up with weaker benefits than workers doing the same job in richer States.

10. The Question the Boards Do Not Answer: Are Gig Workers Employees?

• The Code made gig workers a separate group, not employees
• Gig and platform workers sit outside the traditional employer–employee relationship. So the Code gives them welfare schemes instead of EPF/ESI-type rights [6][5].

• Welfare schemes are not the same as workplace rights. They do not give a minimum wage, a limit on working hours, or protection from being dropped from an app without a reason.

• The strongest objection: a 'separate category' lets platforms escape employer duties

• Critics argue that if an app sets the price, assigns the work and can de-activate a worker, it is acting like an employer.
• The ILO's new Convention No. 193 (adopted June 2026, the first global standard on platform work) asks countries to decide employment status from the facts — how the work is actually done and how workers are paid — not from what the contract calls it [8][9].

• India's Boards were not given any power to make this decision. A rider who is really an employee stays a 'gig worker' under the Code.

• What the objection gets wrong — and what it gets right

• Even the ILO did not create a presumption of employment (an automatic legal assumption that every platform worker is an employee). Employers opposed it, and the Convention does not ban self-employment [9][10].
• Many gig workers choose flexible hours or work on several apps at once. A blanket employee label would not fit all of them.
• But the critics are right on one point. Without a facts-based test, a platform can design its contracts to stay outside labour law, and India has no way yet to check this.
• Fair conclusion: the Boards are a useful safety net, but they do not replace a clear rule on who counts as an employee.

11. What the Boards Should Push For First

• Labour Ministry: set a deadline for acting on Board advice
• Today there is no time limit for the Centre to respond to a Board recommendation [1].

• The Ministry could, through its procedural rules, require a written reply within a fixed time — accepted, or rejected with reasons. Those rules are already in the Centre's hands [1].

• Gig Board: recommend income-loss cover, not just insurance

• NITI Aayog reviewed protections used in other countries: paid sick leave, access to health care and insurance, and income support [7].

• A delivery rider who is injured loses daily earnings at once. Accident cover pays for treatment but does not replace that lost income.

• Centre: check the Code against ILO Convention No. 193

• C193 covers platform workers whatever their legal status, and asks for correct classification [8][9].

• The Labour Ministry could ask the gig Board to compare the Code with C193 and say where India falls short. That would set up any future decision on ratifying the Convention.

• Both Boards: publish what they review

• The Boards already review State record-keeping and spending from the Fund [1].
• Publishing State-wise registration and spending figures would show which States are behind, and give workers' unions evidence to use.

12. Anchors for Answers

• Data: 77 lakh gig workers in 2020–21 (1.5% of total workforce), projected 2.35 crore by 2029–30 (6.7% of non-farm workforce) — NITI Aayog [7]
• Data: Aggregator levy of 1–2% of turnover, capped at 5% of payouts to workers [2][3]
• Report/Committee: NITI Aayog, "India's Booming Gig and Platform Economy" (2022) — recommends social security in partnership mode, as the Code envisages [7]
• Law/Case: Code on Social Security, 2020; social security is in the Concurrent List (Entry 23, List III)
• Comparison: ILO Convention No. 193 on Decent Work in the Platform Economy (June 2026) — decides employment status from the facts and protects all platform workers whatever their status, while India uses a separate 'gig worker' category with welfare schemes [8][9]
• Scheme: e-Shram portal — registration of unorganised and gig workers, the base the Boards' schemes depend on

13. Mains Relevance

• GS-II: welfare schemes for vulnerable sections; mechanisms, laws, institutions and bodies set up to protect them; statutory bodies.
• GS-III: inclusive growth; employment; the effect of the platform economy on labour markets.
• GS-IV (minor): fairness in algorithmic work; corporate responsibility.
• Possible questions: 1. The Code on Social Security, 2020 marks a shift from employer-based to universal social protection. Examine with reference to gig and platform workers. (15 marks) 2. Critically evaluate the role of the National Social Security Boards in securing welfare for India's unorganised and gig workforce. Are advisory bodies enough? (10 marks) 3. Discuss the challenges of extending social security to platform workers, given their ambiguous employment status. (15 marks)

14. Related Topics to Study Next

• The four Labour Codes (Wages; Industrial Relations; OSH; Social Security): to understand the full consolidation of labour law.
• e-Shram portal: the national database used to register unorganised and gig workers.
• Ayushman Bharat PM-JAY for gig workers: extends health cover to platform workers.
• State gig-worker laws (Rajasthan 2023, Karnataka, Telangana): State-level models that came before the Central Boards.
• ESIC and EPFO: the institutions that may administer benefits.
• ILO Social Protection Floors Recommendation (No. 202): the global benchmark for universal social protection.
• NITI Aayog report "India's Booming Gig and Platform Economy" (2022): source of workforce size estimates.

15. NCERT Concepts to Revise

• Gig worker (Economy): The Boards exist mainly to extend social security to gig workers, who work outside traditional employer-employee relationships.
• Aggregator (Economy): Aggregators sit on the Boards and pay the 1–2% turnover levy that funds welfare schemes.
• Social security (Economy): The Code and Boards aim to give informal and gig workers provident fund, health, maternity and old-age cover.
• Concurrent List (Polity): Social security is a Concurrent subject, so both Centre and States act on it and sit on the Boards.
• Regulatory capture (Polity): Industry seats on the Boards raise the risk that aggregators shape the rules meant to regulate them.
• Platform economy (Economy): Digital platforms are the economic setting that created gig work and the need for a separate Board.

16. Common Errors / Trap Areas

• Number of Boards: there are two separate Boards, not one. The Code allowed one Board to do both jobs, but the Oct 2026 notification created two [1][2].
• Member counts: 40 for unorganised workers and 22 for gig/platform workers. Aspirants often swap them [1].
• Vice-chair: the Union Labour Secretary, not the DG of ESIC or EPFO [1].
• The 5% cap: it applies to payments to gig/platform workers, not to turnover. The 1–2% rate applies to turnover [2][3].
• Nature of the Boards: they are statutory and recommendatory/advisory. They are not constitutional bodies, and they do not run the schemes themselves [1].