Hon’ble Apex Court Answers : Plea On Seeking Social Security Benefits For 'Gig Workers' : Zomato, Swiggy, Ola And Uber

A Bench of The Hon’ble Apex Court by Justice L Nageswara Rao issued notice on the suit which claimed that gig workers are in an employment relationship with the aggregators, and are consequently covered under the definition of “workman”.

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice in a writ petition seeking social security rights for "gig workers" employed by online food delivery, courier and tax aggregators applications such as Ola, Uber, Zomato, Swiggy etc.

The Hon’ble Apex Court has sought the response of the Central government on a suit by gig workers praying for social security benefits from employers including food delivery apps like Zomato, Swiggy and taxi aggregator apps like Ola and Uber [Indian Federation of App based Transport Workers v. Union of India].

A Bench l by Justice L Nageswara Rao issued notice on the plea which claimed that gig workers are in an employment relationship with the aggregators, and are consequently covered under the definition of “workman” as per social security legislation.

The petition filed by Indian Federation of App based Transport Workers v. Union of India and by two individuals, Tulasi Jagdish Babu (an Ola driver) and one Kaushar Khan submitted that they are unorganised workers under the Unorganised Workers’ Social Welfare Security Act, 2008, and are therefore entitled to social security.

The bench then proceeded to issue notice on the petition.

It is argued in the petition that "gig workers" and "platform workers" are covered by the definition of "workman" within the meaning of all the social security legislations since they are in an employment relationship with the aggregators. The petitioners have sought for declaring "gig workers" and " "app based workers" as "unorganized workers" and/or "wage workers" within the meaning of Section 2(m) and 2(n) of the Unorganised Workers Social Welfare Security Act, 2008.

It was altercated that the State’s failure to register them under the Act is non-confirmative of their fundamental rights, especially since the legislation has been enacted consequent to Directive Principles of State Policy with a view to ensure basic human stature of the workers.

The plea said that, “Denial of social security to the said “gig workers” and the “platform workers” has resulted in their exploitation through forced labour within the meaning of Article 23 of the Constitution. The right to livelihood includes the right to work on decent and fair conditions of work,"

 The petitioners stated that the respondent companies have been claiming that there exists no contract of employment between them and the petitioners, and that their relationship with the petitioners are in nature of partnership.

The petitioners submitted that, "If such a claim were to be accepted, this would be inconsistent with the purpose of social-welfare legislations." 

The petition said that, "The mere fact that their employers call themselves “aggregators” and enter into the so-called “partnership agreements” does not take away the fact that there exists a jural relationship of employer and employee; master and servant and worker within the meaning of all applicable laws," 

Gig workers" or "app workers" or "platform workers" work in what has come to be known as workers who work in the "informal economy". The informal economy accounts for 1/3rd the Gross Domestic Product ("GDP") and 70% of employment in an average developing country. A substantial number of workers including the wageworkers and unorganized workers work and generate value in the said economy."

In this context, petitioners have also sought for formulation of specific schemes such as health insurance, maternity benefits, pension, old age assistance, disability allowance and completion of vaccination at Aggergator's cost on priority basis.

Gig workers in their petition have also relied on Chapter IX of "The Code on Social Security, 2020" which deals with "Social Security for Unorganized Workers, Gig Workers and Platform Workers" and seeks to provide for framing schemes for unorganized workers to aver that recognition of Gig Workers an indication of Centre's policy for providing them social security.

Further, it was submitted that the fixed-term employment contracts are in the nature of ‘take it or leave it’ and the workmen have no choice but to sign the said contracts for their livelihood.

The petitioners also relied on the judgment of the Uk Supreme Court which had held that Uber drivers are "workers" entitled to minimum wage, paid annual leave and other workers’ rights. Senior Counsel Indira Jaising appeared for the petitioners.

Relief for extension of distribution of food grains under the PM Garib Kalyan Ann Yojana to all App Based Workers irrespective of whether the App Base Based workers hold ration cards or not has also been prayed for.

Petitioners have also sought for issuance of directions to financial institution, banks or NBFC to not seize and/or auction vehicles of App-Based Works on their failure to pay EMI's of their loans till the pandemic continues and subjecting financial institution, banks or NBFC to penalties on their failure to comply with the directions issued in RBI Circulars and Top Court's judgement titled, Small Scale Industrial Manufacturers Association v Union of India, LL 2021 SC 175.

Case : The Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers (IFAT) versus Union of India and others, WP(c) 1068/2021