Earlier this month, the Telangana Government released the draft Telangana Gig and Platform Workers (Registration, Social Security, and Welfare) Bill, 2025, for public consultation. The bill proposes the creation of a welfare board and defines various duties of aggregators and platforms, including conditions for termination, proper working conditions, and the explanation of automated monitoring systems, among others. While the Telangana Gig and Platform Workers Union (TGPWU) welcomed the legislation, they highlighted shortcomings such as the absence of minimum income security and legal recourse against withheld earnings. Consequently, TGPWU, alongside the Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers (IFAT) and the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, has submitted suggestions to the bill. TGPWU’s Founder-President, Shaik Salauddin, noted that the recommendations advocated for stronger worker rights, algorithmic transparency, and tripartite governance. Here are the key suggestions made by the organisations: Changing key definitions The organisations begin by recommending the expansion of the scope of various definitions: Automated monitoring and decision-making systems: should include partially automated systems as well. Grievance: should refer to violations of the provisions of the Act and necessitate mechanisms for redressal. Payout: Should clarify that the payout, or the final payment made by aggregators, excludes the welfare fund fee. Terminate: Should include provisions like deactivating the gig worker’s account, irrespective of the period of time. Gig and platform worker: The bill should redefine the term to reflect the contemporary nature of work through digital platforms, considering that a substantial number of workers rely on “gigs” as a full-time livelihood. This contrasts with the traditional definition of “gig workers”, which referred to individuals undertaking short-term work or freelancing without any commitment to a particular entity. The organisations also call for eliminating the traditional employer-employee relationship from the definition, given that the platform economy incorporates various business models. For example, the two-way model (like Uber and Ola), the three-way model (like Swiggy and Zomato), and the subcontracting model (like Shadowfax) all exercise different levels of algorithmic control over workers. Additionally, the organisations recommended including subcontractors and warehousing models within the bill’s scope. They also proposed removing terms like “primary employer” and “platform worker”. Minimum remuneration: The organisations recommend the addition of “minimum remuneration,” or the minimum payment that workers should receive, calculated based on the time spent, costs incurred, and distance travelled. TGPWU recommends that the state government establish sector-specific remuneration rates to prevent the potential fall of workers’ take-home wages below minimum wage levels. What rights should gig workers have? The associations have advocated for aggregators to ensure the registration of gig and platform workers, rather than placing the onus on workers to self-register. Aggregators should automatically register workers as soon as the platform onboards them, regardless of the duration of engagement. Workers should also have the right to access information regarding wages paid, platform contributions, and social security benefits. Additionally, they should have the ability: To participate in all welfare decisions made by the Board, committees, or other consultative bodies. To access, verify, and seek correction of personal data held by aggregators. To access an internal dispute resolution mechanism. What duties should a platform/aggregator fulfil? Regarding aggregator/platform obligations, TGPWU and IFAT have proposed several key changes: Transparency in automated monitoring and decision-making systems The associations call for platforms to proactively disclose information regarding algorithmic systems, shifting the burden of disclosure away from workers. These disclosures should include: The parameters that determine work allocation, distribution, assessment, and remuneration. This includes grounds for denial of work, deactivation, contract termination, or off-boarding. Rating systems or other metrics used by aggregators to evaluate worker performance. The categorisation of workers based on quality of service, log-in hours, etc. The Personal data of workers held by platforms and the purposes for which such data is processed. Why this matters: The associations cite an International Labour Organisation (ILO) study that identifies the lack of transparency in algorithmic management as a significant gap in protecting worker rights. Notably, this is not the first time gig worker unions have demanded algorithmic transparency. As MediaNama previously reported, such transparency allows cab drivers to better understand their workday, anticipate ride allocations, and protect themselves against arbitrary account suspensions. Obligations to enter into fair contracts The organisations also propose the inclusion of a separate section addressing key aspects of contracts between workers and platforms. These contracts should: Be available in a downloadable format for workers.. Comply with all provisions of the Act. Be written in a language listed in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. Contracts should also specify any possible deductions from workers’ payments, including government cesses, taxes, platform fees, or commissions. Workers must be notified of any changes to the contract or automated systems at least 14 days in advance. They should also have the option to terminate the contract without any adverse impacts. Finally, contracts should include a clause allowing workers to reject a specified number of work requests for reasonable cause without facing adverse consequences. The union further urges the state government to provide standardised contract templates tailored to sector-specific requirements. Why this matters: According to the Fairwork India Ratings report 2023, only five out of twelve platforms analysed were found to provide fair contracts to their workers. Ultimately, without clarity and accessibility of the terms and conditions of their contracts, gig and platform workers may remain at a disadvantage. Termination of work The associations propose that gig and platform workers must be provided with an opportunity to submit proof and contest their deactivation or termination during an enquiry process. Platforms should only block worker IDs without prior notice in cases where there are credible reports of threats to life or personal liberty. Why this matters: Earlier this month, Zomato’s quick commerce arm Blinkit deactivated the IDs of 150 delivery partners in Varanasi after they organised a strike. Although 120 workers were later reinstated after signing an undertaking prohibiting “inappropriate work,” 30 workers still being kept out of the loop. Similarly, Urban Company’s beauty service workers have raised concerns about accounts being blocked if ratings fall below 4.8. Income security The organisations recommend that platforms ensure timely payouts to workers as per contractual terms, without delay. They also suggest the inclusion of the following provisions: The welfare fee under the Act should not be deducted from workers’ earnings. Remuneration should comply with the minimum wage standards stipulated by the respective state government. The state government, in consultation with the Welfare Board, should prescribe sector-specific minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Why this matters: Explaining the rationale behind these suggestions, the organisations contended that previous research by the University of Pennsylvania disclosed that 68% of 10,000 cab drivers and delivery workers encountered unexplained or arbitrary deductions based on skewed app algorithms, among other processes. Salauddin has also echoed this concern during a previous conversation with MediaNama, wherein he argued that mandatory deductions by aggregators to contribute to a social security fund would reduce the take-home income of workers.