India has granted legal status to millions of gig and platform workers under its newly implemented labor laws. This marks a milestone for the country’s delivery, ride-hailing, and e-commerce workforce. However, with benefits still unclear and platforms beginning to assess their obligations, access to social security remains out of reach.
The recognition stems from the Code on Social Security, one of four labor laws the Indian government brought into effect on Friday. This action comes more than five years after the parliament first passed them in 2020. It is the only part of the new framework that addresses gig and platform workers. The remaining three codes, covering wages, industrial relations, and workplace safety, do not extend minimum earnings, employment protections, or working-condition guarantees to this rapidly expanding workforce.
India has one of the world’s largest and fastest-growing gig economies. Industry estimates suggest that more than twelve million people deliver food, drive ride-hailing cabs, sort e-commerce packages, and perform other on-demand services for digital platforms. The sector has become a critical source of employment, especially for young and migrant workers shut out of formal job markets. It is projected to expand further as companies scale logistics, retail, and hyperlocal delivery.
Companies from Amazon and Walmart-owned Flipkart to Indian quick-delivery apps such as Swiggy, Eternal’s Blinkit, and Zepto, as well as ride-hailing firms including Uber, Ola, and Rapido, rely on gig workers to run their businesses in the South Asian nation. India is the world’s second-largest internet and smartphone market after China. Yet despite powering some of India’s most valuable tech businesses, most gig workers operate outside traditional labor protections and lack access to basic social security.
The newly implemented labor laws are intended to change that. They define gig and platform workers in statute and require aggregators, such as food-delivery and ride-hailing platforms, to contribute one to two percent of their annual revenue to a government-managed social security fund. This contribution is capped at five percent of payments made to such workers. But the details remain murky. What exact benefits will be offered, how workers will access them, how contributions will be tracked across multiple platforms, and when payouts will begin all remain unclear. This raises concerns that meaningful protections may take years to materialize.
The Code on Social Security creates a legal framework for gig workers to be covered under schemes such as the Employees’ State Insurance, provident fund, and government-backed insurance. However, the extent of these benefits, including eligibility, contribution levels, and delivery mechanisms, remains unclear and will depend on future rules and scheme notifications.
A key part of the framework is the creation of Social Security Boards at both the central and state levels. These boards are tasked with designing and overseeing welfare schemes for gig and platform workers. The central board must include five representatives of gig and platform workers and five representatives of aggregators, all nominated by the government, alongside senior officials, experts, and state representatives. But there is little clarity on how decisions will be made, how much influence worker representatives will actually have, or who will ultimately control decisions on funding and benefit delivery.
A professor noted that because labor policy in India is shared between the federal and state governments, state governments are responsible for designing, notifying, and administering many of the schemes needed to make the Code on Social Security operational for gig workers. That raises the possibility of uneven access, as some states move quickly to establish social security boards and roll out mechanisms, while others delay or deprioritize the effort due to political or fiscal constraints. Recent examples underscore how workers’ protections may ultimately depend on where they live rather than the law itself.
Platform companies have publicly welcomed the reform but are still largely evaluating what it will require of them. An Amazon India spokesperson said the company supports the Indian government’s intent behind the labor overhaul and is evaluating the changes it will need to introduce. A spokesperson for Zepto said the company welcomes the new labor codes as a big step toward clearer, simpler rules that protect workers while supporting ease of doing business. They added that the changes will help strengthen social security for its delivery partners without undermining the flexibility that quick-commerce operations rely on.
Food delivery firm Eternal, formerly known as Zomato, said in a stock exchange filing that the Social Security Code is a step toward more uniform rules and that it does not expect the financial impact to threaten its long-term business. Nonetheless, a partner at a corporate law firm said the change will naturally have a financial impact on India’s e-commerce sector, as worker contributions are now being formalized. It will also create new compliance obligations, requiring companies to ensure all workers in their networks are registered with the government-managed fund, determine whether individuals are associated with multiple aggregators and how to avoid duplicative benefits, and set up internal grievance mechanisms. They noted that while the law has the right intent, gig worker structures in India are quite novel, and practical challenges in compliance will emerge as the law takes force.
One of the biggest hurdles for gig workers seeking benefits under the newly implemented law will be registering on the Indian government’s E-Shram portal. The portal was launched in 2021 as a national database of unorganized workers. It had registered more than 300,000 platform workers as of the end of August, even though the government estimates India’s gig workforce at around ten million. Trade unions are working to help gig workers enroll so they can access the benefits.
A researcher said registering on the portal could mean lost wages for gig workers, since they would have to take time off to fill in required details. She noted that these workers often work for sixteen hours a day and do not have time to go and register themselves on the government portal. The benefits of registering are not compelling for many gig workers because the law does not address more immediate concerns such as fluctuating earnings, account suspensions, and sudden termination of accounts. Workers say these issues matter far more right now than access to insurance or provident fund benefits.
Trade unions often organize strikes to push platforms to address these concerns directly. However, such actions can disrupt everyone involved, including consumers, and put workers at further risk, as they are not paid while striking and may even face termination for participating.
A union leader said that while the social security rules have now been put in place, they demand a minimum wage and an employer-employee relationship for gig and platform workers, which are yet to be set by the government. They urge the government to obtain data from aggregators and secure their monetary contributions to the fund to start offering benefits to workers.
There is a broader debate over whether gig workers should be treated as employees, a question the new labor laws do not address. The Social Security Code defines gig and platform workers as a separate category, rather than extending them the rights and protections that come with employee status. In contrast, courts and regulators in markets such as the UK, Spain, and New Zealand have moved toward recognizing platform workers as employees or workers, entitled to minimum wages, paid leave, and other benefits. In some US jurisdictions, regulators and courts have pushed for platform workers to be treated as employees or similarly protected workers, though many ride-hail and delivery drivers remain classified as independent contractors.
A researcher concluded that with this law, the Indian government has settled this debate by saying that these gig workers do not sit within the ambit of employment or other protections. The Indian labor ministry did not respond to a request for comment.