The new EP Library Catalogue allows you to search the EP collection for:
- Journals, books and articles in paper or electronic format
- EPRS and Policy Department publications
Abstract by the authors: Examines whether EU law provides a means for individuals carrying out work by way of digital platforms or apps to claim rights to collective bargaining. Considers whether those falsely described as self-employed are entitled to workers' rights, or benefit from a legitimate objective in the public interest to bargain collectively without breaking competition law.
Abstract by the authors: With atypical work gaining popularity, platform work seems to combine all the elements which, by deviating significantly from the standard employment relationship, challenge social security systems. After an overview of the features of the standard employment relationship and the different ways in which non-standard forms of work diverge from them, the article focuses on the nature of platform work. It then analyses how platform work is regulated in five European social security systems (i.e. Germany, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Belgium), and how this regulation may fare when analysed under the lens of the recent European Commission’s proposal for a Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed. The article concludes by highlighting the need for further adaptation of social security systems to the specific features of platform work, and by noting the risks of a regulatory approach towards this new form of work being dominated by the exclusion of low-paid work from the scope of labour-related social insurance schemes.
Abstract by the authors: Platform workers face problems in accessing effective social protection schemes. Furthermore, these workers are not always in a position to build up robust social protection rights even in case they can participate in the schemes. Compared to standard workers, they work in a precarious situation. The small tasks they perform, their geographical mobility and their low earnings are issues that create problems for social security systems’ ability to accommodate these workers. In this contribution, attention to the specific working conditions of platform workers is given; starting from the concept of standard work and a discussion of the way platform work deviates from that performed by standard workers (the original basis used to design traditional social protection schemes). In a second part of this paper, the various challenges that platform work create for social protection schemes are enunciated. In the third part of the contribution, the recent EU Recommendation on access to social protection is used as a yardstick to discuss what kind of answers should be given to accommodate platform workers in social protection schemes. In the final part, conclusions around three elements that are characteristic of platform work, yet not sufficiently addressed in national social protection schemes, nor in the EU Recommendation, are developed. These observations help to establish findings on the future outlook of social protection schemes, which should be inclusive and accommodative for all (new) types of work.
Abstract by the authors: Much of the literature produced in recent years has tried to systematize the various forms of platform work while considering how to (re)classify those working through digital platforms. While this contributes to our understanding of the nature of work in the digital economy and the extent to which current labour law is problematic for some platform workers, the gender dimension and implications, especially the growing concern about discrimination between men and women in the digital economy, appear to have received little attention so far. A recent study showed that some female platform workers receive lower pay than their male counterparts. As some online platforms use algorithms to determine pay levels, the key question addressed here is to the extent to which current EU gender equality law, and the principle of equal pay for women and men in particular, is adequate for protecting platform workers in a situation where work-related decisions are not taken by a human being but by an algorithm that is the potential source of discrimination. To understand how regulation should be 'calibrated' in cases where algorithms result in discrimination, the theory of classification bias can be helpful. It is assumed that the reason for providing protection based on the equal pay principle to a specific group of employees is not compelling enough to exclude platform workers who are classified as self-employed. This article starts with a brief examination of the challenges of working in the digital economy and then goes on to analyse the role of algorithms and their potential to discriminate based on gender. It is argued that the theory of classification bias could be used to address discriminatory algorithmic decision-making. The theory is then applied to the EU's principle of equal pay for women and men, suggesting some improvements in relation to platform work.
Abstract by the authors: There are few topics in contemporary labour law scholarship that have generated more literature than work in the so-called ‘platform economy’. To date, much work has focussed on the question of defining the personal scope of the employment relationship and on the problems of using existing classifications of employment status in the context of work organised via platforms. This article seeks to address the much less-discussed issue of how collective bargaining may function in the ‘platform economy’, and the role of collective labour law actors, most notably the social partners. The article argues that, rather than focussing on individual employment status and litigation, it is by developing a regulatory framework supportive of, and that involves key stakeholders in, strong sectoral collective bargaining that work in the ‘platform economy’ can be adequately regulated to the benefit of workers, business and the State.
Abstract by the author: Platform economy organizations often resolve fundamental organizing problems with novel solutions, thereby transforming their relationship with core stakeholders including regulators and workers. Despite the integral role played by platform workers, research on the interplay between platforms and regulatory conditions has yet to take workers into consideration. We investigate how Uber drivers engage with novel forms of organizing across different regulatory structures. Drawing on insights from resource dependence theory, we conduct a topic modeling analysis of drivers’ online forum posts and a complementary qualitative analysis of triangulated data sources. Our findings reveal that workers do not always succumb to organizing solutions imposed upon them; they also actively oppose or supplement them. Importantly, platform workers’ responses vary with the local regulatory structure, which affects the mutual dependency and balance of power between platforms and workers. We discuss implications for the literature on new forms of organizing and the platform economy.
.
Abstract by the authors: This paper extends research on algorithmic management by examining mechanisms of compliance. Algorithmic management has predominantly been analysed in terms of the exercise of disciplinary power over workers and rational control of labour. Facing algorithms, platform workers would be in a situation of fear, passivity and frustration. In this paper, we utilise the Foucauldian framework of ‘dispositive’ in order to reconceptualise platforms as exerting both rational and normative control. Based on a qualitative case study of the food‐delivery platform Deliveroo, we underscore that algorithmic rational control, although fallible, is being reinforced by techniques of subjectification. Several dispositives on the platform, such as the pay‐per‐delivery and shift picker systems, generate an active mobilisation of workers. Our discussion highlights the governmentality power of algorithmic management, which builds consent by promoting a hyper‐meritocratic ideal of justice.
Abstract by the authors: The production structure that companies of the so-called ‘platform capitalism’ adopt is based—in very essential terms—on the idea of resorting to the collaboration of an indefinite quantity of workers who are asked to provide their service with their own means (bicycles, cars, etc.) only when it is actually requested by a customer—on demand. (…)
Abstract by the authors : This study explores the use of mobile social media in three successive campaigns to unionize workers (2012–2014) in Israel. We examine the workers’ efforts to initiate a union in their workplace as a sociomaterial process of organizing. An analysis of unionization-related Facebook pages and interviews with union activists reveals how the activists leveraged the portable-visibility afforded by social media networks (Facebook and WhatsApp) and mobile devices (Smartphones) to create and express their collective voice, achieving both mobilization of workers and recognition by management. The analysis traces how the activists tactically leveraged the portable-visibility of the media they used, fine-tuning visibility and manipulating portability during the covert and overt phases of their campaign. In the conclusion, we unpack the challenges involved in utilizing these neoliberal platforms in workers unionization efforts within the organizational setting and discuss the implications of these tensions for the study of both organizational resistance and mass protest.
Abstract by the author: The burgeoning gig economy largely operates outside of existing labour standards, mainly because in most countries workers are classified as self-employed rather than as employees. Until now, much legal effort has been focused on bringing platform workers within the scope of labour law by proving that they fit the definition of employee or worker, which functions as the gateway to employment rights. This has yielded some positive outcomes, particularly in exposing sham self-employment. However, this approach is limited, not least because platforms are adept at reconfiguring their conditions of work to avoid the legal definition of employee, or at fragmenting their corporate structure to evade the jurisdiction of courts in the region where workers in fact find themselves. By contrast, not enough attention has been paid to how labour law standards, fashioned for the ‘employee’ paradigm, should be reshaped to meet the needs of platform workers regardless of their employment status
Abstract by the authors: In this inductive, qualitative study, we observe how Uber, a company often hailed as being the poster-child of the sharing economy facilitated through a digital platform may also at times represent and reinforce postcapitalist hyper-exploitation. Drawing on the motivations and lived experiences of 31 Uber drivers in Toronto, Canada, we provide insights into three groups of Uber drivers: (1) those that are driving part-time to earn extra money in conjunction with studying or doing other jobs, (2) those that are unemployed and for whom driving for Uber is the only source of income, and (3) professional drivers, who are trying to keep pace with the durable digital landscape and competitive marketplace. We emphasize the ways in which each driver group simultaneously acknowledges and rejects their own precarious employment by distancing techniques such as minimizing the risks and accentuating the advantages of the driver role. We relate these findings to a broader discussion about how driving for Uber fuels the traditional capitalist narrative that working hard and having a dream will lead to advancement, security and success. We conclude by discussing other alternative economies within the sharing economy.
Abstract by the authors: We present comparative research on precarious work and trade union strategies in three sectors (construction, industrial cleaning, temporary agency work) across seven European countries. Specific sectors have a profile of precarious work that is remarkably similar across countries, originating from similar employer strategies and work organizations. This results in unions facing comparable challenges concerning precarious work at sectoral level and developing comparable sectoral strategies to combat precarious work. The success of these strategies depends to a large extent on the available power resources. Between sectors within single countries, we observe some similarities but also very substantial differences in their institutional configuration and in actors’ constellations, power resources and repertoires of action. National institutional contexts seem much less significant than often assumed.
Abstract by the authors: Crowdwork conducted via digital platforms is a young form of work, but a growing part of the gig economy. Typical for crowdwork is low pay, volatile income streams and no social security benefits. Also, crowdworkers have few possibilities for social comparison or negotiation because they work outside of company organisations. This article examines the question of whether these conditions mean that crowdworkers’ expectations about justice in crowdwork arrangements differ in comparison to their expectations regarding justice in conventional employment relationships. This question is addressed empirically on the basis of 36 qualitative interviews and a survey of 230 crowdworkers. The justice expectations of crowdworkers involved in different types of crowdworking platforms in German-speaking countries were examined. In our sample, crowd work typically serves to supplement – not replace – conventional employment. This explorative research shows that crowdworkers use similar standards of justice regarding work performance in their evaluations of work mediated via crowdwork platforms and conventional employment. It shows that crowdworkers perceive injustices in four specific areas: planning insecurity, lack of transparency in performance evaluation, lack of clarity in task briefings and low remuneration. These areas correspond to the theoretical dimensions of distributive and procedural justice on Colquitt’s (2001) organisational justice scale. These findings have implications for future efforts to regulate crowdwork.
Abstract by the authors: This study examines the causal relationship between education and the use of digital collaborative platforms as a first step in exploring the potential impact of the new digital labour markets on inequality. From the viewpoint of transaction costs theory, the less educated could benefit significantly from the digital collaborative economy due to the reduction in information costs made possible by this new form of exchange. Conversely, a positive relationship between educational level and platform use may be expected following neoclassical and institutionalist economic theories. Using microdata from the 2016 Eurobarometer survey, together with an instrumental variables strategy and conventional ordinary least squares models, hypothesis testing reveals that education has a clear positive effect on digital collaborative platform use. As a result, the less educated are less likely to access the job opportunities offered by digital labour markets. Understanding the relationship between education and access to digital collaborative platforms and impacts on socio-economic inequality is crucial for designing future public policies that promote social justice and well-being in a disrupted landscape.
If you are unable to access the article you need, please contact us and we will get it for you as soon as possible.
| Data Protection Notice | Cookie Policy & Inventory |
 |
 |
 |
Journals on all devices |
Books, articles, EPRS publications & more |
Newspapers on all devices |