A case for regulating gig-based work

Karnataka government's legislation for gig workers addresses industry myths, ensuring fair contracts, income security, and algorithm transparency.

The Karnataka government’s intent to introduce a legislation for the welfare of gig workers is a welcome and necessary step.

It squarely addresses the three big myths propagated by the gig and platform industry. The first myth that aggregators sell to promote platform work is that they would have “no boss” and would be “partners” and “captains” — anything but workers. This drew in many people, particularly the young, to join platform-based gigs. However, it soon became clear that this was not the case. There was a big boss — the algorithm and a network of team managers deployed at the local level to enforce the algorithm.

Algorithms dictate the number of hours the worker needs to put in on weekends, the orders to be delivered, cancellations and rating scores that ought to be maintained in order for tasks to be continually allocated to the worker, and finally when a worker is deactivated or fired. Shaikh Salauddin from the Indian Federation of App-based Transport Workers put it succinctly when he said that “Gig workers spend hours trying to guess what the algorithm is doing and it feels like they are a rat in a maze”. This is totally opposite to the idea of being one’s own boss. A plain reading of the digitally generated terms and conditions that the worker has to invariably agree on to commence work dispels any notion of being an independent contractor. Every aspect of the work is monitored and dictated, with workers facing the consequences if they do not comply.

The Karnataka Bill recognises the pervasive role played by such algorithms and makes the aggregator responsible for sharing the parameters that are used by the algorithm to determine allocation of work, grounds for denial of work, the categorisation of workers and how personal data of workers is being used to determine their ability to work and earn through the aggregator. The Bill breaks the algorithmic control the companies have and allows workers to take back control for at least some part of their work lives.

The second myth that is perpetuated is that persons engaged in platform work enjoy flexible work arrangements. This assertion has enabled platforms to keep gig-based workers away from protections under labour laws. Multiple studies have shown how the term flexibility is abused in the industry. All flexibility in truth rests only with the employer and none with the worker. The payment structure consisting of a number of incentive schemes which enable workers to earn the minimum surplus required to cover costs, in effect, leaves no flexibility with the workers. For instance, workers have to comply with mandatory login hours to be eligible for incentives. If they log in after gaps of being ‘inactive’, they have to make peace with disadvantaged rate cards and incentive schemes.

Karnataka’s draft Bill introduces provisions that mandate fair contracts, income security and the right of platform workers to refuse work without being slapped with sanctions. The above provisions strengthen the position of these workers who are at the same time not considered employees, nor do they enjoy the freedom and flexibility of being independent contractors.

The third myth is that these are ‘part time’ workers, who engage in platform-based gig work for additional income. According to a study of the platform economy in India by PAIGHAM and the University of Pennsylvania, 96% of the cab drivers surveyed, secured 100% of their daily income from gigs. The corresponding figure for delivery workers was 90.7%. Average daily work hours for taxi drivers was in excess of 11 hours, and 10 hours for delivery workers. By making social security a mandatory requirement, the Karnataka Law takes a necessary step towards acknowledging this fact and makes room for an umbrella of schemes that can assist workers through events such as old age, death, health shocks etc.