Why India’s Gig Workers Remain Out of Government Reach ?

Context

The article evaluates the implementation gap in extending social security benefits to India''s gig and platform workers. Despite policy announcements in the Union Budget 2025–26, administrative data from the e-Shram portal indicates that the majority of India''s gig workforce remains unregistered and unreached.

Key Highlights & Findings

• Budgetary Commitment vs. Coverage: In the 2025–26 Budget, healthcare coverage was announced for gig workers registered on the e-Shram portal, with an intended beneficiary pool of over 1 crore workers.
• Severe Implementation Gap: According to Ministry of Labour and Employment data presented in the Rajya Sabha (January 2026), only 8.58 lakh gig workers were registered on e-Shram. Even accounting for growth, an estimated five out of every six gig workers (roughly 85%) remain outside official social safety nets.
• Disparities Across States: Registrations are unevenly distributed. Highly urbanised states with substantial service and gig economies—such as Tamil Nadu (31,654), Telangana (29,951), and Kerala (11,219)—lag significantly and fall outside the top 10 states for registrations.
• Sectoral Concentration: While NITI Aayog identified 21 sectors employing gig workers (including healthcare, retail, and education), registration data shows heavy clustering primarily in food delivery, transportation, and domestic/household services.

Structural Issues & Challenges

Data Deficit and Measurement Ambiguity

• Reliance on Static Estimates: India relies almost entirely on NITI Aayog’s 2022 report (India’s Booming Gig and Platform Economy), which projected the workforce to grow from 77 lakh in 2020–21 to 1.27 crore (2024–25) and 1.43 crore (2025–26).
• Survey Limitations: The Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) does not capture gig and platform workers as a distinct employment classification, despite gig work comprising roughly 2% of India’s total workforce (61.6 crore).

Administrative & Legal Hurdles

• Portal Bottlenecks: e-Shram serves as the unified National Database of Unorganised Workers (NDUW). Making portal registration a mandatory prerequisite creates a digital and bureaucratic barrier for vulnerable, low-literacy, or transient workers.
• Lagging Benefits under Labour Codes: Although the Code on Social Security, 2020 formally defined gig workers and provided a framework for a Social Security Fund, health/accident insurance, and maternity coverage, operationalization of these provisions on the ground has been sluggish.

Worker Misclassification & Attrition

• Gig workers often face high turnover, dual/multiple app registrations, and ambiguous employment classification (independent contractors vs. employees), complicating systematic tracking and continuous social security contributions.

Way Forward & Policy Recommendations

• Institutionalise Labour Statistics: Incorporate specific gig and platform employment modules directly into regular PLFS rounds to generate high-frequency, granular demographic and sectoral data.
• Platform-Led Automatic Enrollment: Instead of placing the entire registration burden on the individual worker, integrate platform aggregators (e.g., transport, delivery, logistics apps) via API pipelines to automate e-Shram onboarding at the point of hiring.
• Operationalize the Social Security Fund: Rapidly establish the dedicated gig worker social security fund envisioned in the Code on Social Security, financing it through a balanced combination of platform aggregator levies and budgetary contributions.
• Targeted State-Level Outreach: Focus awareness and onboarding drives in high-density urban clusters and major metropolitan hubs across southern and western states that currently report disproportionately low registration rates.

Prelims Practice Question

With reference to the gig and platform economy in India, consider the following statements:

1.    The Code on Social Security, 2020 provides a statutory definition distinguishing gig workers and platform workers.

2.    Under the Code on Social Security, 2020, social security schemes for gig and platform workers are funded entirely through budgetary allocations from the Consolidated Fund of India.

3.    The Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) categorises gig and platform workers under a dedicated, separate employment status classification.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 1 and 2 only

(c) 2 and 3 only

(d) 1, 2, and 3

Answer & Explanation

Correct Answer: (a) 1 only

• Statement 1 is correct: The Code on Social Security, 2020 officially defined "gig worker" (a person who performs work or participates in a work arrangement and earns from such activities outside of traditional employer-employee relationship) and "platform worker" for the first time in Indian statutory law.
• Statement 2 is incorrect: The social security fund for gig and platform workers is envisioned to be funded not solely from the government, but through a combination of contributions from platform aggregators (via a levy/cess between 1% to 2% of their annual turnover), central/state government grants, and beneficiary contributions.
• Statement 3 is incorrect: The Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) does not currently capture gig and platform workers as a distinct employment classification, leading to data limitations in measuring the exact size of this segment.

Mains Practice Question:

Critically examine this statement with reference to recent institutional initiatives such as the e-Shram portal and the Code on Social Security, 2020. Suggest viable policy measures to build a resilient social safety net for India''s platform workforce.