A study by Fairwork India, which scored 11 top aggregators on a scale of 10 on fair wages, fair contracts, fair working conditions, fair representation, found most of them “not committed” to ensuring a living wage to their workers (who some of them refer to as partners), and none scoring beyond 6.

The platforms studied were Amazon Flex, Bigbasket, BluSmart, Flipkart, Ola, Porter, Swiggy, Uber, Urban Company, Zepto and Zomato.

The report found that only Bigbasket and Urban Company have a minimum wage policy that guarantees hourly local minimum wage after factoring in work-related costs.

What’s more, none of these platforms were willing to recognise the workers’ right to collectively bargain or unionise, which is a “vital dimension of fairness at work”.

The report said it found it “disconcerting that despite the rise in platform worker collectivisation across the country over the past six years, there was insufficient evidence from any platform to show a willingness to recognise a collective body of workers.”

The report, Fairwork India Ratings 2024: Labour Standards in the Platform Economy, was written by researchers from the Centre for IT and Public Policy, International Institute of Information Technology Bangalore (IIIT-B), and the Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.

The report evaluated the conditions of work across 11 platforms in India at location-based services in sectors, such as domestic and personal care, logistics, food delivery, and transportation.

“Each company was awarded a score out of 10 according to the Fairwork Principles: fair pay, fair conditions, fair contracts, fair management and fair representation. Each score was determined based on a combination of desk research, worker interviews conducted in Bengaluru, Chennai, Delhi, Kochi, Thiruvananthapuram, and-when possible-evidence provided by the platforms,” said the report.

“This year witnessed gig workers’ welfare increasingly gain attention in political manifestos and legislative initiatives. But with the implementation of these efforts remaining uncertain, and platforms redefining gig work, research and advocacy to improve the conditions of gig workers are ever more relevant,” said Professors Balaji Parthasarathy and Janaki Srinivasan, the principal investigators of the team, in a statement.

Among the key findings on ‘fair pay’, the report found that only Bigbasket and Urban Company provided evidence of a “minimum wage” policy.

“No platform was able to evidence that all of their workers earn the local living wage after costs, so none were awarded the second point for Fair Pay,” said the report.

On ‘fair working conditions’, the study found that Amazon Flex, Bigbasket, BluSmart, Swiggy, Urban Company, Zepto and Zomato were able to prove that they provide adequate safety equipment and periodic safety training to workers on their platforms.

Amid a job that is prone to road mishaps, “only Bigbasket, Swiggy, Urban Company, Zepto and Zomato evidenced that their companies provide workers with accident insurance coverage at no additional cost, monetary compensation for income loss in cases they are unable to work for medical reasons other than accidents, and ensuring a worker’s standing is not negatively affected when they return after a break taken with prior notice to the platform.”

As for “fair” work contracts, six out the 11 —  Bigbasket,
BluSmart, Swiggy, Urban Company, Zepto, and Zomato — provided evidence that they ensure “the accessibility and comprehensibility of their contracts, and have protocols for the protection and management of worker data.”

“Bigbasket, BluSmart, Swiggy, Zepto, and Zomato, also evidenced the adoption of a change notification clause in their contracts, reducing asymmetries in liability (such as by a provision to compensate workers for losses due to app malfunctions and outages), the adoption of a Code of Conduct for their subcontractors, and making the variables influencing pricing transparent where dynamic pricing is used,” the report said.

As regards ‘fair management”, Amazon Flex, Bigbasket, BluSmart, Flipkart, Swiggy, Urban Company and Zomato were awarded the “first point” for evidencing due process in decisions affecting workers and channels for workers to appeal disciplinary actions.

“There was sufficient evidence from BluSmart, Swiggy, Urban Company and Zomato of regular external audits to check for biases in their work allocation systems, in addition to policies against discrimination,” the report said.

When it comes to the right to collectively bargain or unionise, a “vital dimension of fairness at work”, the report found it “disconcerting that despite the rise in platform worker
collectivisation across the country over the past six years, there was insufficient evidence from any platform to show a willingness to recognise a collective body of workers.”

Fairwork is an international research project that studies the working conditions of platform workers in more than 30 countries in Asia, Africa, Europe, North America and South America. The work is coordinated by Oxford Internet Institute and the Social Science Research Centre Berlin.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Only 2 Out of 11 Ecommerce Platforms Have Minimum Wage Policy for Gig Workers, Finds Report appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Only one state has an act for gig workers—Rajasthan—as of now, and if this draft becomes law, Karnataka would be the second state to enact a law for gig workers’ welfare. Notably, the Indian National Congress (INC) was the ruling party in Rajasthan, as it is now in Karnataka when the act was passed in the legislative assembly. Telangana, another state in which a gig worker draft law has been on the cards, is also a Congress-ruled state. However, Telangana’s law is not publicly accessible yet, and information on it was reported by sections of the media.

A few common threads

Generally, all state governments, as of now, seem to be following a set structure in terms of the welfare of gig workers.

One, in the definitions, they define:  

i) Aggregators to include major players like Swiggy, Zomato, etc., and smaller players like, say, Shoffer—a luxury electric car ride-hailing service based out of Bangalore.  

ii) Gig workers to include the delivery or ride partners or other such people registered on these platforms for work.

Two, they constitute a board to oversee the welfare of workers and ensure the implementation of the act.

Three, they establish a welfare fund to which the aggregators will be made to pay a certain amount per transaction per worker or some other mechanism.

Four, they outline the rights of the workers and the responsibilities of the aggregators, along with stating the penalties for violations.

While all these elements are present in the Karnataka Gig Worker law draft, it is important to understand the changing contours of employment relations in the gig economy year by year, along with the growing trend of gig work, when drafting the provisions of the law. For example, food delivery workers wear uniforms of the brand they are working with, as mandated, thus providing free marketing to the brand as they ride through the city. This is not factored into the pay given to them, and in fact, the uniforms are supposed to be bought from the brand by the workers themselves. These types of disguised employment conditions are not considered by the government while it defines the relationship between aggregators and workers.

In this context, this article will discuss the Karnataka Gig Worker law, its similarities and differences with the Rajasthan Gig Workers law, and the potential for improvement in the legislation on Gig Worker Welfare.

Draft Karnataka-based Gig Workers (Social Security and Welfare) Bill, 2024

The draft bill defines an aggregator as a digital intermediary for a buyer of goods or user of services to connect with the seller or the service provider, and includes any entity that coordinates with one or more aggregators to provide the services. Essentially, a food delivery app like Swiggy, or an app that facilitates the hiring of electricians or beauticians like Urban Company, comes under the definition.

Section 2(e) of the Act defines gig workers as a person who performs work or participates in a work arrangement that results in payment based on terms and conditions laid down in such a contract. This includes all piece-rate work, and whose work is sourced through a platform, in the services listed in Schedule-I.

The Schedule includes the following services:

1.   Ride Sharing Services  
2.   Food and Grocery Delivery Services  
3.   Logistics Services  
4.   E-Marketplace for wholesale/retail sale of goods and/or services—B2B/B2C  
5.   Professional Service Providers  
6.   Healthcare  
7.   Travel and Hospitality  
8.   Content and Media Services

The draft bill has provisions for the rights of the gig worker in Section 6, granting them the right to register with the Gig Workers Welfare Board—established under Section 3—and the right to access general and specific social security schemes, as well as the right to access a grievance redressal mechanism (Section 7). This Grievance Redressal Mechanism involves either a complaint to the state government-appointed officer or a petition through a web portal whose link should be provided on the aggregator’s website.

The draft also outlines several responsibilities for aggregators:

1. Aggregators must provide a database of workers to the board and update it (Section 10).  
2. Aggregators must register themselves (Section 11).  

3. Aggregators must ensure that the contract is fair, easily understandable in a language comprehensible to the worker and listed in the 8th Schedule of the Indian Constitution. Any change in the contract should occur with prior notice, and termination of the contract by the worker on account of the change should not affect the entitlements they were supposed to receive. 

4. Aggregators must communicate to the gig worker the parameters of allocation, distribution, assessment, and grounds for denial of work, as well as the parameters of the rating system and categorization of the workers on the quality of service, log-in time, etc. if such categorization is done by the employer (Section 14).

5. Aggregators cannot terminate the gig worker without prior notice of 14 days, and the contract must have an exhaustive list of grounds for termination or deactivation from the platform (Section 15).

6. Aggregators must pay workers weekly without delay (Section 16).

7. Aggregators must ensure reasonably safe and healthy working conditions, as practicable as possible (Section 17).  

8. Aggregators must ensure that a grievance link is available on their website and constitute an internal dispute resolution committee if they have more than 50 workers. These disputes include failure to adhere to the responsibilities mentioned above (Section 24). 

9. Aggregators must appoint a human point of contact for queries, with workers having the option to communicate in Kannada, English, or any 8th Schedule language known to them.

The draft also proposes the establishment of a welfare fund, to be funded by the aggregators at a percentage of the pay of platform-based gig workers per transaction or based on annual state-specific turnover, as may be notified by the government. For this purpose, the draft proposes a Central Transaction Information Management System where all transactions are mapped and monitored by the Board to ensure that payments made to workers and deducted fees are recorded and accounted for. Penalties range from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 1, 00,000 and are compoundable unless the offense has been committed on more than three occasions.

It was also reported in the media that the government and aggregators agreed on levying a cess per transaction rather than based on state-specific turnover.

Similarities and differences with the Rajasthan Act

Both laws establish a board, give similar powers to the gig worker welfare board, and establish Central Monitoring Systems. In essence, both laws grant the same rights to workers, impose the same responsibilities on aggregators, and establish welfare funds.

However, the difference lies in the details of these broad structures. For example, the Rajasthan Act explicitly recognises the right of workers to participate in all decisions taken for their welfare through representation on the board. In constituting the board, the Rajasthan Act mandates that one-third of the members shall be women. The Karnataka draft misses these provisions and does not have as many members on the board. The Rajasthan law includes 12 board members, including the in-charge minister, while the Karnataka draft includes 10 members, with five being ex-officio members from various departments.

The Karnataka Act also emphasises transparency and the need for communication in languages understandable by the worker. By making it mandatory for the aggregator to provide details of the rating system or categorization of gig workers based on the quality of service rendered, log-in time, or other criteria, the draft attempts to lift the veil under which aggregators have operated until now.

Other key differences can be found in the welfare fee and penalty sections. The draft Karnataka law chooses an either-or approach, where the welfare fee could either be a percentage of each transaction or a percentage of the state-specific annual turnover. The Rajasthan Act does not mention turnover. In terms of penalties, Rajasthan’s law imposes penalties ranging from Rs. 5 lakh to Rs. 50 lakh. The Rajasthan Act also has provisions for interest payable on delayed payment of the welfare fee.

Potential for development

There is much room for development in the Karnataka draft law. While the fundamental question of defining the relationship between the gig worker and aggregator has not been answered, the draft leaves many concerns in the areas it chooses to operate in.

For example, it does not consider women in the gig workforce, nor does it enact specific provisions to protect their interests, such as maternity-specific provisions where women do not have to lose their categorization within the platform if they take a maternity break.

The bill has already been reportedly opposed by various companies due to concerns about compliance, with claims that it will hurt the ease of doing business in the state. While these concerns are expected, the sheer volume of compliance measures businesses must adhere to under the act raises doubts about its effective implementation. Meanwhile, Kerala’s Minister for Labour, V. Sivankutty, stated in August that the government intend to introduce the Kerala State Platform-Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Bill, 2024 in the assembly session this October.

In this paradigm, where the government seems to have decided not to accord the status of a worker to the gig worker and the status of an employee to the aggregator, the least it could have done is to provide for the increased bargaining power of the worker. This could have been achieved through the official recognition of unions in the gig economy, allowing bargaining to be done with unions or federations of such unions.

Conclusion

Despite the improvements in the Karnataka draft law, the fundamental question and demand remain unheeded. With the control aggregators usually exert on gig workers, the demand has been that gig workers be recognized as employees. With the BJP in Rajasthan not giving importance to the previously enacted gig worker law, and Congress governments consistently defining the relationship between gig workers and aggregators as independent individuals rather than employees, the future possibilities look narrower. 

Such a law should not be a choice between no protection at all and meagre protection for gig workers.

(The writer is a researcher with the organisation)

Related:

Rajasthan’s Gig Worker Law, a step towards industrial democracy

Karnataka Budget 2023-24: CM announces Rs. 4 lakh life & accident insurance policy for gig workers

Report Highlights Poor Working Conditions for Gig Workers; Uber, Ola, Amazon Score Zero

Report Highlights Poor Working Conditions for Gig Workers; Uber, Ola, Amazon Score Zero

India’s Gig Workers: Overworked And Underpaid

The post Karnataka’s draft law for welfare of gig workers, an insufficient tokenism? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Introduced in 2023, this system ranks delivery riders based on a point system, where a “perfect order” earns one point. Maintaining a gold status requires earning 70 points or more weekly, while falling below 50 points moves a rider to the bronze category. Despite Swiggy’s defense that all delivery partners receive basic insurance benefits such as accidental coverage and free ambulance services, many riders find the system unpredictable and are considering purchasing their insurance independently.

Why are gig work-based platforms not providing a blanket General Health Insurance—at least to individuals if not for families?

Swiggy’s stance on health insurance for its delivery agents exemplifies the broader challenges faced by workers in the gig economy. The company’s dynamic rating system, linking insurance benefits to performance metrics, introduces significant uncertainties and risks for its workforce. This system, while ostensibly offering benefits based on engagement levels, can penalize workers for situations beyond their control, such as personal emergencies or unforeseen circumstances. The gamification of gig work, as seen in Swiggy’s dynamic insurance plan, can lead to dystopian outcomes. By turning essential benefits into rewards and tying them to performance metrics, companies create a competitive environment that can push workers to their limits or actually make it miserable for them by not giving them the insurance when they need it the most. This approach can lead to overwork, stress, and even health issues, as workers strive to maintain their ratings and secure their benefits.

While Swiggy emphasises that all delivery partners receive some level of insurance coverage, the reality is that this coverage is tied to maintaining a high rating, which can be challenging in a job with unpredictable variables like traffic, customer moods, or health issues. The only insurance they get, irrespective of these variables, is the Swiggy Accident-related insurance. According to a 2022 post from Swiggy on its blog, this accident insurance seems to be active when the worker is delivering something on the platform. While it is normal for an employer to give its employee accidental insurance when the employee is always on the move, given that Swiggy is a gig work platform, it seems to have settled for the bare minimum expected of it.

The gig economy, by its nature, promotes flexibility and independence, but these benefits often come at the expense of workers’ rights and protections. Companies like Swiggy leverage this flexibility to implement performance-based incentives that may inadvertently contribute to a culture of overwork and stress among their workforces.

This system operates under a veil of flexibility and independence, but it obscures the inherent instability and insecurity faced by gig workers. The false promise of flexibility often masks the precarious nature of gig work, where workers are subject to the whims of algorithms and customer ratings.

Moreover, the opaqueness of these systems further exacerbates the problem. Policies and rating systems are often not transparent, leaving workers in the dark about the rules that govern their work and their livelihoods. This lack of transparency can lead to feelings of powerlessness and frustration among workers. For example, Swiggy, in its communique, states that since the workforce on Swiggy varies day by day, where some people disappear from being on the platform for weeks, it becomes difficult to give insurance. However, no one except Swiggy knows what percentage of Swiggy delivery fleet have not logged in for weeks, and who have been working on the platform for a while and have taken a break for a week. This opacity allows

What can the governments do?

Governments can take up the issue with platforms and nudge them to give better health insurance benefits rather than just accident insurance which is the bare minimum.

Rajasthan and Karnataka have become pioneers in providing social security and insurance benefits to gig workers. The Rajasthan Platform Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Bill 2023, recently passed by the Rajasthan Assembly, establishes a welfare board and a social security fund for gig workers. A tax on digital platform transactions will fund these schemes, providing benefits like accident insurance, health coverage, maternity benefits, pension contributions, and scholarships.

Similarly, Karnataka announced free life and accidental insurance worth Rs 4 lakh for gig workers, covering employees in e-commerce companies like Swiggy and Zomato. These initiatives mark a significant step towards protecting and supporting gig workers who were previously lacking adequate social security and regulatory frameworks.

This is not a national phenomenon, and Karnataka and Rajasthan cover a very small part of the total gig worker ecosystem. The situation in the gig economy calls for urgent attention and action. As the gig economy continues to grow, it is imperative that governments, companies, and society at large work together to ensure a more sustainable and equitable future for all workers. This includes providing adequate support and protection to workers, promoting transparency in policies, and ensuring that the benefits of the gig economy are accrued to whoever runs the platforms and the workers suffer because no one stood for them. And finally, it is important to reorganize collective thinking about the status of gig work in the country—especially with respect to ride-hailing, food delivery, and home services app. The non-existence of managers and flexibility to work when workers want should not take away the fact that there is significant control of the platform on the worker. As India moves towards fixed-term employments—which are gig works but for more than a few weeks/months—it becomes important to think whether we want the uncertainty of gig work to creep into the organized sector or for the greater certainty and social security of the organized sector to move into the gig economy.

(The author is part of the organisation’s legal research team)

Related:

Rajasthan’s Gig Worker Law, a step towards industrial democracy

Karnataka Budget 2023-24: CM announces Rs. 4 lakh life & accident insurance policy for gig workers

Report Highlights Poor Working Conditions for Gig Workers; Uber, Ola, Amazon Score Zero

The post Swiggy’s tiered insurance scheme for delivery fleet & the inherent nature of the Gig economy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In this context, it is important to understand the legislation that seeks to provide social security to platform-based gig workers. 

To whom does this act apply?

The act applies to aggregators – the online intermediary for buyer of goods/user of service and the seller/service provided; any service or work involving gig workers or a platform. For example, a Food Delivery company or a ride hailing company can be considered as an aggregator. 

Who is a Gig Worker?

The act defines Gig Worker as a person who performs work or participates in a work arrangement and earns from such activities outside of traditional employee-employer relationship and who works on a contract that results in a given rate of payment, based on terms and conditions laid down in such contract and includes piece-rate work.  Piece rate work means that the payment is on the basis on the number of units of work performed rather than the time spent on work. For example, food delivery workers earn money based on number of food orders they deliver rather than the number of hours they spend on the job. 

What does the act do?

Mandates registration of workers and aggregators

The Act mandates that the aggregator should provide its database of all platform-based gig workers on-boarded or registered with it, within 60 days of enforcement of the Act. Any registration or on-boarding with the aggregator should be registered with the government automatically. The act also states that every gig worker should get his/her own unique ID. Apart from registration of workers, the act also requires the aggregator to be registered with the government and mandates that the government should publish the list of registered aggregators on a web portal. This makes sure that all eligible beneficiaries are roped into the state’s welfare fold.

Directs to Establish a Fund

The act states that the government shall establish the Platform Based Gig Workers Social Security and Welfare Fund for the benefit of registered platform-based gig workers. The contribution to this fund, apart from a welfare fee charged to the aggregators, would also come from the state government grants and other sources. The Welfare Fee charged to the aggregators would be at a rate of the value of each transaction related to the platform-based gig worker, and will be notified by the government.

Recognises rights of gig workers

The act states that platform-based gig workers have a right to be registered with the government irrespective of the duration of their work and be provided a Unique ID, have access to general and specific social security schemes based on contributions made, have an opportunity at grievance redressal, participate in decisions taken by the board, through representation. 

Constitutes a welfare Board. 

The act constitutes a Rajasthan Platform Based Gig Workers Welfare Board, consisting of the Minister of Labour of the State, respective secretaries of Departments of Labour, Information Technology, Social Justice, Transport, Finance; two representatives of the gig workers and two representatives of the aggregators, owners and manufacturers of goods and services- all nominated by the State Government; two representatives- one from Civil Society and one from a field which the government thinks should be represented in the Board. There is also requirement that 1/3rd of the Board should constitute women. This board is entrusted with ensuring the various compliances under the Act. The Board is entrusted with registration of both workers and aggregators, ensure the technical aspects of the payment mechanisms are functioning and integrated; monitoring schemes of social security for the registered platform-based gig workers; ensuring grievance redressal etc. 

Others

The act states that a 12% interest will be levied on the late paying of the welfare fee by the aggregator and any aggregator who contravenes the provisions of the act, or the rules made under the act could be levied a fine of up to Rs. 5 Lakh for the first contravention and a fine of up to Rs. 50 Lakh for the second contravention. The act also states that all payments to the workers and the payments generated on platforms shall be mapped to a Central Transaction Information and Management System, (CTIMS).

This tracking system will be useful in making sure there is transparency not only with respect to the payments made for the workers but also with respect to the payments generated on platforms since the Board can monitor them. 

What does this mean for Gig Workers?

This act primarily puts the might of the state behind Gig Workers in their fight to get more rights, in an increasingly neoliberal economic environment, where the nature of their employment is an impediment to their right to social security. Since there is no mandatory responsibility on the Gig Worker to register, there is no disproportionate responsibility on the worker. 

Welcome as it is, this is only a first step since steps are yet to be taken to increase workers’ collective bargaining power with respect to their commission etc. Although these issues might not be solved by legislation, concerted state efforts could facilitate such endeavours. 

(The author is a legal researcher with the organisation)

Related:

What Karnataka thinks today, will India think tomorrow?

Safai Shramik Union raises demands for a law that safeguards rights of sanitation workers: Maharashtra

Zomato Workers win Back Benefits After 4-Day Strike in Thiruvananthapuram

Report Highlights Poor Working Conditions for Gig Workers; Uber, Ola, Amazon Score Zero

The post Rajasthan’s Gig Worker Law, a step towards industrial democracy appeared first on SabrangIndia.