Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has temporarily stayed a recent judgment from a single judge bench that classified ANI Technologies Private Limited, operator of Ola, as the employer of its drivers. This ruling was significant as it indicated that Ola would be required to adhere to laws protecting women from workplace sexual harassment if complaints were filed against its drivers.
The decision to halt the judgment was made on October 4, with the court stating that the matter necessitates further consideration. The case is scheduled for a hearing again on October 28. The initial ruling, which garnered support from various quarters, reignited discussions about gig workers’ employment status and the potential accountability of corporations in such scenarios.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a complaint filed by a woman who, in August 2018, alleged sexual harassment by an Ola driver while commuting from Yelahanka to JP Nagar in Bengaluru. Despite her repeated pleas for the driver to stop, she felt uncomfortable throughout the ride.
In response to the complaint, Ola claimed to have blacklisted the driver but the woman sought more stringent consequences, filing a complaint under the Protection of Sexual Harassment (PoSH) Act. Ola argued that it served merely as a transmitter and that labor laws did not apply since drivers were independent contractors.
However, the court countered this stance, noting that the PoSH Act’s definition of “employee” is broad. It determined that a relationship of “employer” and “employee” indeed exists between Ola and its drivers. The court pointed out that Ola’s subscription and customer agreements lacked explicit statements absolving the company of responsibility for incidents occurring during rides.
In its findings, the court criticized Ola’s Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) for neglecting the matter and failing to conduct a thorough investigation. Consequently, Ola was directed to compensate the victim with ₹5,000.
This ruling, while now paused, highlights ongoing debates regarding the classification of gig workers and the responsibilities of tech-driven companies toward their workforce.
Read More: