Legal Classification of Gig Workers in Rajasthan: A Framework for Social Security Entitlements — An Evidence-Based Secondary Data Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29070/wt26cq41Keywords:
Gig Economy, Platform Workers, Social Security, Labour Classification, Rajasthan, Code on Social Security 2020, Algorithmic Control, Dependent ContractorAbstract
In India, the need of the hour is to regulate gig workers, and a legal definition of gig workers and their entitlements to social security benefits are still not very clear. This paper addresses the situation of gig workers in the state of Rajasthan in India - the first state in the country to have laws regarding gig workers, the Rajasthan Platform Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, 2023. The paper draws data from NITI Aayog, International Labour Organization (ILO), National Sample Survey (NSS) and peer reviewed empirical studies and analyzes the socio-economic characteristics of the gig workforce in the state of Rajasthan, the gaps in the existing social protection systems, and an assessment of the effectiveness of multi-jurisdictional regulatory frameworks. Secondary data analysis shows that over 88% of gig workers are not covered by health insurance, 92% are not covered by pension and monthly income that they receive is 34% below the notified Minimum Wage in the State. The paper proposes a structured model of the social security entitlement funded by a tripartite contribution system, after a detailed analysis of the purpose of law, the paper was developed a tri-dimensional typology on the bases of the algorithmic control index, the economic dependency index and a platform integration index. The results provide a replicable and evidence-based model that can be used in other states and in the context of a developing economy in India .
Downloads
References
1. Aloisi, A. (2016). Commoditized workers: Case study research on labour law issues arising from a set of on-demand/gig economy platforms. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 653–690.
2. Aloisi, A., & De Stefano, V. (2022). Your boss is an algorithm: Artificial intelligence, platform work and labour. Hart Publishing.
3. Berg, J. (2016). Income security in the on-demand economy: Findings and policy lessons from a survey of crowdworkers. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 543–576.
4. Bhandari, M., & Kesar, S. (2020). Labour market informality, precarious work and social protection in India. Global Labour Journal, 11(2), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.15173/glj.v11i2.4199
5. Chakraborty, S. (2021). Gig economy and labour law in India: An analysis of regulatory gaps. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 64(3), 701–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-021-00330-8
6. Cherry, M. A., & Aloisi, A. (2017). Dependent contractors in the gig economy: A comparative approach. American University Law Review Press.
7. Countouris, N. (2019). The legal determinants of work: Comparative perspectives. International Labour Review, 158(4), 681–706. https://doi.org/10.1111/ilr.12143
8. Das, A. K., & Mehta, B. S. (2022). Platform work and social protection in India: Evidence from food delivery workers. Economic and Political Weekly, 57(14), 34–42.
9. Davidov, G. (2016). A purposive approach to labour law. Oxford University Press.
10. De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the just-in-time workforce: On-demand work, crowdwork, and labour protection in the gig economy. International Labour Office.
11. Dutta, A. (2021). Platform economy and labour rights in India. Academic Foundation.
12. Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018) (California Supreme Court).
13. Florisson, R., & Mandl, I. (2018). Platform work: Types and implications for work and employment. Eurofound Working Paper, EF18004. https://doi.org/10.2806/696038
14. Government of India. (2020). Code on Social Security, 2020 (No. 36 of 2020). Ministry of Law and Justice.
15. Government of India. (2020). Code on Wages, 2019 (No. 29 of 2019). Ministry of Law and Justice.
16. Government of Rajasthan. (2023). Rajasthan Platform Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, 2023. Department of Labour.
17. Government of Rajasthan. (2023). Rajasthan Platform Based Gig Workers Welfare Fund Rules, 2023. Department of Labour.
18. Gupta, N., & Sharma, R. (2022). Rajasthan Platform-Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, 2023: A critical appraisal. Journal of Indian Law and Society, 13(2), 88–112.
19. International Labour Organization. (2019). Work for a brighter future: Global Commission on the Future of Work. ILO.
20. International Labour Organization. (2021). World employment and social outlook 2021: The role of digital labour platforms in transforming the world of work. ILO.
21. Jain, S., & Trehan, M. (2021). Social security for gig workers in India: Legislative gaps and policy imperatives. NUJS Law Review, 14(2), 1–28.
22. Johnston, H., & Land-Kazlauskas, C. (2018). Organizing on-demand: Representation, voice, and collective bargaining in the gig economy. Conditions of Work and Employment Series, 94. ILO.
23. Kalhan, A. (2020). Gig economy and labour regulation: Indian perspectives. Eastern Book Company.
24. Katz, L. F., & Krueger, A. B. (2019). The rise and nature of alternative work arrangements in the United States, 1995–2015. ILR Review, 72(2), 382–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793918820008
25. Mahapatra, S. (2020). Extending social security to informal workers in India: Challenges and prospects under the Code on Social Security, 2020. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 8(3), 501–522. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2020.35
26. Mehrotra, S., & Giri, S. (2019). Informal employment trends in India: Persistent informality, but growing positive development. ILO Working Paper No. 4. International Labour Office.
27. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. (2023). Periodic Labour Force Survey 2022–23. Government of India.
28. NITI Aayog. (2022). India's booming gig and platform economy: Perspectives and recommendations on the future of work. Government of India.
29. Prassl, J. (2018). Humans as a service: The promise and perils of work in the gig economy. Oxford University Press.
30. Prassl, J., & Risak, M. (2016). Uber, TaskRabbit, and Co.: Platforms as employers? Rethinking the legal analysis of crowdwork. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 619–652.
31. Rajasthan Economic Review. (2023). State Finance Department, Government of Rajasthan.
32. Routh, S. (2014). Informality, collectivity, and social protection: Lessons from India. Journal of South Asian Development, 9(3), 257–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973174114549488
33. Sharma, A. (2023). Rajasthan's gig worker welfare model: A legislative first in India. National Law School of India Review, 35(1), 45–72.
34. Singh, P., & Agarwal, N. (2022). Platform economy workers and the Code on Social Security, 2020: Prospects and limitations. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 57(4), 601–618.
35. Sriram Pistons and Rings Ltd. v. Workmen, AIR 1987 SC 2378 (Supreme Court of India).
36. Srivastava, R. (2019). Informal labour in India: Challenges for theory and policy. Routledge India.
37. Todolí-Signes, A. (2017). The 'gig economy': Employee, self-employed or the need for a special employment regulation? Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 23(2), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258916673747
38. Uber BV v. Aslam [2021] UKSC 5 (UK Supreme Court).
39. Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020). What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
40. Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56– 75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616
41. WorkersUnity Trust v. Union of India, W.P. (C) No. 1127/2021 (Delhi High Court, pending).
This work is licensed under a 