娱乐的严肃业务:欧盟对数字经济中在线工作人员的法律保护

IF 0.8 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.54648/ijcl2023008
C. Barnard
{"title":"娱乐的严肃业务:欧盟对数字经济中在线工作人员的法律保护","authors":"C. Barnard","doi":"10.54648/ijcl2023008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While a huge amount of judicial and academic attention has been paid to the employment status of those who provide physical services via an app, such as ride-hailing services by Uber drivers and food delivery services by Deliveroo cyclists, much less attention has been given to the legal position of those providing services as influencers and content creators in the online world via platforms such as Instagram and YouTube. It may be possible that some fall within the Court of Justice’s increasingly broad definition of ‘worker’, a position helped by the presumption of worker status in the proposed Platform Work Directive. If so, they will benefit from the full range of EU employment rights. But many are genuinely self-employed and so are entitled to almost no employment protection. Yet, like workers, they have a vulnerability. If their access to these platforms is turned off, it is highly damaging for their work; and there may be no obvious alternative platform to give them the profile which is necessary for them to succeed. The EU is showing itself to be innovative in responding to this challenge: first, with an extended personal scope under the proposed Platform Workers Directive which gives some rights to ‘persons performing platform work’ (PPPW) (and more rights still to ‘platform workers’), and second, in the P2B Regulation 2019/1150 and the Digital Services Act, by moving away from the focus on the status of the individual and paying attention instead to the obligations of the platform. These obligations can be summed up by the acronym TAR: Transparency, Accountability and Remedies. They are procedural rather than substantive obligations but they do recognize the need for at least some protection for those who, in the past, would have been denied it. This legislation is, indirectly, beginning to reshape our understanding of what constitutes labour law.\nGig Economy, Precarity, Worker Protection, Online Platforms, Influencers, Content Creators","PeriodicalId":44213,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Serious Business of Having Fun: EU Legal Protection for Those Working Online in the Digital Economy\",\"authors\":\"C. Barnard\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/ijcl2023008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While a huge amount of judicial and academic attention has been paid to the employment status of those who provide physical services via an app, such as ride-hailing services by Uber drivers and food delivery services by Deliveroo cyclists, much less attention has been given to the legal position of those providing services as influencers and content creators in the online world via platforms such as Instagram and YouTube. It may be possible that some fall within the Court of Justice’s increasingly broad definition of ‘worker’, a position helped by the presumption of worker status in the proposed Platform Work Directive. If so, they will benefit from the full range of EU employment rights. But many are genuinely self-employed and so are entitled to almost no employment protection. Yet, like workers, they have a vulnerability. If their access to these platforms is turned off, it is highly damaging for their work; and there may be no obvious alternative platform to give them the profile which is necessary for them to succeed. The EU is showing itself to be innovative in responding to this challenge: first, with an extended personal scope under the proposed Platform Workers Directive which gives some rights to ‘persons performing platform work’ (PPPW) (and more rights still to ‘platform workers’), and second, in the P2B Regulation 2019/1150 and the Digital Services Act, by moving away from the focus on the status of the individual and paying attention instead to the obligations of the platform. These obligations can be summed up by the acronym TAR: Transparency, Accountability and Remedies. They are procedural rather than substantive obligations but they do recognize the need for at least some protection for those who, in the past, would have been denied it. This legislation is, indirectly, beginning to reshape our understanding of what constitutes labour law.\\nGig Economy, Precarity, Worker Protection, Online Platforms, Influencers, Content Creators\",\"PeriodicalId\":44213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2023008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2023008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管司法和学术界对那些通过应用程序提供实体服务的人的就业状况给予了大量关注,例如优步司机的叫车服务和Deliveroo骑自行车的送餐服务,对于那些通过Instagram和YouTube等平台在网络世界中作为影响者和内容创作者提供服务的人的法律地位,人们的关注要少得多。有些可能属于法院对“工人”日益宽泛的定义,这一立场得益于拟议的平台工作指令中对工人身份的推定。如果是这样,他们将从欧盟的全面就业权利中受益。但许多人是真正的自营职业者,因此几乎没有就业保护。然而,和工人一样,他们也有弱点。如果他们对这些平台的访问被关闭,这将对他们的工作造成极大的损害;而且可能没有明显的替代平台来为他们提供成功所需的简介。欧盟在应对这一挑战方面表现出了创新性:首先,根据拟议的《平台工人指令》扩大了个人范围,该指令赋予“从事平台工作的人”一些权利(更多的权利仍然赋予“平台工人”),其次,在P2B条例2019/1150和《数字服务法》中,不再关注个人的地位,而是关注平台的义务。这些义务可以用缩写TAR来概括:透明度、问责制和补救措施。它们是程序性义务,而不是实质性义务,但它们确实认识到,对于那些在过去被剥夺权利的人,至少需要一些保护。这项立法间接地开始重塑我们对劳动法构成的理解。Gig经济、不稳定、工人保护、在线平台、影响力者、内容创作者
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Serious Business of Having Fun: EU Legal Protection for Those Working Online in the Digital Economy
While a huge amount of judicial and academic attention has been paid to the employment status of those who provide physical services via an app, such as ride-hailing services by Uber drivers and food delivery services by Deliveroo cyclists, much less attention has been given to the legal position of those providing services as influencers and content creators in the online world via platforms such as Instagram and YouTube. It may be possible that some fall within the Court of Justice’s increasingly broad definition of ‘worker’, a position helped by the presumption of worker status in the proposed Platform Work Directive. If so, they will benefit from the full range of EU employment rights. But many are genuinely self-employed and so are entitled to almost no employment protection. Yet, like workers, they have a vulnerability. If their access to these platforms is turned off, it is highly damaging for their work; and there may be no obvious alternative platform to give them the profile which is necessary for them to succeed. The EU is showing itself to be innovative in responding to this challenge: first, with an extended personal scope under the proposed Platform Workers Directive which gives some rights to ‘persons performing platform work’ (PPPW) (and more rights still to ‘platform workers’), and second, in the P2B Regulation 2019/1150 and the Digital Services Act, by moving away from the focus on the status of the individual and paying attention instead to the obligations of the platform. These obligations can be summed up by the acronym TAR: Transparency, Accountability and Remedies. They are procedural rather than substantive obligations but they do recognize the need for at least some protection for those who, in the past, would have been denied it. This legislation is, indirectly, beginning to reshape our understanding of what constitutes labour law. Gig Economy, Precarity, Worker Protection, Online Platforms, Influencers, Content Creators
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Published four times a year, the International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations is an essential source of information and analysis for labour lawyers, academics, judges, policymakers and others. The Journal publishes original articles in the domains of labour law (broadly understood) and industrial relations. Articles cover comparative and international (or regional) analysis of topical issues, major developments and innovative practices, as well as discussions of theoretical and methodological approaches. The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review process. A distinguished editorial team, with the support of an International Advisory Board of eminent scholars from around the world, ensures a continuing high standard of scientific research dealing with a range of important issues.
期刊最新文献
Litigating the Algorithmic Boss in the EU: A (Legally) Feasible and (Strategically) Attractive Option for Trade Unions? Modern Slavery in Liner Shipping: An Empirical Analysis of Corporate Statements The Requirement of Fair Negotiation (Gebot des fairen Verhandelns) and the Principle of Undue Influence in German and US Employment Law Regulating Platform Work in the UK and Italy: Politics, Law and Political Economy Regulating Algorithmic Management at Work in the European Union: Data Protection, Non-discrimination and Collective Rights
×
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