Balancing Flexibility and Legal Safety Obligations for Gig Workers: Insights from the Karnataka High Court Ruling

In a significant judgement in December 2025, the Karnataka High Court ruled that certain categories of gig workers, particularly those engaged in repeated delivery and transport work with structured timings, customer ratings, and algorithmic task allocation, cannot be classified as "independent contractors" for basic Occupational Safety & Health (OSH) compliance. This decision stemmed from a writ petition by a worker who suffered an injury in a delivery-related road accident, alleging that the platform failed to provide safety gear or insurance.

The court examined the practices of the app and found that algorithmic task assignment, mandatory app check-ins, and performance penalties created a sufficiently controlled relationship akin to an employer-worker nexus for OSH duties. It ordered aggregators to provide helmets, reflective gear, basic first-aid kits, and documented fatigue breaks for structured shifts. The platform is expected to appeal in the Supreme Court, but the High Court's reasoning is already shaping compliance debates across states.

Many gig workers, especially delivery riders and app-based couriers in Bengaluru, Mysuru, and Mangaluru, resonated with this ruling. They spoke about the difference between "optional gigs" and days when the app keeps ringing with tasks they dare not refuse if they hope to make a living. Riders shared screenshots of routes assigned without rest windows and days when they covered 150–180 km under time pressure, knowing that a single "late" tag against their account could slash earnings.

From a compliance leadership standpoint, the Karnataka High Court decision presents both immediate obligations and strategic uncertainties. While gig platforms traditionally relied on "partner" narratives to deny employer-style duties, this judgement suggests that courts will examine functional control, such as schedules, penalties, performance rules, rather than contractual labels when determining OSH applicability.

If you were advising a gig platform today, how would you balance flexibility with legally grounded safety obligations? What kinds of documented rest and risk-mitigation practices would genuinely protect riders without undermining the gig model?

The Karnataka High Court's ruling has indeed brought the gig economy under the spotlight, raising pertinent questions about the balance between flexibility and safety obligations.

Firstly, it's essential to understand that while gig work offers flexibility, it should not compromise on the safety and well-being of the workers. The core issue here is the classification of gig workers as 'independent contractors', which traditionally absolves platforms from certain employer responsibilities. However, the court's ruling emphasizes the need to look beyond contractual labels and consider the functional control exerted by platforms.

Legally, this ruling suggests a shift towards recognizing gig workers as 'employees' for the purpose of OSH compliance. This means platforms may be required to provide safety gear, insurance, and ensure proper rest periods, among other things. It's crucial to keep abreast of evolving labor laws and court rulings in this regard.

As for balancing flexibility with safety obligations, a few practical steps can be taken. Firstly, platforms should conduct thorough risk assessments and implement safety equipment policies. This could include providing helmets, reflective gear, and basic first-aid kits. Secondly, platforms should document rest periods and ensure that workers are not overworked. This could involve setting a maximum limit on the number of hours or tasks a worker can undertake in a day.

Risk-mitigation practices could include providing insurance coverage for workers and setting up a robust incident response system. Platforms should also consider providing training on emergency procedures and first-aid.

Finally, it's important to remember that ignoring these obligations could lead to legal liability and damage to the platform's reputation. Therefore, it's in the best interest of platforms to proactively address these issues and ensure the safety and well-being of their workers.