Using automated systems to match supply and demand for work cannot justify poor working conditions, says the report presented to MEPs on Thursday.
Practices known as “algorithmic management” sometimes are not transparent enough to reveal that those working for a digital labour platform are subordinate to it and have their working hours and working conditions controlled by it, particularly in cross-border situations. This lack of transparency about a person’s working status might result in low pay and inadequate access to social protection.
“Delivery workers, ride-hailers, logistics operators and many more face working conditions that are not up to European labour standards. Self-employment is the norm for many platform workers today. Yet, working conditions too often tell a different story. We can only ensure that workers have labour rights if their employment status is correctly identified. Based on their actual working conditions, workers will be presumed to be employees, and, in case of litigation, it will be up to platforms to prove the contrary. National competent authorities and labour inspectorates will apply this legal presumption proactively in order to prevent misclassification and litigation”, said Elisabetta Gualmini (S&D, IT), responsible for the committee report.
Ms Gualmini explained that the directive should be ambitious and look beyond platform work. She proposed that provisions concerning algorithmic management should apply to all workers subject to automated and semi-automated systems.
She concluded her presentation saying that “algorithm features that have an impact on working conditions have to be subject to collective bargaining. We cannot accept a two-tier labour market, where workers managed by their employers through digital tools have fewer rights than workers in the traditional economy”.
During the discussion, some MEPs stressed that the innovation provided by platform work must be accompanied with respect of workers’ rights in line with EU legislation to avoid abuse by international platforms. Workers should have access to a national social security system and not only a private insurance offered by a platform, and they should be properly organised to promote collective bargaining. Others backed the idea of “presumption of employment” proposed by the rapporteur, where a digital platform has to prove that a person is self-employed, but warned against automatic classification to allow for genuine self-employment.
There were diverging opinions among invited experts; those representing platforms stressed the need for flexibility to preserve their competitiveness and innovation, and they argued that people who chose to be self-employed because of the flexibility that this brings would refuse “rigid” employment. Experts representing trade unions or employees called for legal certainty for workers, whether they are independent contractors or subordinated, and called for platforms’ algorithms to be more transparent. They underlined that EU workers need common rules guaranteeing equal treatment and that flexibility is an important element that should not come at the expense of minimum health and social protection.
Next steps
The text is in the early stages of the Employment Committee’s work. Next, the committee will discuss political groups’ amendments to the report drafted by Ms Gualmini.