Step outside a busy restaurant in Chennai or Pune during the dinner rush, and you\\\'ll likely see a cluster of delivery riders waiting on motorbikes, helmets off, checking their phones. Each rider\\\'s next job, their expected earnings for the hour, their current performance standing, and their chances of getting orders tomorrow are all being calculated, updated, and acted on in real time by software they can\\\'t inspect and rules they were never shown. That everyday scene captures something genuinely important about how work is organised in twenty-first-century urban India — and about the management questions it raises. This article offers a clear, structured account of how digital platform companies manage their gig workforces, with particular attention to India. Rather than revisiting the familiar debate about whether gig workers should be reclassified as employees, it looks at the management relationship itself — what platforms actually do to direct, measure, motivate, and discipline workers who are legally contractors, not employees. Three questions drive the analysis: What tools do platforms use to manage workers they don\\\'t technically employ? How do workers experience and respond to these systems? And what do those answers mean for companies, regulators, and the millions of Indian households whose financial stability depends on gig platforms? The argument runs through a review of contemporary scholarship, regulatory documents, and platform operational evidence, organised around four theoretical frameworks that together explain the mechanics, the logic, and the consequences of algorithmic management. The central claim is straightforward: the gig economy hasn\\\'t abolished management — it has moved it from human supervisors into software, with significant consequences for worker rights, welfare, and voice that India\\\'s regulatory frameworks are only beginning to confront.
Kamalesh et al. (Thu,) studied this question.