The Congress-led Karnataka government has introduced the draft of the Karnataka Platform-Based Gig Workers Bill 2024, which aims at providing social security and welfare measures for platform-based gig workers in the state.
The bill is expected to be passed in the ongoing Monsoon Session of the Assembly. While many gig workers across the country have been seeking better working conditions, Karnataka, which has one of the largest numbers of gig workers in the country, has decided to bring in a law similar to Rajasthan’s but with more tweaks. Speaking to News18, Karnataka Labour Minister Santhosh Lad explained the provisions of the bill.
Edited excerpts:
The industry has been saying that the Karnataka Platform-Based Gig Workers Bill 2024 will hamper the ease of doing business. What do you say to that?
I don’t know how the ease of doing business will be hampered. We are only interested in getting a cess amount on the transaction based on the business that we are planning to do. There will be a body that will collect that money, which will ensure that those who are working under that app will be given welfare social schemes.
There is no inspection or rounds, and for almost a year now, we have been deliberating on this. I should thank Rahul Gandhi for starting this. It was started in Rajasthan when we (Congress) were in power, but we do not know if the successive BJP government that came has implemented it or not.
We have copied a bit of Rajasthan’s model. I called upon top officials from the International Labour Organisation and held 18 rounds of meetings. Of late, NASSCOM also participated in the discussion and has given us their suggestions. The draft has incorporated some of the suggestions, and now it has gone for vetting by our department.
NGOs who are closely working with us also have the draft, and they are also making suggestions. One should understand that any new law which is brought about in this country, even at the gram panchayat level, will have some teething problems. But I do not agree that the move hampers business.
How do you plan to convince the industry insiders?
We have called them and held several rounds of discussions. We must understand that we are not collecting this fee from their pocket. The money will neither be taken from the industry nor from the gig workers working on the ground. It will be on the commuters using the service. It is a very small charge of 50 paise, Re 1, or Rs 2. It will depend on the transaction.
What conditions did the gig workers discuss with you?
Take into consideration the working conditions of a gig worker. He spends 12 to 14 hours on the road, the amount of pollution and carbon dioxide he must be inhaling, and the effects on his health. I have been very loud in my appeal, and I have had people get angry with me on this. No industry or businessman will talk about this, but those who are affiliated with this are prone to so much risk, accidents, and health risks.
I challenge you, if a person is working on these roads every day for 10 to 15 years, imagine the compromise he will make to his life and his family. I say, as a businessman and a stakeholder, it is mandatory for you to take this seriously. They can come up with models on how to improve this business model; the government will be interested in it.
They should remember they are only an app provider, right? It is the gig worker who is providing the vehicle, he is driving around, he is risking his life on the roads for hours. You are creating business for him, he is creating the money for you. Who is the bigger player here? He is the main person in the scheme of things and he is compromising with his life, giving his life and soul for this. Keeping all these considerations, I asked them to give us a proposal, which they did not.
Finally, we had to give suggestions in the public domain. That’s when they began discussions. Interested parties have come through NASSCOM and hopefully we see it passing in this Assembly session.
One criticism was the government hardly put it out in English and those who understood Kannada better did not get a chance until the last moment. That means it was not up for debate for long. How do you respond to that?
It is an understanding on the trade platform. The stakeholders started putting conditions, which I said if they did, it would be done for both parties. You cannot say to the driver that he can’t cancel five or six trips. He has the right to cancel, but before he does so, he must assess where the customer is. Many drivers try to see if it is economically viable for them before they pick their customer for the ride. But then it should also not affect the customer.
Then there was a concern that drivers have complaints against them, and removing the driver from the platform should be barred. My counter-question is, if the customer is a problem, will they bar the customer? That won’t work, right? There should be equal ground on how to tackle such issues and a solution should be arrived at.
Our interest is to collect a cess, whichever model works and is agreeable to both parties, for a small fee. It is important to organise this business which is going to only grow as the years go by. We want to concentrate on welfare, and that will be our sole aim.
Will this bill stand legal scrutiny?
There is nothing illegal in this because we are all agreeing to a format. This is a new thing we want to do, and there is nothing that would attract legal issues as all parties will agree upon the terms and conditions.
