The intersection of casual work and platform work: Lessons learned from the casual work agenda for the labour protection of platform workers

IF 1.1 Q2 LAW European Labour Law Journal Pub Date : 2023-09-20 DOI:10.1177/20319525231194269
Ilda Durri
{"title":"The intersection of casual work and platform work: Lessons learned from the casual work agenda for the labour protection of platform workers","authors":"Ilda Durri","doi":"10.1177/20319525231194269","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, the advent of platform work, i.e. work activities channelled through web platforms or apps, has been at the centre of discussions for being ‘an opportunity-generating machine’, and its darker side, that is the poor quality of working conditions associated with it, has also been discussed. Work patterns inherent in platform work, such as unpredictable work schedules and work insecurity (even for the next minute or hour), the lack of a stable income, and exclusion from even basic protections, have long been detected. They can be traced back in the daily work of dock workers in the late nineteenth century, but also in more contemporary forms of casual work, such as on-call work or zero-hours work. Accordingly, history seems to repeat itself, and even go to extremes with platform work. Against this background, this article focuses on the intersection of casual work and platform work, and explains that as a result of it, platform work can actually fall within the scope of broader regulatory strategies applicable to casual work, hereinafter the casual work agenda. The regulatory challenges deriving from the insecure nature of the work have already been dealt with by national and supranational regulators in the context of casual work. This article evaluates an already-available blueprint - the casual work agenda - in light of reducing the working hours, job (work), income, and employment status insecurity associated with platform work. To this end, it observes that a rich legal landscape exists in the Netherlands for addressing these insecurities. At the EU level, there are also insightful legal tools, prominent examples being the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive, the Fixed-Term Work Directive, and the Working Time Directive. They provide for important legal safeguards, especially in countering working time and job insecurity. This article also looks at the proposed EU Directive on Platform Work and notes that it overlooks the legal safeguards contained in these instruments. Having regard to this, it calls on EU policymakers to redefine this legal initiative in light of the best regulatory practices offered by the casual work agenda.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Labour Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231194269","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In recent years, the advent of platform work, i.e. work activities channelled through web platforms or apps, has been at the centre of discussions for being ‘an opportunity-generating machine’, and its darker side, that is the poor quality of working conditions associated with it, has also been discussed. Work patterns inherent in platform work, such as unpredictable work schedules and work insecurity (even for the next minute or hour), the lack of a stable income, and exclusion from even basic protections, have long been detected. They can be traced back in the daily work of dock workers in the late nineteenth century, but also in more contemporary forms of casual work, such as on-call work or zero-hours work. Accordingly, history seems to repeat itself, and even go to extremes with platform work. Against this background, this article focuses on the intersection of casual work and platform work, and explains that as a result of it, platform work can actually fall within the scope of broader regulatory strategies applicable to casual work, hereinafter the casual work agenda. The regulatory challenges deriving from the insecure nature of the work have already been dealt with by national and supranational regulators in the context of casual work. This article evaluates an already-available blueprint - the casual work agenda - in light of reducing the working hours, job (work), income, and employment status insecurity associated with platform work. To this end, it observes that a rich legal landscape exists in the Netherlands for addressing these insecurities. At the EU level, there are also insightful legal tools, prominent examples being the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive, the Fixed-Term Work Directive, and the Working Time Directive. They provide for important legal safeguards, especially in countering working time and job insecurity. This article also looks at the proposed EU Directive on Platform Work and notes that it overlooks the legal safeguards contained in these instruments. Having regard to this, it calls on EU policymakers to redefine this legal initiative in light of the best regulatory practices offered by the casual work agenda.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临时工作和平台工作的交集:从临时工作议程中吸取的教训,以保护平台工人的劳动保护
近年来,平台工作的出现,即通过网络平台或应用程序引导的工作活动,一直是“创造机会的机器”的讨论中心,其阴暗面,即与之相关的工作条件质量差,也被讨论了。平台工作固有的工作模式,如不可预测的工作时间表和工作不安全感(即使是下一分钟或一小时),缺乏稳定的收入,甚至被排除在基本的保护之外,早就被发现了。它们可以追溯到19世纪末码头工人的日常工作,但也可以追溯到更现代形式的临时工,如随叫随到的工作或零时工。因此,历史似乎在重演,甚至在平台工作中走向极端。在此背景下,本文将重点关注临时工和平台工作的交集,并解释由于它,平台工作实际上可以属于适用于临时工的更广泛的监管策略的范围,以下是临时工议程。国家和超国家监管机构已经在非正式工作的背景下处理了由于工作不安全性质而产生的监管挑战。本文根据减少与平台工作相关的工作时间、工作(工作)、收入和就业状况的不安全感,评估了一个已有的蓝图——临时工议程。为此目的,它指出,荷兰有丰富的法律环境来解决这些不安全问题。在欧盟层面,也有一些有见地的法律工具,突出的例子是《透明和可预测工作条件指令》、《固定期限工作指令》和《工作时间指令》。它们提供了重要的法律保障,特别是在应对工作时间和工作不稳定方面。本文还研究了拟议的欧盟平台工作指令,并指出它忽略了这些文书中包含的法律保障。考虑到这一点,它呼吁欧盟政策制定者根据临时工作议程提供的最佳监管实践,重新定义这一法律倡议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
28.60%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Anti-discrimination cases decided by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2023 Resocialisation through prisoner remuneration: The unconstitutionally low remuneration of working prisoners in Germany Work in prison: Reintegration or exclusion and exploitation? Beyond profit: A model framework for ethical and feasible private prison labour Minding the gap? Blind spots in the ILO's and the EU's perspective on anti-forced labour policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1