Why are Blinkit workers protesting? (GS Paper 2, International Relation)
Why in news?
- The recent strike by Zomato-owned Blinkit delivery agents has once again brought to the forefront issues plaguing the gig economy in the country.
- The strikes began when Blinkit rolled out its new payout structure for delivery executives, under which the minimum payout per delivery was slashed to ₹15 from ₹25. As a result, Blinkit delivery executives are now set to earn ₹600-700 a day as opposed to ₹1,200 before.
Who is a ‘gig worker’?
- Gig workers refer to workers outside of the traditional employer-employee relationship. There are two groups of gig workers; platform workers, and non-platform workers.
- When gig workers use online algorithmic matching platforms or apps to connect with customers, they are called platform workers.
- Those who work outside of these platforms are non-platform workers, including construction workers and non-technology-based temporary workers.
Question over categorization:
- Whether gig workers should be categorised as ‘employees’ or as ‘independent contractors’ has been a heated debate.
- In India, employees are entitled to a host of benefits under statutes such as the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (EPFA), and the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.
- Similarly, contract labourers are governed under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 and are also entitled to benefits such as provident funds.
- However, given the unique nature of gig work, gig workers display characteristics of both employees and independent contractors and thus do not squarely fit into any rigid categorisation.
What is the proposed law?
- The Ministry of Labour and Employment introduced the Code on Social Security, 2020 which brings gig workers within the ambit of labour laws for the first time.
- Under section 2(35) of the Code, a ‘gig worker’ is defined as ‘a person who performs work or participates in a work arrangement and earns from such activities outside of a traditional employer-employee relationship’.
- The Code defines platform work as ‘a work arrangement outside of a traditional employer-employee relationship in which organisations or individuals use an online platform to access other organisations or individuals to solve specific problems or to provide specific services” in exchange for payment.
- Although the Code recognises ‘gig workers’, it distinguishes between such workers and employees.
- While employees have benefits such as gratuity, employee compensation, insurance, provident fund, and maternity benefits, the Code stipulates that Central and State governments must frame suitable social security schemes for gig workers on matters relating to health and maternity benefits, provident funds and accident benefits among others.
- The Code also mandates the compulsory registration of all gig workers and platform workers to avail of the benefits under these schemes.
What are some of the concerns?
- Out of the four new labour codes proposed, gig work finds reference only in the Code on Social Security. As a result, gig workers remain excluded from vital benefits and protections offered by other Codes such as minimum wage, occupational safety etc.
- They also cannot create legally recognised unions. Moreover, they remain excluded from accessing the specialised redressal mechanism under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, denying them an effective remedy for grievances against their employers.
- Considering the non-traditional nature of their work, gig workers also do not have the right to collective bargaining.
- Despite receiving the assent of the President, the Labour Codes are still awaiting implementation three years on. The Centre has said that this is due to the delay in framing of rules by the States.
Have the courts intervened?
- On September 20, 2021, the Indian Federation of App-based Transport Workers (IFAT) filed a public interest litigation on behalf of gig workers before the Supreme Court.
- The petition demanded that gig workers or platform workers be declared as ‘unorganised workers’ so that they can come under the purview of the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008 (UWSS Act) and be provided with statutory protection in the form of social security benefits.
- It has been contended that the exclusion of gig workers from the category of ‘unorganised workers’ or ‘wage workers’ under Sections 2(m) and 2(n) of the UWSS Act is violating their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Further, it has been argued that such denial of social benefits amounts to exploitation through forced labour, within the meaning of Article 23.
- Although the Supreme Court sought the Centre’s response to this petition back in December 2021, the Centre has not yet responded.
