A Global Debate at a Turning Point
The rise of the platform economy, where services are delivered through digital intermediaries like food delivery apps, ride-hailing platforms, and freelance portals, has fundamentally redefined the idea of work. The challenge now is whether we can regulate this new form of labour without dismantling its core model.
This question took centre stage at the just concluded 113th International Labour Conference (ILC 2025) of the ILO in Geneva. At its annual session in June 2025, ILC was attempting to set standards to ensure “Decent work in Platform Economy”. To the Conference Committee on this subject, ILO recommended that the ILC adopt a binding Convention along with a Recommendation on regulating Platforms and aggregators. Many Governments and, particularly, almost all Employer Organisations, in their response to the ILO Questionnaire in preparing for this conference, preferred a Non-Binding Recommendation, if at all ILO decides to set standards at this juncture. The implications of this move by the ILO to suggest that ILC 2025 adopt a Binding Convention are enormous: a Convention would require member states to align domestic laws, while a Recommendation would serve as directional guidance only.
As an Employer-delegate Advisor part of Govt of India delegation to the ILC 2025, and as part of the Global Task Force of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), I had the privilege of participating in these deliberations now in my third consecutive year. This continuity has allowed India to contribute meaningfully to a dialogue that is still evolving and often polarised.
India’s experience is particularly relevant. We are home to one of the largest and most dynamic platform workforces in the world, and we are simultaneously undertaking major labour reforms aimed at extending social protection to informal and digital workers. How global standards are framed today will directly influence national policy, worker classification, and innovation pathways in India’s fast-expanding digital economy.
India’s Position: Regulation With Flexibility
From the outset, India’s position was both clear and constructive. We strongly advocated for a Recommendation, not a Convention. This stance was aligned with other major economies and their governments like the United States, China, Japan, and many from South and South East Asia, as well as several other Asian and African nations.
The question was never whether platform workers should be protected they absolutely should be. The concern was whether a prescriptive, one-size-fits-all approach could truly serve their interests in diverse national contexts. Many Global South economies are still grappling with high unemployment and informal labour. In such contexts, platform work is often a gateway to income, not a symptom of exploitation.
The ILO’s draft Convention proposal to the ILC 2025, comprising 78 clauses, sought to define everything from employment status to algorithmic transparency to minimum wages. However, after two weeks of intense negotiation, only 11 clauses were substantively addressed. This deadlock revealed just how divided the world remains on the future of work and the need for a more principle-based, contextualised global framework.
India’s Legal and Digital Groundwork: A Quiet Revolution
India is often assumed to be trailing in labour reforms, but in the case of platform work, we are far ahead of many developed nations.
The Code on Social Security, 2020, is among the first national legislations globally to define “gig workers” (Section 2(35)) and to empower the central government under Section 114 to create a dedicated social security scheme for them.
This legal framework is backed by a robust digital infrastructure:
- The e-Shram portal has registered over 35 crore unorganised workers, including platform workers.
- It offers API-based integration for platforms, enabling real-time data flow and contribution tracking.
- Platforms can link worker payments to portable social benefits like Ayushman Bharat, accident and term insurance, and future pension schemes.
The architecture is ready, the policy moment must now match it.. What remains is its timely implementation at the national level. Otherwise, the vacuum will continue to be filled by fragmented, state-level schemes as seen in Karnataka, Rajasthan, and is emerging in Telangana.
Why Overregulation Can Do More Harm Than Good
While it is true that many platform workers face exploitation, long hours, poor grievance redressal, and lack of insurance, blanket classification of these workers as “employees” may not be the right fix.
In India, platform work serves multiple roles:
- It allows students to earn while studying.
- It enables migrants to support their families.
- It gives rural youth access to the digital economy.
To mandate full employment benefits without flexibility could break the model altogether, particularly for small and medium-sized platforms that cannot absorb the compliance burden. Worse, it could concentrate market power in the hands of a few large, well-capitalised players.
We must remember: not all gig workers are alike, and not all platforms are exploitative.
Algorithmic Control: A New Form of Power Asymmetry
That said, the issue of algorithmic control is real and growing. Platforms today govern access to work, earnings, and incentives using backend software that workers often do not understand and cannot contest.
Examples include:
- Shifting incentive thresholds to make bonuses harder to earn.
- Reducing the visibility of a worker’s profile without explanation.
- Structuring delivery slots to keep workers logged in for 12–14 hours.
This form of invisible control can replicate, and in some cases deepen, the very power asymmetries that formal labour law sought to correct.
However, the solution cannot be forced algorithm disclosure, which would undermine innovation and violate proprietary rights. Instead, India should consider:
- Regulatory sandboxes to test fair practices.
- Third-party algorithm audits.
- Platform ombudsman systems for grievance resolution.
We must aim for smart, layered regulation, not knee-jerk reclassification.
The ILO’s Role: Guiding, Not Governing
At Geneva, India’s delegation suggested that if the ILO proceeds with a Convention, it should be principle-based, not prescriptive. The final text should:
- Embrace broad guidelines around fairness, safety, and protection.
- Allow national discretion in defining implementation models.
- Encourage experimentation, particularly in emerging economies.
This approach avoids turning the ILO into a blunt regulatory hammer and instead positions it as a platform for collaborative problem-solving.
Several countries, including India, recommended that the ILO convene a working group of experts and stakeholders before the 2026 conference to revise and simplify the 78-clause draft. Without this, the proposed Convention risks failure next year.
A constructive reset now can pave the way for a globally relevant and nationally adaptable outcome in 2026.
India’s Strategic Opportunity: Lead by Doing
India stands on the threshold of becoming a global thought leader in platform work regulation. We already have:
- The legal definition
- The digital tools
- The policy intent
By finalising and launching a national social security scheme for gig workers, India can show the world how to:
- Enable portability of benefits
- Encourage contributory participation from platforms and workers
- Provide a secure foundation for workers who may later enter formal employment
This can be a moment of demographic dividend realisation where gig work serves as a stepping stone, not a dead-end.
In fact, a successful implementation of Social Security Structure could provide cues for covering all other unorganised/informal workers in their current status, without waiting for them to become formal workers. That will lead to universal social security much faster.
A Cautionary Note on Fragmentation
Delays at the central level have already led to state-level schemes that vary widely in scope and design. If this trend continues, India may end up with a patchwork of policies that confuse platforms, burden workers, and limit portability.
Without national coordination, state-level initiatives may unintentionally compete or conflict. A nationally driven, technology-enabled model backed by Aadhaar, e-Shram, and API integration offers scale, uniformity, and transparency. This is the model India must lead with.
Conclusion: From Regulation to Resilience
The future of work is being shaped today, and platform labour is a major part of that future. It is not without its flaws, but neither is it devoid of opportunity.
India’s approach, as reflected in its stance at ILC 2025, offers a third way, one that protects workers without criminalising platforms and that empowers digital livelihoods without compromising economic dignity.
We must regulate platform work but not break it. And as we do so, we must ensure that our laws are not only just but also just enough.
(The veiws expressed here are solely fof the author and do no reflect the view of ET LegalWorld)
