Legal Status of Gig Workers in India: Labour Protection in the Platform Economy                                                               

Abstract

The emergence of the gig economy in India represents a transformative shift in work structures, labour relations, and employment regulation in the twenty-first century. Driven by rapid technological advancements, platform expansion, smartphone accessibility, and changing job aspirations, platform-mediated work has expanded dramatically, making gig workers one of the fastest-growing labour segments. India is now the fifth largest gig economy globally and is projected to become the third largest by 2030, with the workforce expected to grow from 1 crore in 2024–25 to 2.35 crore by 2029–30. These workers operate outside the traditional employer–employee framework, engaging in flexible, task-based labour rather than salaried employment. Although companies promote gig work as offering freedom and autonomy, the reality is far more complex, marked by precarious conditions, fluctuating income, algorithmic control, absence of bargaining power, and lack of social security protections. Gig workers continue to face legal invisibility despite their critical contributions to India’s digital economy.

Introduction

The legal ambiguity surrounding gig workers largely arises from their classification as “partners,” “independent contractors,” or “freelancers,” terms that digital platforms use to deny employer obligations. This classification excludes gig workers from statutory protections such as minimum wages, provident fund, maternity benefits, insurance schemes, and collective bargaining rights. The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically exposed their vulnerabilities: while most of the economy shut down, gig workers—especially food-delivery partners and ride-hail drivers—continued working, yet lacked access to health benefits, job security, or risk allowances. The pandemic made evident that the gig economy, despite being technologically advanced, is built on fragile labour foundations requiring urgent legal reform. As India’s gig economy becomes central to livelihood generation and digital economic growth, re-evaluating the legal status of gig workers is both timely and necessary.

Constitution and Labour Law Framework

The Indian Constitution provides a broad protective framework for labour rights. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law^[1]; Article 19(1)(c) protects the right to form associations and unions^[2]; Article 21 ensures the right to life and livelihood^[3]; and Articles 23 and 24 prohibit forced labour and child labour respectively^[4]. Directive Principles such as Articles 39(d), 41, 43 and 43A envision a welfare-oriented labour regime that includes equal pay for equal work, the right to work and assistance, humane working conditions, and worker participation in management^[5]However, Indian labour statutes like the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947^[6]; Minimum Wages Act, 1948^[7]; Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952^[8]; and the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961^[9]were enacted long before gig work existed. These laws recognise only salaried employees, contract labour, and apprentices—leaving gig workers structurally outside the legal framework.

The Code on Social Security, 2020: Recognition Without Implementation

The first major attempt to address this gap was the Social Security Code, 2020, which for the first time defined “gig worker” and “platform worker” under Sections 2(35) and 2(61)^[10]. The Code proposes a Social Security Fund for gig and platform workers, accident insurance, old-age protection, maternity benefits, and the establishment of a National Social Security Board^[11]. However, the Code has not been implemented because the required rules have not been notified. As a result, gig workers remain unprotected in practice despite being recognised in legislation. While the e-Shram Portal launched in 2021 has registered millions of unorganised workers, including gig workers^[12], registration alone does not equate to entitlement. Rajasthan’s Platform-Based Gig Workers Act, 2023^[13], and Karnataka’s proposed Bill^[14] demonstrate state-level innovation but cannot replace a cohesive national framework.

Judicial Developments in India

Indian courts have begun addressing gig workers’ rights. A landmark decision came from the Karnataka High Court in Ms. X v. Internal Complaints Committee, ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2024), where the Court held that Ola drivers fall within the meaning of “employee” for purposes of the POSH Act^[15]. The Court noted the Act’s broad definition and emphasised that platform workers are entitled to workplace protections regardless of contractual misclassification^[16]. The judgment focused on Ola’s significant control over drivers—pricing, rating systems, penalties, and algorithmic management—characteristics typical of an employment relationship. However, the Court clarified that this interpretation is limited to the POSH Act and does not extend to labour statutes with narrower definitions. Meanwhile, in a pending PIL, the Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers (IFAT) seeks recognition of gig workers as unorganised workers entitled to social security, alleging violations of Articles 14, 21, and 23^[17]. Its outcome may redefine gig workers’ welfare rights.

Global Precedents and International Standards

Countries worldwide are grappling with gig worker classification. In the United Kingdom, the Supreme Court in Uber BV v. Aslam (2021) held that Uber drivers are “workers,” granting them rights to minimum wage and paid leave^[18]. In contrast, in the Deliveroo case, riders were held not to be employees due to a genuine right of substitution^[19]. The United States witnessed major reform in Dynamex, adopting the ABC test presuming workers to be employees^[20], although Proposition 22 limited its application to ride-hailing and delivery drivers^[21]. Canada introduced the Digital Platform Workers’ Rights Act in Ontario to regulate deactivation and pay transparency, though it still falls short of full worker classification^[22]. These international developments demonstrate a global trend toward greater protection and recognition of platform labour.

Legal and Policy Gaps in India

Despite progress, India’s legal framework still leaves gig workers vulnerable. The most pressing concern is ambiguity—gig workers are considered employees for POSH purposes but independent contractors for wage and social security laws. The non-implementation of the Social Security Code further deepens this gap. Platforms argue that mandatory contributions may threaten business viability, but worker welfare cannot be sacrificed for profitability. Gender and safety concerns remain prevalent, with female gig workers facing harassment, unsafe routes, and lack of maternity benefits. Disabled gig workers face accessibility challenges. Furthermore, algorithmic deactivation without due process underscores the urgent need for a national grievance mechanism. Reports by NITI Aayog and various parliamentary committees have consistently recommended inclusive social security measures for gig workers^[23][24].

Conclusion

The gig economy is now central to India’s economic development, employment landscape, and digital transformation. Yet gig workers remain among the most vulnerable labour groups, facing legal ambiguity, unstable income, and lack of social protections. While legislative and judicial developments show growing recognition, implementation gaps prevent meaningful realisation of workers’ rights. India must adopt a comprehensive regulatory framework that creates a separate legal category for platform workers, ensures shared financial responsibility for social security, establishes grievance mechanisms, mandates algorithmic transparency, and recognises gig worker unions. As the gig workforce is projected to grow beyond 23 million by 2030, ensuring fairness, dignity, and social justice for gig workers is both a constitutional mandate and a socio-economic necessity.

References

1. Cases

India

1. X v. Internal Complaints Committee, ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Karnataka High Court, 2024).
2. Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers (IFAT) v. Union of India, SLP (C) No. ___ of 2021 (Supreme Court of India) (pending).
3. Food Delivery Workers Collective v. Govt. of Delhi, W.P. No. ___ of 2023 (Delhi High Court) (pending).
4. United Kingdom
5. Uber BV v. Aslam [2021] UKSC 5.
6. Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v. Central Arbitration Committee (Deliveroo Case) [2023] UKSC ___.

     United States

7. Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 416 P.3d 1 (Cal. 2018).
8. Statutes

India

8. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, No. 14 of 1947.
9. Minimum Wages Act, 1948, No. 11 of 1948.
10. Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, No. 19 of 1952.
11. Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, No. 53 of 1961.
12. Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, No. 14 of 2013.
13. Code on Social Security, 2020, No. 36 of 2020 (India).
14. Rajasthan Platform-Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, 2023.
15. Karnataka Gig Workers’ Welfare Bill, 2024 (proposed).

      International / Foreign

16. Ontario Digital Platform Workers’ Rights Act, S.O. 2022, c. 7.
17. Proposition 22, California (2020) – Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act.

• Constitutional Provisions (India)

18. India Const. art. 14.
19. India Const. art. 19(1)(c).
20. India Const. art. 21.
21. India Const. art. 23.
22. India Const. art. 24.
23. India Const. art. 39(d).
24. India Const. art. 41.
25. India Const. art. 43.
26. India Const. art. 43A.
27. Government Reports & Sources
28. Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. of India, Report on Social Security for Gig and Platform Workers (2020).
29. Ministry of Labour & Employment, e-Shram Portal Data Dashboard (2025).
30. Press Information Bureau (PIB), Govt. of India, Gig Workforce in India Expected to Reach 2.35 Crore by 2029–30 (2024).
31. Press Information Bureau, Union Budget 2025–26 Highlights (2025).
32. Standing Committee on Labour, Report on Platform Economy and Social Security (2024).
33. Ministry of Women & Child Development, Safety Guidelines for Women Gig Workers (2024).
34. Parliament of India, Rajya Sabha Debates, Discussion on the Social Security Code (2020).
35. Policy Reports / Think-Tank Publications
36. NITI Aayog, India’s Booming Gig and Platform Economy (2022).
37. NITI Aayog, Need for Inclusive Social Protection for Gig Workers (2023).
38. Indian Institute of Public Administration, Algorithmic Management in India’s Platform Economy (2023).
39. Planning Commission of India, Informal Labour and Digital Work in India (2021).
40. International Reports
41. OECD, Employment Outlook 2019 (2019).
42. International Labour Organization (ILO), World Employment and Social Outlook 2022: Digital Labour Platforms and the Future of Work (2022).

[1] India Const. art. 14.

[2] Id. art. 19(1)(c).

[3] Id. art. 21.

[4] Id. art. 23, 24

[5] Id. art. 39(d). 41, 43, 43A

[6] Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, No. 14 of 1947.

[7] Minimum Wages Act, 1948, No. 11 of 1948.

[8] Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, No. 19 of 1952.

[9] Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, No. 53 of 1961.

[10] The Code on Social Security, 2020, No. 36 of 2020, §§ 2(35), 2(61).

[11] Id. ch. IX.

[12] Ministry of Labour & Employment, e-Shram Portal Data Dashboard (2025), https://eshram.gov.in

[13] Rajasthan Platform-Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, 2023.

[14] Karnataka Gig Workers’ Welfare Bill, 2024 (proposed).

[15] Ms. X v. Internal Complaints Comm., ANI Techs. Pvt. Ltd. (Karnataka HC 2024).

[16] Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013, sec 2(f).

[17] Petition for Special Leave to Appeal, IFAT v. Union of India (Supreme Court of India, pending).

[18] Uber BV v. Aslam [2021] UKSC 5.

[19] Deliveroo Case [2023] UKSC ____.

[20] Dynamex Operations W., Inc. v. Superior Ct., 416 P.3d 1 (Cal. 2018).

[21] Proposition 22, California Ballot Measure (2020).

[22] Ontario Digital Platform Workers’ Rights Act, S.O. 2022, c. 7.

[23] NITI Aayog, India’s Booming Gig and Platform Economy (2022).

[24] NITI Aayog, Need for Inclusive Social Protection for Gig Workers (2023).