In a forceful and compelling intervention during the Winter Session of the Rajya Sabha, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Raghav Chadha delivered a speech that drew attention to what he described as one of the most urgent and overlooked crises of the digital economy: the working conditions of India’s gig workers. Speaking partly in Hindi and partly in English, Chadha urged Parliament and regulatory bodies to confront the reality that while app-based service companies have risen to commanding heights of wealth and convenience, the workers who hold these systems together operate in precarious conditions that receive far too little scrutiny.

Chadha began by highlighting how deeply quick-commerce and app-based services have embedded themselves into modern life. With the press of a button, a meal, a grocery packet, a taxi ride, or a home cleaning service arrives at a consumer’s door. Yet behind every such effortless transaction, he noted, is a worker whose life remains largely invisible. “Every day, we press a button on our mobile phone app and a notification arrives: ‘Your order is on its way,’” he observed. “But behind this notification, there is often a person we do not acknowledge.”

He contextualised this invisibility by listing the various workers who populate India’s sprawling gig economy: the delivery personnel of Zomato and Swiggy, taxi drivers working with Ola and Uber, the rapid-delivery riders of Blinkit and Zepto, and service professionals of Urban Company. These individuals, he argued, form the “invisible wheels of the Indian economy.” While the technology platforms they support have achieved valuations in the billions and have risen to the status of unicorns, the workers are left with conditions that, he said, are in many cases worse than those of daily wage earners or factory labourers. The central injustice, he emphasised, is that the wealth and convenience of the sector rests on a labour force that lacks the protections and recognition that should accompany such essential work.

The most pressing concern Chadha raised was what he termed the “tyranny of speed,” referring especially to the rise of 10-minute delivery models that have become a major selling point for grocery and instant-commerce apps. This business model, he argued, has created an environment in which delivery personnel are compelled to act in ways that endanger their own lives. Addressing the Rajya Sabha Chair, he pointed out that a delivery rider awaiting a green signal at a traffic light often faces the anxiety that if a few minutes are lost, the algorithm may penalise them: their rating could drop, their incentives diminish, or even their ability to log into the platform could be disrupted.

This pressure, Chadha said, pushes riders to overspeed, jump red lights, or take unsafe shortcuts. “For ten-minute delivery, he overspeeds, jumps red lights, and puts his life at risk,” he declared, calling on lawmakers to question whether a few minutes saved for the consumer is worth the risk to a worker’s life. He emphasised that while such companies advertise convenience and speed, the unseen toll is borne by individuals who have little safety net or institutional support.

Chadha also spoke at length about the emotional and psychological strain placed on gig workers. Customer anger, he said, has become an additional burden. Even minor delays of five to seven minutes often provoke hostile phone calls, threats of complaints, and the ubiquitous one-star rating that can jeopardise a worker’s earnings for an entire month. Ratings, the MP argued, have become tools of coercion and punishment rather than fair measures of performance, especially when workers confront factors outside their control, such as traffic congestion, weather changes, or delivery-area constraints.

The structural deficiencies of the gig economy formed another major part of his speech. Most gig workers do not have permanent employment status. Instead, companies classify them as “partners” or “associates,” a designation that absolves platforms of obligations such as stable working hours, fair compensation policies, workplace protections, or insurance. Chadha noted that many of these workers lack access to even basic health and accident coverage, despite the fact that their jobs inherently involve higher-than-average physical risk. “Their situation is even worse than that of an employee working in a factory,” he said, underscoring that gig workers often navigate hazardous roads, unpredictable urban conditions, and constant time pressure without any of the formal safety guarantees provided to other categories of labour.

By drawing attention to gig workers’ familial roles—“They are someone’s father, husband, brother, and son”—Chadha sought to humanise a workforce that is often treated as an anonymous extension of app-based convenience. He argued that the House should view the issue not simply as a labour concern but as a matter of social responsibility, justice, and long-term regulatory foresight. The push for ever-faster delivery, he asserted, must be reevaluated in light of human cost.

Chadha’s speech comes at a moment when India’s gig workforce has expanded rapidly, fuelled by digital adoption, urban growth, and changing consumer preferences. Yet the legal and regulatory framework remains underdeveloped. Gig workers continue to occupy a grey zone between self-employment and traditional employment, leaving them without clear rights or protections. While several state governments, including Rajasthan and Karnataka, have begun contemplating or implementing gig worker welfare schemes, national-level regulation has yet to catch up. Chadha’s intervention thus functions as both a critique of regulatory delay and a call to action.

His argument also resonated with ongoing global debates about the rights of gig workers. Countries such as the United Kingdom and Spain have taken steps to classify certain gig workers as employees or dependent contractors, extending to them benefits such as minimum wages, insurance coverage, and collective bargaining rights. By raising the issue in Parliament, Chadha placed India squarely within this broader international conversation.

Towards the end of his speech, Chadha made a direct appeal for Parliament to intervene through thoughtful legislation and oversight. The aim, he said, should be twofold: to ensure that the digital economy continues to innovate and expand, but also to ensure that the workers driving this growth receive dignity, safety, and fundamental protections. He reiterated that ending the “tyranny” of high-speed delivery models is not about stifling business but about establishing humane boundaries that prevent exploitation.

Pushing for a regulatory framework that addresses unfair incentives, dangerous delivery timelines, and the absence of safety nets, Chadha urged the House to consider “humane working conditions” as a non-negotiable right. The goal, he emphasised, must be to create an economic environment where convenience does not come at the cost of human wellbeing.

As Parliament continues its Winter Session, Chadha’s intervention is expected to amplify calls from labour activists, gig unions, and digital rights advocates who have long argued that India must not build its digital services economy on conditions that compromise worker safety. Whether the government responds with a legislative roadmap remains to be seen, but Chadha’s speech has undoubtedly re-centred the experiences of gig workers within national policy discourse, challenging both lawmakers and consumers to rethink the realities behind modern convenience.