约束超级强大的数字平台:按需道路运输工作监管新形式的建议

M. Rawling, Joellen Riley Munton
{"title":"约束超级强大的数字平台:按需道路运输工作监管新形式的建议","authors":"M. Rawling, Joellen Riley Munton","doi":"10.53637/dpei2001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Late in 2020 in California, two giant rideshare operators, Uber and Lyft, spearheaded a USD200 million campaign to overturn state legislation providing employment entitlements to their workers. This article exposes the way these enterprises employ legal drafting to disguise the reality of their relationships with workers; and we consider the rhetorical arguments they use to justify these strategies. We conclude that it is time for Australian regulators to adopt an alternative approach to ensuring basic protections for workers which focusses on the nature of the work being undertaken, rather than on the legal form of the contract between enterprise and worker. We focus on the Australian road transport industry, and particularly on rideshare and food delivery workers, because despite assertions that their labour is part of a shiny new ‘digital economy’, this kind of work has been important in societies since medieval times, or earlier.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constraining the Uber-Powerful Digital Platforms: A Proposal for a New Form of Regulation of On-Demand Road Transport Work\",\"authors\":\"M. Rawling, Joellen Riley Munton\",\"doi\":\"10.53637/dpei2001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Late in 2020 in California, two giant rideshare operators, Uber and Lyft, spearheaded a USD200 million campaign to overturn state legislation providing employment entitlements to their workers. This article exposes the way these enterprises employ legal drafting to disguise the reality of their relationships with workers; and we consider the rhetorical arguments they use to justify these strategies. We conclude that it is time for Australian regulators to adopt an alternative approach to ensuring basic protections for workers which focusses on the nature of the work being undertaken, rather than on the legal form of the contract between enterprise and worker. We focus on the Australian road transport industry, and particularly on rideshare and food delivery workers, because despite assertions that their labour is part of a shiny new ‘digital economy’, this kind of work has been important in societies since medieval times, or earlier.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53637/dpei2001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53637/dpei2001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2020年末,在加利福尼亚州,优步(Uber)和Lyft这两家大型拼车运营商发起了一场2亿美元的运动,旨在推翻为其员工提供就业权利的州立法。本文揭露了这些企业利用法律起草来掩盖其与工人关系的现实;我们考虑他们用来证明这些策略的修辞论点。我们得出的结论是,澳大利亚监管机构是时候采取另一种方法来确保对工人的基本保护了,这种方法侧重于所从事工作的性质,而不是企业和工人之间合同的法律形式。我们关注澳大利亚道路运输行业,尤其是拼车和送餐工人,因为尽管有人断言他们的劳动力是闪亮的新“数字经济”的一部分,但自中世纪或更早以来,这类工作在社会中一直很重要。
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
Constraining the Uber-Powerful Digital Platforms: A Proposal for a New Form of Regulation of On-Demand Road Transport Work
Late in 2020 in California, two giant rideshare operators, Uber and Lyft, spearheaded a USD200 million campaign to overturn state legislation providing employment entitlements to their workers. This article exposes the way these enterprises employ legal drafting to disguise the reality of their relationships with workers; and we consider the rhetorical arguments they use to justify these strategies. We conclude that it is time for Australian regulators to adopt an alternative approach to ensuring basic protections for workers which focusses on the nature of the work being undertaken, rather than on the legal form of the contract between enterprise and worker. We focus on the Australian road transport industry, and particularly on rideshare and food delivery workers, because despite assertions that their labour is part of a shiny new ‘digital economy’, this kind of work has been important in societies since medieval times, or earlier.
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
1.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Intoxication Evidence in Rape Trials in the Country Court of Victoria: A Qualitative Study To Catch a Killer Cousin: Investigative Genetic Genealogy as a Critical Extension of Familial Searching in Serious Crime Convictions in Australia Indigenous Experience Reports: Addressing Silence and Deficit Discourse in Sentencing Reversing the ‘Quasi-tribunal’ Role of Human Research Ethics Committees: A Waiver of Consent Case Study The Spectacle of Respectable Equality: Queer Discrimination in Australian Law Post Marriage Equality
×
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