Platform for Change

A women-led union gives voice to India’s gig workers

Seema Singh cofounded the GIPSWU after Urban Company refused to listen to workers‘ demands and blocked her ID in retaliation. SHAHID TANTRAY FOR THE CARAVAN
01 February, 2026

We’re glad this article found its way to you. If you’re not a subscriber, we’d love for you to consider subscribing—your support helps make this journalism possible. Either way, we hope you enjoy the read. Click to subscribe: subscribing

Seema Singh’s frustrations with her employer were coming to a head in 2020. Two years earlier, she had quit her job at a salon after seeing an advertisement by Urban Company that promised flexibility, autonomy and better pay. Seema liked the idea of working on her own terms—choosing her hours, and earning more per appointment, would potentially allow her more time with her children.

Founded as UrbanClap in 2014, Urban Company was one of the pioneers of India’s platform-based gig economy, connecting customers with a range of service professionals, such as electricians, plumbers, cleaners and beauticians. It joined an expanding ecosystem of companies involved in ride-sharing, food delivery, groceries and logistics. The platform model was presented as a win-win: customers received services at unprecedented speeds, companies scaled rapidly without taking on the obligations of conventional employers, and workers were told that they were gaining flexibility. According to the union labour ministry, there were 7.7 million gig workers in India as of 2020–21, and this figure is expected to rise to 23.5 million by the end of the decade.

It did not take Seema long to realise that the cost of the added convenience would be borne by the workers. “The system in India is so bad, there is no limit to how much these companies take advantage,” she told me. “Outside India, the gig economy must be as they say it is. Here, we do the work out of necessity—there is no choice.” Platforms such as Urban Company, Zomato, Swiggy, Uber and Ola are able to sidestep accountability and obligations under labour law, while workers have weak legal standing, ineffective grievance redressal mechanisms and negligible institutional protection. For all the talk of flexibility, they are forced to work long hours if they are to make a living off their meagre earnings.

Seema said that the first signs she noticed were the debt traps. Beauticians like her were required to purchase equipment and products through loans facilitated by the platform, with repayments automatically deducted from their earnings. They were sorted into tiers—classic, prime and luxe—with each higher tier advertised as an opportunity to earn more, though they came with higher costs, such as more expensive kits. Workers often had to absorb discounts offered to customers, while also having to pay for their travel and platform commissions. “After all that work, we have no savings in hand,” Seema told me. “Banks don’t give loans, no health insurance, we have nothing.”

Thanks for reading till the end. If you valued this piece, and you're already a subscriber, consider contributing to keep us afloat—so more readers can access work like this. Click to make a contribution: Contribute