“Can You Complete Your Delivery?” Comparing Canadian and European Union Legal Statuses of Platform Workers

IF 2.5 3区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics and Governance Pub Date : 2023-08-29 DOI:10.17645/pag.v11i3.6833
R. Gebert
{"title":"“Can You Complete Your Delivery?” Comparing Canadian and European Union Legal Statuses of Platform Workers","authors":"R. Gebert","doi":"10.17645/pag.v11i3.6833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In December 2021, the European Commission proposed a directive creating five criteria for the presumed classification of platform economy workers as salaried employees. The issue is timely, of course, as the digital organisation of work continues to grow rapidly. Our article contrasts the merits and limitations of this initiative to the Canadian experience concerning so-called independent contractors in the platform economy. In fact, Canadian labour law has long recognised a third status of workers—dependent contractors. It permits collective bargaining, while platform workers remain autonomous, notably for tax purposes. Immediately, the striking similarities between the European Union’s five criteria and judicial tests applied by Canadian labour tribunals seem to indicate that both entities are moving in the same direction. However, the federal structure of labour law in Canada and the single market’s social dimension also pose important challenges regarding the uniform implementation of new protections. Based on recent fieldwork in Toronto, and as the European Union directive moves into the approval and implementation stages, our article addresses the research question of how basic labour rights in the platform economy progress similarly (or differently), and which actors are driving the change on each side of the Atlantic. We argue that this policy field provides labour market actors with opportunities for “institutional experimentation” navigating the openings and limitations of federalism.","PeriodicalId":51598,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Governance","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v11i3.6833","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In December 2021, the European Commission proposed a directive creating five criteria for the presumed classification of platform economy workers as salaried employees. The issue is timely, of course, as the digital organisation of work continues to grow rapidly. Our article contrasts the merits and limitations of this initiative to the Canadian experience concerning so-called independent contractors in the platform economy. In fact, Canadian labour law has long recognised a third status of workers—dependent contractors. It permits collective bargaining, while platform workers remain autonomous, notably for tax purposes. Immediately, the striking similarities between the European Union’s five criteria and judicial tests applied by Canadian labour tribunals seem to indicate that both entities are moving in the same direction. However, the federal structure of labour law in Canada and the single market’s social dimension also pose important challenges regarding the uniform implementation of new protections. Based on recent fieldwork in Toronto, and as the European Union directive moves into the approval and implementation stages, our article addresses the research question of how basic labour rights in the platform economy progress similarly (or differently), and which actors are driving the change on each side of the Atlantic. We argue that this policy field provides labour market actors with opportunities for “institutional experimentation” navigating the openings and limitations of federalism.
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
“你能完成送货吗?”比较加拿大与欧盟平台工人的法律地位
2021年12月,欧盟委员会提出了一项指令,为平台经济工作者作为受薪员工的假定分类制定了五条标准。当然,随着数字化工作组织继续快速发展,这个问题是及时的。我们的文章对比了加拿大关于平台经济中所谓的独立承包商的经验的优点和局限性。事实上,加拿大劳动法早就承认第三种身份——依赖工人的承包商。它允许集体谈判,而平台工人保持自主,特别是出于税收目的。欧洲联盟的五项标准和加拿大劳工法庭采用的司法测试之间惊人的相似之处似乎立即表明,这两个实体正朝着同一方向发展。然而,加拿大劳动法的联邦结构和单一市场的社会层面也对统一执行新的保护措施构成重大挑战。基于最近在多伦多的实地调查,随着欧盟指令进入批准和实施阶段,我们的文章解决了平台经济中基本劳工权利如何相似(或不同)发展的研究问题,以及哪些参与者正在推动大西洋两岸的变化。我们认为,这一政策领域为劳动力市场参与者提供了“制度实验”的机会,以驾驭联邦制的开放和限制。
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
Politics and Governance
Politics and Governance POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
99
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Politics and Governance is an innovative offering to the world of online publishing in the Political Sciences. An internationally peer-reviewed open access journal, Politics and Governance publishes significant, cutting-edge and multidisciplinary research drawn from all areas of Political Science. Its central aim is thereby to enhance the broad scholarly understanding of the range of contemporary political and governing processes, and impact upon of states, political entities, international organizations, communities, societies and individuals, at international, regional, national and local levels. Submissions that focus upon the political or governance-based dynamics of any of these levels or units of analysis in way that interestingly and effectively brings together conceptual analysis and empirical findings are welcome. Politics and Governance is committed to publishing rigorous and high-quality research. To that end, it undertakes a meticulous editorial process, providing both the academic and policy-making community with the most advanced research on contemporary politics and governance. The journal is an entirely open-access online resource, and its in-house publication process enables it to swiftly disseminate its research findings worldwide, and on a regular basis.
期刊最新文献
Territorial Configurations of School‐to‐Work Outcomes in Europe Strategies for Engaging and Outreaching NEETs in Italy: Insights From Active Labour Policies Public Policy Europeanisation in Response to the Covid‐19 Crisis: The Case of Job Retention Schemes NextGenerationEU and the European Semester: Comparing National Plans and Country‐Specific Recommendations Tested by the Polycrisis: Reforming or Transforming the EU?
×
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