Platform Governance and Gig Worker Vulnerability in India: Implications for Labour Protection and Employability
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66635/mqk0dm07Keywords:
Gig Economy, Platform Work, Algorithmic Management, Labour Law, Gig Workers, Employability, Platform GovernanceAbstract
The rapid expansion of digital labour platforms has transformed employment relationships across global labour markets and accelerated the growth of the gig economy in India, particularly in sectors such as ride-hailing, food delivery, logistics, and home services. While platform work has created livelihood opportunities for millions of workers, concerns persist regarding employment security, labour protection, and long-term employability. This study examines the structural vulnerabilities experienced by gig workers in India by analysing the intersection of platform governance, labour regulation, and employability outcomes. The research adopts a mixed-methods approach integrating theoretical analysis with empirical evidence collected through a primary survey of 205 gig workers engaged in platform-based services. The study explores worker experiences related to working hours, income dependence, earnings satisfaction, social security access, awareness of labour laws, and perceptions of career sustainability.
The findings reveal a significant paradox within platform employment. Although most workers depend heavily on digital platforms for their livelihood, they continue to be classified as independent contractors, limiting their access to labour protections, social security benefits, and grievance redressal mechanisms. The results further indicate long working hours, moderate to low earnings satisfaction, and limited awareness of labour regulations among workers. The study also highlights the role of algorithmic management systems in regulating task allocation, performance evaluation, incentives, and disciplinary processes. Workers frequently perceive these systems as opaque and lacking accountability, thereby intensifying employment insecurity. From an employability perspective, the findings suggest that gig work offers limited opportunities for skill development and long-term career advancement, leading many workers to view platform work as a temporary livelihood option.The study contributes to the growing literature on gig economy governance by integrating insights from Labour Process Theory, Psychological Contract Theory, Employability Theory, and Institutional Theory within the Indian context. The findings underscore the need for governance frameworks that balance technological innovation with worker protection, institutional accountability, and workforce development.
References
1.Aloisi, A., & De Stefano, V. (2022). Your boss is an algorithm: Artificial intelligence, platform work and labour. Hart Publishing.
2.Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. Monthly Review Press.
3.Broughton, A., Gloster, R., Marvell, R., Green, M., Langley, J., & Martin, A. (2018). The experiences of individuals in the gig economy. UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.
4.Bucher, E. L., Schou, P. K., & Waldkirch, M. (2021). Pacifying the algorithm: Anticipatory compliance in the face of algorithmic management in the gig economy. Organization Studies, 42(11), 1663–1684.
5.De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the “just-in-time workforce”: On-demand work, crowdwork, and labor protection in the gig economy. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 471–504.
6.Government of India. (2019). Code on Wages, 2019. Ministry of Labour and Employment.
7.Government of India. (2020a). Industrial Relations Code, 2020. Ministry of Labour and Employment.
8.Government of India. (2020b). Code on Social Security, 2020. Ministry of Labour and Employment.
9.Government of India. (2020c). Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020. Ministry of Labour and Employment.
10.Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366–410. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174
11.Koley, S. (2025). Platform economy and labour transformation in India.
12.Kumar, A., & Singh, R. (2024). Gig economy and labor vulnerability in emerging markets. Economic and Political Weekly, 59(12), 34–42.
13.Lee, M. K., Kusbit, D., Metsky, E., & Dabbish, L. (2015). Working with machines: The impact of algorithmic management on workers. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1603–1612). ACM.
14.Möhlmann, M., & Zalmanson, L. (2017). Hands on the wheel: Navigating algorithmic management and Uber drivers’ autonomy. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, 1-17.
15.NITI Aayog. (2022). India’s booming gig and platform economy: Perspectives and recommendations on the future of work. Government of India.
16.Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Sage Publications.
17.Stewart, A., & Stanford, J. (2017). Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options? Economic and Labour Relations.
Review, 28(3)420-437.
18.https://doi.org/10.1177/1035304617722461
19.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/10.1177/095
