The gig-pay alarm: what the numbers tell us
I spend a lot of time thinking about the future of work. The Economic Survey 2025–26 recently landed a clear, uncomfortable fact on the table: about 40% of India’s gig workers report monthly earnings below Rs 15,000 [^1]. That statistic is not just a line in a report — it is a signal that flexibility without fair pay becomes vulnerability.
In this post I want to explain the Survey’s call for minimum per-task or per-hour earnings, why that matters, and what balanced policy and platform responses might look like.
Quick background: the gig economy in India
The platform-enabled gig economy grew rapidly over the last half-decade. Estimates in official commentary show the gig workforce rose from roughly 77 lakh in FY21 to about 1.2 crore in FY25 — a 55% jump — and non-agricultural gig jobs are projected to constitute a meaningful share of employment by the end of the decade [^1][^2]. Platforms now coordinate work allocation, monitoring and payments for delivery, quick commerce, digital micro-tasks and many other services. That scale brings opportunity, but also new forms of income volatility and thin credit histories for workers.
If you’ve followed my earlier writing, you’ll know I’ve long argued that the rise of gig work requires rethinking job definitions and protections — see my piece “Gig Economy — A New Name for Self-Employment” where I explored both opportunities and pitfalls of platform work [^3].
What the Economic Survey found (short version)
- Roughly 40% of gig workers earn under Rs 15,000/month. This is the headline that has generated policy attention [^1].
- Income volatility and “thin-file” credit records limit financial inclusion for many gig workers, reducing access to productive assets and upward mobility [^1].
- Platform algorithms concentrate control over allocation, monitoring and pay, creating risks of bias and burnout.
- The Survey recommends targeted interventions including minimum per-hour or per-task earnings (with compensation for waiting time), algorithmic transparency, competition rules and co-investment in tools and training [^1].
The proposal: minimum per-task (or per-hour) earnings — rationale
The idea is straightforward: set a pay floor for tasks or time so that gig work delivers predictable basic incomes and is not used to undercut regulated employment. Rationale includes:
- Reducing the cost gap between regular and gig work to avoid employers circumventing benefits through contractual forms.
- Making earnings predictable, which eases access to credit and social protections.
- Compensating for ‘waiting’ or other unpaid on-platform time that currently lowers effective hourly returns.
The Survey frames this as a way to make gig work a choice, rather than something people are pushed into because of lack of alternatives [^1].
Potential benefits
- Improved income floor for low- and medium-skill gig workers, reducing poverty traps.
- Easier access to formal finance and social protection when incomes are predictable.
- Incentive for platforms to invest in worker training and co-investment in assets (bikes, equipment), enabling upward mobility.
- Reduced industrial tension: pay floors could ease frequent strikes by delivery and quick-commerce workers.
Challenges and trade-offs
- Poorly designed minima could reduce demand for workers (platforms might automate or ration tasks) or shift costs to consumers.
- Implementation complexity: tasks vary widely in time, difficulty and context; designing fair per-task rates is technically and administratively challenging.
- Enforcement: the fragmented nature of the sector and small platforms complicate monitoring and compliance.
- Risk of unintended exclusions if platforms narrow worker eligibility (ratings, onboarding) to limit costs.
Policy recommendations (practical steps)
- Define categories: start with high-volume, homogeneous tasks (food delivery, quick-commerce, standard micro-tasks) and pilot per-task floors.
- Compensate waiting time: ensure remuneration accounts for on-platform idle time between tasks.
- Algorithmic transparency and data portability: require platforms to share anonymised allocation and pay data with regulators to detect gaming.
- Co-investment incentives: fiscal or concessional finance to help platforms and local governments co-invest in worker assets and training.
- Progressive rollout: pilot in select metros and sectors, evaluate impacts on incomes, demand, and platform behaviour before scaling.
- Strengthen dispute resolution and grievance redress tied to the new Labour Codes and e-Shram registration to enable portability of benefits.
Perspectives: workers and platforms
- Workers: many will welcome predictability and a clearer path to formal finance and training. But workers fear that strict floors may reduce work volumes; hence worker groups should be part of design and pilots.
- Platforms: they must balance margins and customer-pricing. Clear, phased rules and incentives for co-investment reduce abrupt shocks and encourage constructive collaboration.
Concluding takeaways
The Survey’s 40% figure makes a blunt case: scale plus flexibility is not enough. If policy simply tolerates low, unstable pay, gig work can be a dead-end for millions. Minimum per-task or per-hour earnings — thoughtfully designed, piloted and paired with transparency, training and co-investment — can be a practical instrument to improve livelihoods without killing the productive flexibility platforms offer.
I’ll close with a simple test for any reform: will it increase workers’ ability to choose work freely, save, access credit and upgrade skills? If not, it needs rethinking. For those of us who care about both opportunity and dignity of work, that should be the guiding principle.
[^1]: Coverage summarising the Economic Survey’s findings and recommendations: Outlook Business, The Week and other press reporting (Jan 29, 2026) Outlook Business / The Week.
[^2]: Data point on workforce growth referenced in press summaries of the Economic Survey (Jan 29, 2026).
[^3]: My earlier reflection on gig work and self-employment: "Gig Economy - A New Name for Self-Employment" (blog) link.
Regards,
Hemen Parekh
Any questions / doubts / clarifications regarding this blog? Just ask (by typing or talking) my Virtual Avatar on the website embedded below. Then "Share" that to your friend on WhatsApp.
Get correct answer to any question asked by Shri Amitabh Bachchan on Kaun Banega Crorepati, faster than any contestant
Hello Candidates :
- For UPSC – IAS – IPS – IFS etc., exams, you must prepare to answer, essay type questions which test your General Knowledge / Sensitivity of current events
- If you have read this blog carefully , you should be able to answer the following question:
- Need help ? No problem . Following are two AI AGENTS where we have PRE-LOADED this question in their respective Question Boxes . All that you have to do is just click SUBMIT
- www.HemenParekh.ai { a SLM , powered by my own Digital Content of more than 50,000 + documents, written by me over past 60 years of my professional career }
- www.IndiaAGI.ai { a consortium of 3 LLMs which debate and deliver a CONSENSUS answer – and each gives its own answer as well ! }
- It is up to you to decide which answer is more comprehensive / nuanced ( For sheer amazement, click both SUBMIT buttons quickly, one after another ) Then share any answer with yourself / your friends ( using WhatsApp / Email ). Nothing stops you from submitting ( just copy / paste from your resource ), all those questions from last year’s UPSC exam paper as well !
- May be there are other online resources which too provide you answers to UPSC “ General Knowledge “ questions but only I provide you in 26 languages !
No comments:
Post a Comment