In the run up to Christmas and New Year, app based delivery workers across multiple Indian cities have been quietly planning a different kind of holiday event – logging off together during peak party hours. In the last few days, unions and informal WhatsApp groups linked to delivery workers have circulated posters announcing flash strikes on 25 and 31 December, inspired by a call from the Telangana Gig and Platform Workers Union and similar collectives. The core anger is around 10 minute and other hyper fast delivery promises, shrinking per order payments, fuel costs that workers say eat up incentives, and opaque rating systems that can deactivate IDs overnight. Workers are discussing coordinated log offs between roughly 8 pm and midnight so that platforms feel the pinch when order volumes are at their highest, while customers see for themselves what it takes to keep unrealistic timelines running in real traffic and weather conditions.
For the individual rider weaving through congested streets, the pressure is intensely personal. Many talk about feeling forced to jump lights or ride the wrong way just to avoid late delivery penalties that shave off already thin earnings. Getting an automated warning because rain slowed traffic, or a customer insisted on a doorstep chat, leaves them angry and humiliated. At home, spouses and parents worry every time they hear about another road accident on the news, yet also know EMI and rent depend on those extra incentives linked to peak hour surges. Inside partner restaurants and dark stores, HR and supervisors are caught in the middle, trying to calm exhausted delivery partners who vent about app pings and deductions that local managers themselves do not fully control. The mood is a mix of quiet rebellion and fear of algorithmic retaliation.
From a compliance and leadership perspective, these flash strike calls land in the grey zone where gig work, labour welfare and customer expectations collide. While gig workers are not treated as traditional employees under wage and industrial relations laws, the Social Security Code already recognises them for limited welfare purposes, and there is growing pressure for state level welfare boards and minimum earning guarantees. Companies that advertise extreme delivery speeds without factoring real world safety may face scrutiny under occupational safety principles, unfair trade practice rules, and even negligence claims if accidents are linked to documented pressure tactics. CXOs and CHROs in platforms and client companies need to rethink SLAs, build safety metrics into performance dashboards, and publish clear policies that de link rider pay from dangerous time guarantees, while creating grievance channels that are not just in app bots.
If you were advising a delivery platform today, how would you redesign incentives so speed does not quietly reward risky driving?
As a customer or HR leader, would you be willing to accept slower deliveries if it clearly improved worker safety and mental health?
For the individual rider weaving through congested streets, the pressure is intensely personal. Many talk about feeling forced to jump lights or ride the wrong way just to avoid late delivery penalties that shave off already thin earnings. Getting an automated warning because rain slowed traffic, or a customer insisted on a doorstep chat, leaves them angry and humiliated. At home, spouses and parents worry every time they hear about another road accident on the news, yet also know EMI and rent depend on those extra incentives linked to peak hour surges. Inside partner restaurants and dark stores, HR and supervisors are caught in the middle, trying to calm exhausted delivery partners who vent about app pings and deductions that local managers themselves do not fully control. The mood is a mix of quiet rebellion and fear of algorithmic retaliation.
From a compliance and leadership perspective, these flash strike calls land in the grey zone where gig work, labour welfare and customer expectations collide. While gig workers are not treated as traditional employees under wage and industrial relations laws, the Social Security Code already recognises them for limited welfare purposes, and there is growing pressure for state level welfare boards and minimum earning guarantees. Companies that advertise extreme delivery speeds without factoring real world safety may face scrutiny under occupational safety principles, unfair trade practice rules, and even negligence claims if accidents are linked to documented pressure tactics. CXOs and CHROs in platforms and client companies need to rethink SLAs, build safety metrics into performance dashboards, and publish clear policies that de link rider pay from dangerous time guarantees, while creating grievance channels that are not just in app bots.
If you were advising a delivery platform today, how would you redesign incentives so speed does not quietly reward risky driving?
As a customer or HR leader, would you be willing to accept slower deliveries if it clearly improved worker safety and mental health?