The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Maho Hatayama Dagmara Maj-Swistak Table of Contents Executive Summary 6 1. Introduction 8 2. How are labor regulations adapted to protect platform-based work? 11 3. What can we learn from specific regulatory attempts? 14 3.1. Classifying employment status for platform-based work 14 3.2. Improving working conditions 19 Wages/Remuneration 19 Working time 22 Protection against unfair dismissal and adverse treatment 24 Freedom of association and right to collective bargaining 26 3.3. Special provisions to protect platform workers 28 4. Enforcement and compliance 31 5. Conclusion 34 References 37 Annex 1: The list of countries examined 44 Annex 2: Fundamental principles and rights at work 44 Annex 3: Relevant international standards 45 Annex 4: Number of laws/bills by types of platform workers and number of jurisdictions by scope of provisions 46 Annex 5: Country examples for the definition of platform workers 47 Annex 6: Terminology 48 List of Figures Figure 1: Common challenges faced by platform workers 9 Figure 2: Types of approaches to regulate platform workers among countries examined 12 Figure 3: Countries with regulatory reforms by region 12 Figure 4: Number of reforms by year 12 Figure 5: Scope of provisions related to employment relationship 15 Figure 6: Scope of provisions related to decent wages for platform workers 20 Figure 7: Additional aspects included in the wage regulations 21 Figure 8: The definition of working hours 22 Figure 9: Scope of provisions related to working hours 23 Figure 10: Scope of regulations related to protection against unfair dismissal 25 Figure 11: Scope of provisions related to freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining 27 Figure 12: Scope of regulations 28 Figure 13: Challenges for enforcement of the labor law for platform workers 32 Figure 14: Measures to increase compliance 32 Figure 4.1: Number of laws/bills by types of platform workers 46 Figure 4.2: Number of jurisdictions by scope of provisions 46 List of Tables Table 1: Scope of provisions by area of regulations 13 Table 2: Maximum working hours by country 24 Table 3: Country examples - areas beyond traditional labor laws 29 List of Boxes Box 1: Methodology 10 Box 2: The role of judicial rulings in defining the employment status of platform workers 17 Box 3: Transport regulations for ride-hailing workers 18 Box 4: Platform companies’ initiatives for decent pay 21 Box 5: Soft-law initiatives pertaining to working time 23 Box 6: Obstacles to unionizing and collectively negotiating 26 Box 7: Collective actions in developing countries leading to better working conditions 28 Box 8: Platform cooperative - innovation in platform business models 35 The regulation of platform-based work: 4 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Acronyms BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics CWS Contingent Worker Supplement EPRS European Parliamentary Research Service EU European Union EW Employing Workers ILO International Labour Organization LOM Mobility Orientation Law on Transport MEIC Ministry of Economy, Industry, and Commerce MOPT Ministry of Public Works and Transportation MOU Memorandum of Understanding MTESS Ministry of Labor, Employment, and Social Security NUPSAW National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers NYC New York City OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development OHS Occupational Health and Safety SCJN Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 5 Acknowledgment This policy brief was prepared by Maho Hatayama (Economist) and Dagmara Maj-Swistak (Consultant) as part of the activity of the World Bank Labor Global Solutions Group ‘Better Labor Regulations for the Digital Economy and Beyond’. The project was led by Michael Weber (Senior Economist) in FY21–22 and by Matteo Morgandi (Senior Economist) and Eliana Carranza (Senior Economist) in FY23–24. The policy brief benefitted from consultations with external experts during the two-day workshops, hosted by the World Bank, ‘Regulating platform-based work in developing countries: How to balance job opportunities and workers’ protection’ in May 2023. We are grateful to three peer reviewers, Michael Weber (Senior Economist, World Bank), Uma Rani (Senior Economist, ILO), and Sergei Suarez Dillon Soares (Senior Economist, ILO), for their valuable comments. We also thank Sara de Lorenzo (Consultant) for her support on the publication and dissemination process and Agnes Mganga (Program Assistant) for her administrative support. This policy brief is part of a series under the project, which includes (a) ‘Regulating Platform-Based Work in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Towards a Context-Appropriate Approach’ by Matteo Morgandi and David Alzate; (b) ‘The Regulation of Platform-Based Work: Recent Regulatory Initiatives and Insights for Developing Countries’ by Maho Hatayama and Dagmara Maj-Swistak; (c) ‘The Effects of Regulating Platform-Based Work on Employment Outcomes: A Review of the Empirical Evidence’ by David Alzate; and (d) ‘The Economic Rationale to Regulate Platform-based Work’ by Jonathan Stöterau. The regulation of platform-based work: 6 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Executive Summary The rapid expansion of the digital economy has transformed the labor market, particularly through the rise of platform-based work. Despite the opportunities it brought into the lives of many workers, the digital economy has presented many challenges to the working conditions of platform workers. This policy brief examines regulatory approaches to protect platform workers across the world and synthesizes the approach to legislation and its scope in the key areas of labor regulations. It includes 23 regulatory reforms in 20 jurisdictions that took place from 2016 to 2024. Our analysis finds that governments take three approaches to regulating platform work: (a) amending the existing labor legislation to platform workers, (b) introducing stand-alone legislation specific to them, and (c) developing measures only to clarify their employment status and extend existing laws for platform workers. Among the countries examined, most of those that introduced regulatory initiatives are high-income countries. Geographically, they are mainly from Europe, North America, and Latin America. In addition, our review suggests that many of the reforms limit their focus to location-based platforms. When it comes to the scope of the legislation, provisions on data privacy, protection, and portability, freedom of association and collective bargaining, and protection against unfair dismissal are most frequently covered by special legislation for platform workers. Employment status determines if workers can access labor rights and social protection. Clarifying employment relationships is thus crucial to improving the working conditions of platform workers. Countries have chosen different approaches to clarify the employment status of these workers. These include (a) clarifying a list of criteria to define employment status, (b) creating a new third category of workers, (c) including the definition of platform workers in the existing category, and (d) introducing specific provisions for contracts. Given the complexity of determining employment relationship, courts still play a key role in determining the employment status in many countries. To improve pay for platform workers, enforcing the existing national minimum wage is the most common approach in setting wage regulations. Given the nature of platform-based work, some regulations include special provisions, such as rules on tips, payment processes, and compensation for work-related costs like equipment. Provisions related to working hours have been included in legislation for platform workers. These include setting a specific number of hours, enforcing existing rules on working hours in the labor law, clarifying mandatory breaks, and introducing ‘the right to disconnect’. A unique challenge in platform work is defining what constitutes working hours. Few regulations provide clarity on this issue. Rules concerning employment termination are needed to protect workers against the uncertainty of job loss. Many countries require platform companies to provide workers with valid reasons for termination, and some mandate severance pay and advance notice of employment termination. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 7 Trade unions or workers’ associations aim to advance and defend the interests of workers. However, there are legal and practical difficulties for platform workers to participate in coordinated group actions and collective bargaining. Many of the approaches focus on recognizing the rights of collective bargaining and unionization for platform workers. Some European countries have reformed competition laws, which often create barriers to collective bargaining for self-employed workers. The nature of platform work requires specific considerations in areas such as occupational health and safety (OHS), transparency in algorithm management, and data privacy, protection, and portability. For example, several reforms include provisions to enhance transparency and accountability in automated monitoring and decision-making systems, including prohibiting discrimination by algorithm and requiring companies to inform platform workers about automated monitoring systems. This brief suggests several principles for policy makers when considering how to regulate platform work. First, establishing clear methods to define employment relationships and ensuring minimum rights to all platform workers are key to ensuring labor rights and social protection. Second, trade unions, cooperatives, online forums, and employers themselves can be part of efforts to establish rules and standards for worker protection. In addition, improving the working conditions of platform workers requires a mix of responses across various policy areas including competition policies, social protection schemes, tax policies, or transport regulations. These different areas of regulation interact with each other and can be considered holistically as any new regulations for platform workers are developed. Fourth, effective regulations depend on enforcement and compliance with the law. As countries expand legal coverage for platform workers, it is essential to ensure that there are adequate efforts for enforcement and compliance. Finally, more data and more evaluation can help design more effective regulations. Labor regulations and other regulatory fields should be updated to balance flexibility and protection in the digital economy, based on quality data and impact assessments of regulatory changes. The regulation of platform-based work: 8 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 1. Introduction The digital economy is transforming the world of work. In recent years, more and more workers have engaged in digital labor platforms. Especially in low- and middle-income countries, platform-based work brings advantages for workers—a valuable source of income, greater flexibility, and access to more productive or formal jobs, especially for vulnerable groups such as youth or migrants (Cusolito et al. 2022; Filipetto et al. 2022; Weber et al. 2021; Yassin and Rani 2022). Despite the opportunities it brought into the lives of many workers, the digital economy has presented many challenges to the working conditions of platform workers. Key issues include limited income security, long working hours, lack of health and safety measures, and discriminatory practices (Figure 1). These issues existed in ‘traditional’ employment relationships, but the working conditions of platform workers are often exacerbated due to the nature of platform-based work. First, platform workers rely on demand-driven tasks at a piece-rate pay. As a result, the workers have little income and job security (Wood et al. 2019). Moreover, platform workers tend to work overtime with irregular work schedules, negatively affecting their safety, health, and productivity (ILO 2021). In addition, their time spent looking for jobs and waiting for or communicating with clients is often not compensated (ILO 2021). Finally, their work and performance are monitored and managed by algorithms or automated decision- making systems (De Stefano and Aloisi 2022). Such practices increase the risk of abuse by platforms, and workers often fear the termination of contracts (De Stefano and Aloisi 2022; ILO 2021), potentially depriving them of the flexibility, control, and autonomy that they might have had in the informal economy. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 9 1 Common challenges faced by platform workers Figure 1: Employment relationships Wages/Remuneration Working hours • Limited clarity on • Unfair wages or nonpayment • Long working hours employment status • Unpaid time (traveling to the • Unpredictable work schedules • Limited information on terms location, waiting time, searching) and unsocial hours (nights, and conditions • Indirect costs for weekends) • No contracts equipment/technologies • Time spent on unpaid work or • Control and monitoring by • Lack of information on payment searching for tasks platforms schedule and conditions • High work intensity to meet their income needs Unfair dismissal/adverse Freedom of association/ Occupational health treatment collective bargaining and safety • No severance pay • No legal rights of collective • Lack of health/safety measures • Terminantion without valid bargenning • No training on occupational reasons or advance notice • Lack of formal worker associations health and safety • No effective dispute resolution among platform workers Data privacy and portability Discriminatory practices Access to social protection • Lack of data protection • Discrimination based on gender, and benefits • Lack of access to personal data national origin, or ethinicity • No annual, sick, and maternity leave • No unemployment, disability, and health insurance • No pension contributions Source: Berg et al. 2018; Datta et al. 2023; Graham, Hjorth, and Lehdonvirta 2017; ILO 2021; Melia 2020; Wood 2023; Wood, Lehdonvirta, and Graham 2018 ; Wood et al. 2019. Most countries have labor laws to improve the law enforcement and exacerbate noncompliance of efficiency of the labor markets and ensure laws. equitable outcomes (Boeri and van Ours 2008; Nickell and Layard 1999). They set the boundaries This brief provides country examples of regulatory for employment relationships and protect workers’ approaches for policy makers aiming to introduce rights, enhance their job security, and improve working regulation for platform-based workers. Since most conditions. ILO1 international labor standards inform reforms took place in high-income countries, this fundamental principles and rights at work that can brief includes country examples from any income be covered in the national regulations (Annexes 2 and group but aim to guide policy makers in low- and 3).2 Since the nature of work and associated issues middle-income countries. This brief examines the are shifting rapidly with the expansion of platform approach to legislation and its scope in the key areas work, existing labor laws may not fully reflect changes of labor regulations: employment relationship, wages/ in labor market needs and dynamics. Moreover, remuneration, working time, protection against unfair depending on the country context, casualization and dismissal/treatment, and freedom of association informalization of work could potentially challenge and the rights of collective bargaining. The nature of 1  ILO = International Labour Organization. 2  However, ILO (2021, 2023a) examined the application of international labor standards to the platform economy and identified several gaps in the scope, showing that challenges among platform workers may not be fully addressed in the existing international standards. The regulation of platform-based work: 10 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries platform work requires specific considerations in other of these areas are also highlighted.4 Finally, effective areas that include occupational health and safety regulations depend on enforcement and compliance (OHS), transparency in algorithm management, or with the law. Actions taken by governments for data protection, privacy and portability.3Examples enforcement will be discussed in Chapter 4. Box 1: Methodology This policy brief examines 20 jurisdictions across six regions. It covers the reform from 2016 to 2024. While it mainly focuses on labor regulations, a few key examples of regulations for ride-hailing or delivery services are drawn from the transport sector. Digital labor platforms can be divided into two broad categories: location-based and web-based platforms (ILO 2021). Location-based platforms enable performing services at a specified physical location including ride-hailing and delivery services. In the case of web-based (or online) platforms, outputs are delivered via digital channels, and tasks can be performed remotely. The brief covers labor regulations that can apply to either location-based platforms or both. First, the team conducted desk reviews to identify regulations that specifically protect platform workers using secondary sources such as official government websites. Some of the data also come from the World Bank Employing Workers’ (EW) surveys. The EW surveys rely on laws and regulations as well as surveys taken by local lawyers and public officials. Data were collected in 2021. After identifying lists of legislations/bills, the team reviewed the official publications of the respective governments. Country examples were chosen based on the public availability of legal documents. Therefore, the list of countries is not exhaustive, but most of the recent reforms are covered (Annex 1).3 Many forms of ‘regulations’—court judgments, collective agreements, codes of conduct, or contracts—affect the working conditions of platform workers. However, this brief mainly focuses on legally binding laws or bills (draft of a proposed law presented to the legislature for consideration). 3  This brief excludes Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico that have introduced several bills. Brazil created a working group to propose regulations for platform workers (Decree 11.513/2023) in May 2023. However, the working group is not reaching an agreement. In Mexico, there are currently 21 law proposals that would affect platform workers, but none have been formalized (Fairwork 2023b). In March 2023, the Colombian government introduced the Employment Law Reform Proposal (No. 367-2023(C)). The labor reform aimed to update the Labor Code and include articles regulating online delivery work. The bill was archived as the first debate did not achieve a quorum. 4  Datta et al. (2023) provide country examples introducing social security for platform workers. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 11 2. How are labor regulations adapted to protect platform- based work? Governments have introduced various regulatory approaches to provide labor protection for platform workers. A review of national and regional legislation identifies three approaches to regulating platform work: (a) amending the existing labor legislation to platform workers, (b) introducing stand-alone legislation specific to them, and (c) developing measures only to clarify their employment status and extend existing laws for platform workers (Figure 2). The third model affects labor rights and working conditions because access to these rights depends on employment status. The introduction of special regulations is only one of the means to regulate platform-based work. In practice, any labor reform could potentially adopt any of these legislative approaches, making it challenging to categorize them neatly into distinct groups. Many countries have not introduced any regulatory reforms. In these countries, it is possible that existing regulations and social protection systems already cover self-employed platform workers.5 5  For example, there are countries that have included the self-employed in their social security systems (ILO 2020). The regulation of platform-based work: 12 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 2 Types of approaches to regulate platform workers among countries examined Figure 2: Revise the existing laws and define labor rights/protection for platform workers • Belgium, Chile, Ecuador, France, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, United States (NY) Establish stand-alone legislation specific to platform workers • Argentina, Canada, EU, Malta, Peru, Uruguay • Portugal, Kenya, Egypt, Costa Rica (trasnport regulations for ride-hailing and/or food delivery) Clarify their employment status or definition to declare them so as to extend exisiting laws to platform workers* • Portugal**, Mauritius Source: World Bank. Note: The legal basis is described in Reference section. *Other jurisdictions such as EU or Belgium also take this approach among others, but this category includes the countries that have introduced only this approach. ** While Portugal’s reform in the labor code has provisions on algorithm management or economically dependent self-employed workers, this brief looks at provisions that specifically refer to platform workers. EU = European Union. Figure 3: Countries with regulatory reforms by Figure 4: Number of reforms by year region 3 Figure Figure 4 8 Europe and Central Asia 7 2 Latin America and the 6 2 Carribean 5 8 Middle East and North 2 4 Africa 3 North America 2 6 Sub Saharan Africa 1 0 2016 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Note: Figure 3 covers 19 jurisdictions and excludes EU. Figure 4 covers 23 reforms across 20 jurisdictions (including the EU). Reforms include laws and bills in both labor and transport regulations. Among the countries examined, most of those These regulatory responses are also recent that introduced regulatory initiatives are high- phenomena. Most of the reforms covered in this brief income countries. Out of 19 jurisdictions, 12 are from took place during 2022 (Figure 4).7 The earliest was in the high-income group followed by the upper-middle- France in 2016 (LAW No. 2016-1088 of August 8) and income (5 countries) and lower-middle-income (2 the latest reform was in EU in 2024 (Directive of the countries) groups.6 Geographically, the countries that European parament and of the council on improving have introduced these changes in national legislation working conditions in platform work).8 or drafted bills are mainly from Europe, North America, and Latin America (Figure 3). Regarding the approach to legislative reforms, about a half of the countries made changes in existing 6  EU is excluded. 7  Years of issuing laws or bills 8  The directive was proposed in December 2021 by the European Commission. In February 2024, the Council and the Parliament reached a provisional agreement on platform work, which was approved by employment and social affairs ministers at the Council meeting on March 11, 2024. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 13 Table 1: Scope of provisions by area of regulations Area Scope Countries with relevant provisionsa Wages/ • Reference existing statutory minimum wages Argentina, Canada, Remuneration • Introduce specific wage rates to platform workers Chile, Italy, • Provide compensation for overtime or irregular hours Luxembourg, Malta, • Regulate tips Mauritius, United • Require transparent payment methods and intervals States (NY), Uruguay • Pay work-related costs such as equipment Working hours • Set a specific number of work or overtime hours Argentina, Chile, • Reference maximum working hours set in the existing laws Ecuador, France, • Introduce mandatory breaks after a set number of continuous working Luxembourg, Malta, hours Mauritius, Peru, • Provide the right to disconnect Portugal, Uruguay Protection • Require valid reasons for termination of work relationship Argentina, Canada, against unfair • Prohibit termination due to maternity Chile, EU, Ecuador, dismissal/ • Require severance pay France, Italy, adverse • Provide advance notice of termination Luxembourg, Malta, treatment • Protect against retaliation Uruguay • Establish a mechanism to appeal unfair termination Freedom of • Provide the right to form or join a trade union and to strike Argentina, Chile, association • Harmonize competition law with labor law Ecuador, EU, France, and the rights Greece, Luxembourg, of collective Peru, Uruguay bargaining OHS • Provide training on OHS Argentina, Chile, • Offer protective equipment or associated costs Ecuador, EU, Greece, • Mandate platforms to have a safe working environment and preventive Malta, Peru, Uruguay measures • Inform workers of work-related risk Data privacy, • Protect digital reputation Argentina, Chile, protection and • Provide workers with the right to access and transfer their personal Ecuador, EU, Greece, portability data Italy, Luxemburg, Malta, • Ensure the protection of personal data and prohibit processing Peru, Uruguay personal data Transparency and • Prohibit discrimination by automated decision-making systems or Argentina, Chile, accountability algorithm Ecuador, EU, Malta, in algorithm • Require companies to inform workers of automated decision making Mauritius, Spain, management and monitoring systems Uruguay • Ensure human oversight of automated systems Source: World Bank. Note: The table excludes countries with transport regulations (Costa Rica, Egypt, Kenya, Portugal). a. Countries listed in this column take one or a few provisions but do not mean to have all the provisions listed in the scope. laws to regulate platform workers while others When it comes to the scope of the legislation, introduced stand-alone legislation.9 Some of the labor provisions on data privacy and protection, protection law reforms can be applied to both location- and web- against unfair dismissal, and freedom of association based platform workers while many others limit their and collective bargaining are frequently covered focus to location-based platforms (Figure 4.1, Annex). (Figure 4.2., Annex).10 By contrast, few jurisdictions Beyond labor regulations, several countries (Costa set rules or lists of criteria to define employment Rica, Egypt, Portugal, and Kenya) have introduced status. All the jurisdictions clarify the definition of specific rules in the transport sector to regulate and platform workers. protect ride-hailing or delivery workers. 9  The countries that introduced stand-alone legislation include those that introduced a new law or bill instead of amending the existing one. 10  This figure accounts for only 11 jurisdictions with stand-alone laws, bills, or chapters (Argentina, Canada, Chile, Ecuador, EU, Greece, Luxembourg, Malta, Peru, United States, and Uruguay). The regulation of platform-based work: 14 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 3. What can we learn from specific regulatory attempts? 3.1. Classifying employment status for platform- based work Employment status determines if workers can access labor rights and social protection. In many jurisdictions, labor laws giving effect to labor rights and benefits apply only to employees. Clarifying employment relationships is thus crucial to improving the working conditions of platform workers. The relationship between platform workers and companies is, however, complex to define. On the one hand, platforms exercise considerable control over the work allocation and organization of platform workers (De Stefano et al. 2021). On the other hand, some platform workers join online work because of its autonomy and flexibility (Datta et al. 2023). Therefore, workers may have some independence but are still subject to the influence and decisions of the platform companies. To take advantage of these complexities, many digital platforms classify their workers as self-employed to avoid costly employment obligations (De Stefano et al. 2021). For example, classifying platform workers as employees can potentially cost 20–30 percent more than classifying them as contractors (Scheiber 2018). When they fall outside of the existing legal framework, the consequences are not only limited access to labor rights but also increased casualization and informalization depending on the country context. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 15 Figure 5: Scope of provisions related to employment relationship Figure 5 Clarify a list of Include the Introduce specific criteria to define Create a new third definition of provisions for employment status category of workers platform workers in contracts (Belgium, EU,Greece, (Argentina, Canada, the existing (Argentina, Chile, Luxemburg, Malta, Italy) category (Mauritius, Greece,Italy, Peru, Portugal, Ecuador) Luxembourg, Malta, Spain) Peru, Uruguay) Source: World Bank. Countries have chosen different approaches to services, (b) choose the type and maximum number clarify the employment status of these workers. of projects and the time to undertake them, (c) Four approaches were observed in our analysis: (a) provide their independent services to any third party, clarifying a list of criteria to define employment and (d) determine the time of providing their services status, (b) creating a new third category of workers, themselves (Article 69 par. 2). (c) including the definition of platform workers in the existing category, and (d) introducing specific Another example of using presumptions can be provisions for contracts. Given the complexity of found in the Maltese Digital Platform Delivery determining employment relationship, courts still Wages Council Wage Regulation Order 2022 (Legal play a key role in determining the employment status Notice 268 of 2022). Article 4 stipulates a legal in many countries. Scope of provisions observed is in presumption of employment that requires fulfillment Figure 5. of four criteria (out of five) to prove that there is no employment relationship. A legal presumption or list of criteria, which determine whether platform workers fall into Most recently, two other European countries employee status or not, is the most common amended their labor codes: Portugal (Decent Work approach, especially in high-income countries. Agenda - Law No. 13/2023 as of 03 April 2023) and Spain introduced a regulation (Royal Decree Law Belgium (The Labour Deal - The Act of 3 October 2022 9/2021, of May 11, which modifies the revised text of on Various Labour Provisions). Both countries have the Law of the Workers’ Statute, approved by Royal introduced a legal presumption to define employment Decree Law 2/2015) that guarantees the labor rights relationships. These proceedings are in line with the of delivery workers on digital platforms (the so-called Proposal for the Directive of the European Parliament Riders’ Law). The twenty-third additional provision and of the Council on improving working conditions introduced by the decree establishes a rebuttable in platform work. The Platform Work Directive aims presumption of an employment relationship. to ensure that people performing platform work have their employment status classified correctly The Greek Law (4808/2021 of June 19, 2021) and correct bogus self-employment (EPRS 2024).11 recognizes two forms of relationship between digital The directive obliges EU countries to establish a platforms and service providers: dependent labor rebuttable legal presumption of employment at contracts or independent service or project contracts the national level. When a platform wants to rebut (Article 69 par. 1). The law clarifies that a “service the presumption, it is up to them to prove that the provider is not presumed to be an employee” if they contractual relationship is not an employment are entitled to (a) use their substitutes to provide relationship. 11  In December 2023, the Council and the European Parliament reached a provisional agreement on a proposed directive to improve working conditions for platform workers. In February 2024, the provisional agreement was endorsed by the Council and the Parliament and then be formally adopted by both institutions. Member states will have two years to incorporate the provisions of the directive into their national legislation (Council of the EU 2023). The regulation of platform-based work: 16 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Figure cuadro Example of presumption: To protect platform workers, some countries have established a set of criteria to determine the existence of an employment relationship. They vary across countries, but commonly include: • Supervision (control or direction) of the performance of work • Restriction of the freedom to choose working hours • Obligation to respect specific rules, e.g., appearance • Determination of remuneration • Providing workers with tools, materials, or equipment to execute work • Restriction against performing work for any third party • Restriction against subcontracting of work In Peru, the Commission of Labor and Social or other prescribed services by workers who are Security (Comisión de Trabajo y Seguridad Social) on offered work assignments by an operator through a July 19, 2023, approved a bill, which put together digital platform. four draft laws (No. 0018/2021-CR, 0667/2021-CR, 0842/2021-CR, 1536/2021-CR) to recognize the labor In Italy, Legislative Decree 81/2015 (Article 2) rights of platform workers for on-demand delivery, introduced the concept of “hetero-organized” work courier, and transport services. According to Article (lavoro eterorganizzato) (Pallini 2019; ISSA 2023). 8, workers can be dependent or independent based Platform workers classified in this category are on the level of subordination and with a working day entitled to labor law protection (Waeyaert et al. 2022). of not less than 4 hours per day or 20 hours per week. Legislative Decree No. 101/2019 further updated the scope of “hetero-organized” work by including Given that legislative reforms take time, courts that the organization through a digital platform is a still play a key role in determining employment relevant criterion for the application of this category status of platform workers (Box 2). Most litigation (ISSA 2023). Additionally, the decree introduced brought by workers has concentrated on classification a new chapter to establish minimum levels of issues—whether platform workers are employees or protection for self-employed digital platform workers self-employed. Judges consider different factors to in the delivery sector (Chapter V-bis to Legislative determine employment relationships. Such indicators Decree No. 81/2015). This chapter includes provisions include subordination, payments of remuneration, on contracts, wages, anti-discrimination measures, provision of work tools, or the organization of work and data protection (Waeyaert et al. 2022). hours (ILO 2006). However, courts often reach different outcomes even within the same country. Some countries added the category and definition of platform workers in the existing category Another approach, which is documented with without clarifying their employment status. These country case studies in this brief, has been laws—by explicit reference to defined platform to create a new category of workers without workers—provide them with certain rights and providing clarity in employment relationships. One benefits. In 2019, Mauritius adopted the Workers’ such example is Canada. In April 2022, Ontario in Rights Act of 2019 and have provisions for ‘atypical Canada enacted Bill 88, the Digital Platform Workers’ workers’ that encompass platform workers. Based Rights Act. The purpose of this act is to establish on section 17 subsection (3)(b)(i) of the Act, atypical certain rights for workers, regardless of whether workers include those who “perform work brokered those workers are employees (Section 2). The act through the online platform or through other similar does not amend employment classification but relies services.”12 Under the Workers’ Rights (Atypical Work) on the term ‘workers’. A ‘worker’ means “subject to Regulations of 2019 (No. 234 of 2019), some rights the regulations, an individual who performs digital and protections are granted, including working time platform work and includes a person who was a limits, minimum remuneration, and annual and sick worker.” The act defines ‘digital platform work’ as the leave, to name a few. provision of for-payment rideshare, delivery, courier, 12  The definition of atypical workers is amended by the Finance (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021 (Act No. 15 of 2021). The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 17 Box 2: The role of judicial rulings in defining the employment status of platform workers The judicial system retains a key role in defining the employment status of platform workers. Most litigation brought by platform workers has concentrated on classification issues—whether platform workers are employees or self-employed. However, courts often reach different outcomes even within the same country. For example, in the United States, the Court for the District of Columbia ruled that an Uber driver is an employee, while the Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania decided that such a driver is an independent contractor (Cherry 2019). Such contradictory rulings reflect differing facts and conditions presented in court but also the discretionary power of labor judges (Kilhoffer et al. 2020). Judges consider different factors to determine employment relationships. Many courts prioritize the principle of primacy of facts, rooted in ILO Recommendation No. 198, looking at the actual nature of the relationship instead of the label and content of written agreement. Other indicators include subordination, payments of remuneration, provision of work tools, or the organization of work hours (ILO 2006). The flexibility of work schedules remains a common indicator, yet court decisions are made case by case. Tribunals in Brazil, for example, ruled that the flexible work schedule of drivers prevents them from being reclassified as employees (De Stefano et al. 2021). Contrarily, judges in France, Spain, and Belgium questioned the actual freedom of working schedules due to the control platforms have over riders’ schedules through algorithms or rating systems (De Stefano et al. 2021). Litigation has been used outside Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries and has mainly focused on their employment status. For example, in Uruguay, an Uber driver filed complaints on eligibility for vacation pay and bonus. The Labor Court of Appeals found that Uber is in an employment relationship with its drivers, who should be guaranteed labor protections and rights. In South Africa, the court in the case against Uber filed by the National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers (NUPSAW) pertaining to unfair dismissal overturned the ruling of the Commissioner of Conciliation, Mediation, and Arbitration, who in 2017 found that an employment relationship existed between the drivers and Uber. The Labor Court ruled that the previous decision was in error and determined that Uber was not an employer. Case laws play a key role in defining employment status but also influence national legislative development. An example is the ‘ABC’ test developed by the California Supreme Court for the case involving delivery drivers for a same-day delivery company (Dynamex). The ABC test contains three conditions to be satisfied for a person to be an employee: (a) the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact; (b) the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and (c) the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed. This landmark test later became part of the California Labor Code (‘AB 5’ law), allowing the State of California to better classify the employment status of platform workers. The regulation of platform-based work: 18 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries In January 2023, a bill regularizing platform was service contracts can thereby aid in clarifying approved in Ecuador for a second debate by the employment relationships. National Assembly of Ecuador’s Commission of Workers’ Rights and Social Security (Comisión del Some countries have mandated platforms to Derecho al Trabajo y Seguridad Social). The draft law include specific provisions in their contractual would change Article 1 of the Labor Code to update arrangements. One of the examples comes from the scope of the code and include workers offering Chile, where the Minister of Labor and Social services in the delivery or distribution of products Welfare promulgated a new legislation (Law No. through digital platforms. This revision means that 21,431) amending the Labor Code. The law mandates these workers are subject to the rights and obligations establishing either employment contracts for under the existing Labor Code. 13 dependent digital workers or service provision contracts for independent digital platform workers. Another way to regulate platform workers has In the latter case, the law requires contracts to been to mandate specific contractual terms include key conditions such as determination of to determine relationships that clarify the price, personal data protection, and the grounds for rights and obligations of all parties. In many termination of the contract (Article 152-x). cases, digital labor platforms have deliberately refrained from providing employment contracts Other than labor regulations, some of the transport with workers or from using any terms or wording regulations for ride-hailing and food delivery work also that would imply that a person is an employee provide rules on contracts with drivers, regardless of (Kullmann 2021). Having either employment or their classification (Box 3). Box 3: Transport regulations for ride-hailing workers Beyond labor regulations, several countries have introduced specific rules for ride-hailing platforms and workers, some of which have an impact on the working conditions of drivers. Portugal established a legal framework for ride-hailing platforms (Law 45/2018 of August 10, 2018, the so- called Uber law). Even though this legal regime does not clarify the legal status of drivers, it stipulates that drivers need to have a written contract that governs the relationship between the parties (Article 10.2). Kenya’s Legal Notice 120 - National Transport and Safety Authority Regulations 2022 clearly states the obligation of concluding agreements between a transport network company and a ‘transport network driver’. Such agreements should describe the duties of both parties, indicate the duration of the contract, and include provisions regarding the payment of a commission. There are other aspects (such as the requirement to give a written notice in case of an intention to deactivate, suspend, or remove and ensuring a minimum log-out period) that are a part of said agreements. In Egypt, the Law No. 87 of 2018 Regulating Road Transport Services Using Information Technology aims to provide a legal framework for ride-hailing services that use technology to connect with customers. Although the law does not mention contractual arrangements, companies need to submit a certificate indicating payment of social insurance contributions before employing drivers (Article 11). Costa Rica introduced a bill ‘23.736’ in May 2023 to regulate transportation service facilitated through digital platforms. It classifies platform workers as platform-affiliated drivers (Conductor Afiliado a Plataforma), who are registered persons by the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT) and seen as independent workers, without being subject to fixed prices, itineraries, routes, schedules, frequencies, and geographical areas (Article 4). Workers are guaranteed a “minimum gross profitability per kilometer” for each trip, which must be calculated by MOPT in conjunction with the Ministry of Economy, Industry, and Commerce (MEIC) (Article 7).13 13  Since 2019, Costa Rica introduced several bills to regulate ridesharing platforms (21587; 23110) or protect the labor rights of deliverers (21567) and limit rises in the fees that platforms charge restaurants (22142). However, none of them have reached the voting phase of the legislative process. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 19 Overall, many countries have implemented In addition, provisions on compensation for irregular reforms to improve the clarity that distinguishes work hours or overtime are also included in the wage between employees and self-employed to prevent regulations. misclassification. Moreover, the definition of platform worker differs from country to country (Annex 5). Given the nature of platform-based work, some Which approach to take remains an open question. also include special rules for platform workers The court judges can be more precise in assessing the that do not exist in the general labor law. First, nature of the work case by case. However, litigation bonuses, tips from customers, or the different types is typically a lengthy process and burdensome for of fees (commission or service fees, subscription fees, judiciary systems, especially those with limited bidding charges) affect how much platform workers capacity. can earn. In the ride-hailing sector, for instance, platforms charge commissions ranging from 10 Creating a third category of workers could reduce percent to 25 percent.15 Second, workers also need legal uncertainty and help them receive certain labor to bear work-related costs. For example, ride-hailing rights and social protections (Harris and Kruger and delivery workers need to pay vehicle-related 2015). On the other hand, whether the status of this costs including fuel, vehicle rental, insurance, and ‘grey area’ is a good way to regulate platform work maintenance. is under discussion. Adding a third category might increase more complexity. It is possible that platform The special rules include, among others, rules on companies deliberately move employees into the tips, payment processes, or compensation for quasi-subordinate category (Cherry and Aloisi 2017). work-related costs such as equipment (Figure 7). In the case of litigation, judges would need to rule over As shown in the next section, some governments three instead of two categories. updated the definition of working hours so that their earnings reflect actual hours of work including waiting times or times spent for unpaid tasks (Figure 3.2. Improving working conditions 8). Wage regulations for platform works are tightly related to working time regulations. This is because Wages/Remuneration many people work on a piece-rate basis and their earning depends on the hours of work. Governments set minimum wages to provide adequate income for workers and reduce wage The most common approach is to use the inequality (ILO 1971).14 Minimum wages are important, existing minimum wages as a reference point for especially when some firms monopolize local markets, ensuring decent pay for platform workers. Several leaving little bargaining power to workers (Manning Latin American countries introduced bills to set 2021). Wage regulations ensure that workers are paid minimum wages for platform workers. In May 2020, a fair wage for their work while improving worker the Argentinian Ministry of Labor, Employment, motivation and productivity (Dube, Lester, and Reich and Social Security (MTESS) introduced a bill, 2010; Neumark and Wascher 2007). the Statute of the Worker of Digital Platforms on Demand, regulating employment relations between Governments have attempted to improve pay platform companies and workers. According to for platform workers in several ways (Figure 6). Article 9, drivers are entitled to receive the minimum Enforcing the existing national minimum wage is remuneration that must be equivalent to the one way when setting wage regulations for them. amount of the legal minimum wage, proportionate Several jurisdictions specify minimum pay rates per to the duration of the workday. The minimum unit (hourly, miles, or task) for platform workers remuneration will be increased per trip depending who provide on-demand or one-off services over a on distance, time of performance, and waiting time limited duration instead of monthly minimum wage. (Article 10). 14  It is important to note that minimum wages aim to set a floor and protect workers against unduly low pay (ILO 2016). Collective bargaining can be used to set wages above the existing floor. 15  The commission fees levied by the platform companies is contrary to the ILO Private Employment Agencies Convention 1997 (No. 181). The convention defines a private employment agency as a natural or legal person engaged in “matching offers of and applications for employment” and/or “employing workers with a view to making them available to a third party which assigns their tasks and supervises the execution of these tasks” (Art. 1). The convention provides that agencies “shall not charge directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, any fees or costs to workers” (Art. 7). The regulation of platform-based work: 20 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Figure6: Figure 6 Scope of provisions related to decent wages for platform workers Additional Introduce specific provisions regarding Enforce existing wage rates for compensation, tips, minimum wages platform workers payment, work related cost Source: World Bank. Under Law No. 21,431 in Chile, for both independent trip offers and trip time (City of New York 2023). and dependent platform workers, total hourly fees earned in a month must be more than the minimum These reforms have taken into account additional monthly income set by law, increased by 20 percent aspects of decent pay when establishing (Article 153-v&y). The additional amount aims to wages for platform workers. These include (a) cover waiting periods or other noneffective working compensations for working overtime, at night, or in time. The company needs to verify that the fees special conditions; (b) tips and gratuities; (c) payment accrued for the services meet these minimum values methods and intervals; and (d) payment of work- and, if not, must pay the worker the difference. related cost (Figure 7). In Uruguay, the Bill on digital platform workers For example, Malta has provisions on overtime protection (No. 2982 of 2022) was introduced in rates. If platform workers work more than 40 October 2022. The draft bill covers workers on hours per week, the overtime rates of 1.5 times goods delivery and passenger transport services and should be paid to platform workers (Article 8). The aims to provide a minimum set of benefits for both Argentinian bill also suggests that the amount of dependent and independent workers. The bill does remuneration should increase by at least 20 percent not state provisions on remuneration for independent when the service is provided during rains or storms workers but for dependent workers to receive the (Article 11). Companies may increase the amount of amount equivalent to the national minimum wage for compensation for workers who work more than 30 each piece or hour of work (Article 16). Mauritius has hours per week. a similar provision. An employer should pay platform workers’ wages no less than the national minimum For location-based platform workers, tips are wage or no less than that earned by a comparable an important part of their income. The act in worker with the same working hours and similar Canada states that tips and other gratuities are not duties (Section 5, the Workers’ Rights (Atypical Work) considered wages for any purpose (Article 9). Article Regulations of 2019 (No. 234 of 2019)). 10 also stipulates that an operator must not withhold or make a deduction from workers’ tips or other Another approach is setting specific pay rates for gratuities. platform workers. One of the recent reforms took place in New York City (NYC). Starting July 2023, Although customers may offer a tip up front, some the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection platforms may not disclose to workers or customers set a minimum pay rate for app-based restaurant how much of the tip the platform retains. NYC delivery workers (City of New York 2023). The rule attempts to address this issue. Platforms must set a minimum of USD 17.96 per hour for all workers disclose total compensation and overheads including who are connected to the app, excluding tips. The gratuities and how much is taken by the app to minimum pay rate will be adjusted for inflation each delivery workers (No. 110, Local Law of City of New year. The pay should be based on the time waiting for York 2021). The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 21 7 Additional aspects included in the wage regulations Figure 7: Figure Work overtime, at Payment methods Payment of work night or in bad Tips and gratuities and intervals related cost weather conditions Additional Tips are not considered Regular payment should Work-related cost compensations for work wages (Argentina, be established at specific should be compensated overtime, at night or in Canada, Mauritius); dates (Canada, Chile, (Argentina, Luxembourg, bad weather conditions Companies should Mauritius, NYC, US) Malta, Uruguay) (Argentina, Malta, disclose total Mauritius) compensation and overheads including tips (NYC, US) Source: World Bank. Note: Countries listed are not exhaustive. Transparency of payment procedure is also substantially. In South Africa and India, for example, important as platforms may unilaterally most platform workers earn above the minimum determine the frequency and methods of wage, yet they are expected to pay for their own payments. For example, the Chilean law (2022) also equipment and work-related costs on their own regulates payment periods. The company shall pay (Fredman et al. 2022). As a result, these workers are the independent platform worker the corresponding often forced to work long hours to cover necessary fees for the services within one month (Article 152-y). expenses. If a minimum wage rate is at the lower rate, indirect costs including commission fees reduce Work-related costs such as travel costs, fuel, their actual earnings, in which case, a minimum equipment, maintenance, or insurance may wage regulation could lead to a reduction in workers’ reduce the take-home pay of platform workers income and does not ensure a decent living. Box 4: Platform companies’ initiatives for decent pay Platform companies themselves have taken voluntary initiatives to set a floor for wages. Common approaches include guaranteeing national or local minimum wages, providing guidelines on the prices for clients/users, setting specific rates or fixed prices for services, and making up differences if the workers do not receive the payment guarantee. These companies took such initiatives as they advocate fair labor practices and gender equity. In Bangladesh, for example, Lily, a ride-hailing platform that hires only women workers, ensures a minimum monthly wage of BDT 8100 (USD 84.8) by establishing a formal employment contract, which is more than the national minimum wage. In addition, workers are also entitled to performance- based incentives (Fairwork 2021). SweepSouth is a platform company in South Africa offering domestic services from home cleaning to outdoor cleaning, heavy lifting, and maintenance services. With a mission to “providing dignified, flexible work at decent pay,” the platform ensures all its workers earn at least the national minimum wage in South Africa of R23.19 per hour, after covering work-related costs (Fairwork 2022). The regulation of platform-based work: 22 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries In 2022, Luxembourg introduced Bill No. 8001, has an important influence on both employers and which aims to amend the Labor Code to regulate the workers. employment relationships of workers who provide services or work via digital platforms. The bill only One issue specific to platform work is the applies to platform workers who are defined as difficulty in defining what counts as working employees of the digital platform. It states that hours (OECD 2019a). The definition of working hours platform workers should be reimbursed for work- directly affects their earnings as most work on a piece related costs, including any costs on communication, or hourly rate basis. The nature of platform work equipment, or its maintenance costs (Article L.371-8). changes the traditional definition of working hours given indirect working hours—time spent by workers To sum up, many provisions extend the statutory waiting for a job on their app or time traveling to a minimum wage to platform workers. In addition to task. Few regulations give clarity on what counts regulatory efforts by the governments, platforms as working hours (Figure 8). Most countries define themselves have also taken steps to ensure workers working hours as the time from when workers access earn enough income (Box 4). Employers’ and workers’ the platform to when they log out freely. Clarifying associations including trade unions also play key the definition of working hours is key, as the number roles in determining wages for platform workers. of working hours used to calculate earnings can be These voluntary initiatives can help workers receive adjusted to include both direct and indirect hours fair wages for their work. (Fredman et al. 2021). Working time Several provisions related to working hours have been included in legislation for platform workers. Labor legislation set rules on working hours and These include setting a specific number of hours, periods for rest and recuperation, including weekly enforcing existing rules on working hours in the labor rest and paid annual leave (ILO 1935). Working hours law, and clarifying mandatory breaks (Figure 9). The and the organization of work can directly affect maximum hours of work or the length of a weekly rest mental and physical health, safety, earnings, and period varies across countries. In recent years, several productivity (ILO 2023b). They can also play an European countries have introduced rules or laws on important role for employer firms in determining ‘the right to disconnect’ in response to the increasing their profitability and productivity (Golden 2012). use of technology in the workplace. These rights are The regulation of working times and rest, therefore, also stated in special legislation in some countries. 8 The definition of working hours Figure 8: Luxemburg: Argentina: Chile: Mauritus: Uruguay: The time during A working day as The entire time Working hours All the time which workers are starting with a during which the include waiting at during which the connected and log-on to an app worker is at the home for work to worker is at available to the and ending with a disposal of the be delivered or available to the platform and log-off at a time platform assigned (Section 1) company, from provide services chosen freely company, from the time the (Art. L.372-7) (Article 6) the time they application is access the digital logged in, until it infrastructure and is disconnected until they (Article 14) voluntarily disconnect (Atricle 152, u) Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Note: If the laws or bills are originally published in a non-English language, this translation is unofficial and may not reflect the exact wording of the official document. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 23 Figure 9: Scope of provisions related to working hours Figure 9 Introduce Set a specific Enforce the exisiting mandatory breaks Provide the rights to number of working rule on working after a set of disconnect hours or overtime hours continuous working hours Source: World Bank. Maximum working hours is set specifically for The maximum hour of work varies across countries workers in the transport sector. In Portugal, Article and ranges from 10 to 12 hours per day or from 13 of Law 45/2018 states that regardless of the 40 to 48 hours per week. The Argentina Bill, Article number of platforms a driver works for, a worker may 7 mentions that the work week shall not exceed 48 not drive a vehicle for more than 10 hours within a hours. This is the same as the existing labor law 24-hour period. The law also requires the computer applicable to wage employees (Section 1, Workday system to track the driver’s working time, including Law [Law No. 11,544]). rest time (Article 20). Beyond ‘hard’ laws, several soft- law initiatives have been undertaken by governments, Countries such as Uruguay, Luxembourg, and Chile employers, and employee organizations. Indian set provisions on maximum working hours only Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2020 provides a for dependent platform workers (Table 2). These similar provision—drivers should not be logged in for provisions often reference the existing labor law. more than 12 hours a day (Box 5).16 17 For example, Chile states that workers can freely Box 5: Soft-law initiatives pertaining to working time Beyond ‘hard’ laws that are legally binding, several soft-law initiatives have been undertaken by governments, employers, and employee organizations.17 Some of these, such as codes of conduct or guidelines, have been developed by public bodies in collaboration with trade unions and platform companies. In India, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways has issued the Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2020 to regulate shared mobility, reduce traffic congestion and pollution, and facilitate ease of doing business, customer safety, and driver welfare. Guidelines provide direction with regard to working time, including the maximum log-in hours and the mandatory break. In 2021, China published Guiding Opinions on Safeguarding the Labor Rights and Interests of New Employment Forms for Laborers that cover platform workers. It encourages companies to reasonably determine rest methods and pay reasonable remuneration when they work on a holiday. 16  It is worth mentioning that several Indian states such as Rajasthan and Karnataka drafted bills or regulations to regulate location-based platforms. 17  Soft law refers to agreements, principles, and declarations that are not legally binding (ECCHR, 2022). Hard law refers to legal obligations that are binding on the parties involved. The regulation of platform-based work: 24 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Table 2: Maximum working hours by country Countries Maximum working hours Only dependent Legal basis (Article of workers? respective law/bill) Argentina 48 hours of work per week Art. 7 Chile The same with the labor code (45 hours per week, Yes Art. 152-u 10 hours per day) Peru 48 hours of work per week Yes Art.6 Luxembourg The same with the labor code (10 hours per day) Yes Art. L.372-7 Malta 40 hours of work per week Art.6 Mauritius 45 hours of work per week Section 1 Portugal 10 hours of work per day Art. 13 Uruguay 48 hours of work per week Yes Art. 15 Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Note: This table excludes guidelines. set their own schedules to suit their needs, but the but also created provisions in the transport code maximum limit of the weekly, daily working hours applicable to platform workers in the delivery and and weekly rest must be respected as established in transport sectors (Article 44). While France already the existing labor code (Article 152-u). This provision created this right to disconnect for employees in is only for dependent platform workers. the existing law (LAW n°. 2016-1088 of August 8, 2016), the LOM extends this right to self-employed It is important to note that Uruguay and Chile define platform workers in the transportation sector (Gillis, two types of platform workers: independent and Lenaerts, and Waeyaert 2022). Platform workers dependent workers. This means that dependent are entitled to freely choose activity time slots and platform workers are still covered by the existing inactivity periods (Article L. 1326-4). The platform labor laws and governed by the special rules created cannot terminate the contractual relationship with by the bill/law (Leyton et al. 2022). the worker when a worker exercises this right (Article L. 1326-2). Enforcing a minimum disconnection time or mandatory break is another option to ensure decent Overall, various provisions related to working hours working hours. While the Chilean law does not state have been included in legislation for platform workers. maximum working hours for independent workers, A unique challenge in platform work is defining what it does state minimum disconnection time for them. constitutes working hours, and few regulations According to Article 152-z, the company shall ensure provide clarity on this issue. Clarifying the definition compliance with a minimum disconnection time for of working hours is key as many people work on a the independent platform worker of 12 continuous piece-rate basis and the number of working hours hours within a 24-hour period. This provision on 12 directly affect their earnings. continuous hours of disconnection is also found in the Ecuadorian Bill (Article 4). Mauritius also states that Protection against unfair dismissal and adverse platform workers should have at least 11 consecutive treatment hours of rest after the completion of his/her normal day’s work (Section 1). Rules concerning termination and unfair or discriminatory practices can provide insurance Some countries such as France and Luxemburg for workers against the uncertainty of job loss. provide ‘rights to disconnect’ for platform workers. For platform workers, unfair dismissal encompasses France introduced the Mobility Orientation Law on platform deactivation or being disciplined without Transport (LOM) (Law n° 2019-1428 of December fair explanation or process. 24, 2019), which not only amended the labor code The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 25 Figure 10: Scope of regulations related to protection against unfair dismissal Figure 10 Require valid Require Provide Protect Set up a channel reasons for severance advance notice against to appeal unfair termination pay of termination retaliation treatment Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Different types of legal provisions are found in six months immediately before the termination. The special legislation for platform-based work (Figure bill also asks companies to pay compensation if 10). Many countries require platform companies to workers are prevented from working for more than present workers with valid reasons for termination. 30 consecutive days (Article 26). Some require severance pay and advance notice of employment termination, offering workers a certain Advance notice of employment termination aims period of time for job searches and protecting them to offer workers a certain period of time to make from unemployment. A few countries also set up a future plan and facilitate job search (ILO 1982a). a mechanism for workers to appeal decisions they In Chile, the platform must communicate in writing consider unfair. the termination of the contract to the independent platform worker at least 30 days in advance. This The most common approach among the countries provision covers only those workers who have reviewed is to require justified reasons for the provided continuous services for six months or termination. In Malta, the Digital Platform Delivery more and is not required when termination is due to Wages Council Wage Regulation Order 2022 allows misconduct (Article 152-a). platform workers who consider their dismissal unfair to request that platforms provide substantiated Bill 88 in Canada also stipulates the right to notice grounds in writing within 10 working days (Article 26). of removal. Article 11 mentions that no platform company shall remove a worker’s access to the digital When it comes to ‘valid reasons’, some countries platform without providing a written explanation for such as Mauritius and Argentina specify that the removal. If a platform company plans to remove workers should not be fired due to pregnancy workers’ access to the online platform for 24 hours or maternity. For example, Mauritius prohibits or longer, it must give the worker two weeks’ written the termination of platform workers due to their notice. maternity leaves (Section 9). It states that “an employer shall not give to a female atypical worker, Some countries put explicit protection against who is on maternity leave, a notice of termination of retaliation. In France, for example, Article L. 1326-2 employment.” (Chapter 5 of the transport code, introduced by the LOM) states that self-employed workers can refuse Most countries have severance pay in their a transport service proposal without being subject existing labor law; the same provisions are to any penalty. The platform cannot terminate provided in special legislation for platform the contractual relationship on the grounds that workers. For example, Argentina includes workers have refused one or more proposals. Malta mechanisms to calculate compensation in case of and Canada also have provisions to protect against unjustified dismissal. According to Articles 28 and retaliation. It is unlawful to subject workers to any 29 of the Bill, platforms are obliged to pay severance adverse treatment as a result of a complaint lodged compensations equivalent to one month of earnings against the platforms or any proceedings enforcing for each year of seniority. The calculation will be compliance with their labor rights provided under the based on the average monthly income during the respective law. The regulation of platform-based work: 26 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries In the case of deactivations or unfair termination, Freedom of association and right to collective platform workers need to access grievance and bargaining dispute resolution processes. Since appealing to courts is time-consuming and costly, a mechanism Trade unions or workers’ associations aim to to submit complaints and solve disputes can be advance and defend the interests of workers. useful (Lane 2020). Law 45/2018 in Portugal requires Through collective bargaining, they negotiate working platforms to develop mechanisms for workers to conditions and terms of employment with employers, submit complaints. The platforms also must provide including fair wages and working time (ILO 1984; information on external dispute resolution systems Visser 2019). Trade unions can reach vast numbers (Section 19). An innovative recent example comes of platform workers with campaigns and represent from NYC. The NYC Department of Consumer and them in situations where their rights are violated Worker Protection established online complaint by platforms (De Stefano 2016). These are essential portals where workers can easily report violations rights for platform workers. of workplace laws. The Peruvian Bill also requires platforms to establish dispute resolution channels However, platform workers have a structurally and a designated office in each city. Article 18 weak bargaining position. Individualization and recommends that the platform should have at least fragmentation of work make it difficult to coordinate one in-person or digital support channel in each of the collective power compared to wage workers. There are cities of operation in Peruvian territory to facilitate legal and practical difficulties for platform workers to the resolution of complaints and claims by workers. participate in coordinated group actions and collective bargaining (Bessa et al. 2022; Vandaele 2018). These Overall, platform workers should have adequate obstacles are multifaceted, encompassing issues protection against unfair termination and adverse such as the geographic dispersion of workers across treatment. As seen in the examples, platforms need various locations and frequent turnover (De Stefano to provide a channel for workers to communicate and Aloisi 2018; Fernández 2022; Prassl 2018). The with the platform and respond within a reasonable complexity of these challenges is elucidated in Box 6. time frame. In the case of deactivations, the Notably, web-based platform workers, who operate appeals channels can protect them against adverse across different countries, face heightened difficulties treatment by voicing concerns or appealing in overcoming these obstacle (Johnston and Land- disciplinary actions. Kazlauskas 2018). Box 6: Obstacles to unionizing and collectively negotiating Fear of retribution against those who attempt to unionize discourages workers from joining strikes. In Chile, after a public protest against a change in the wage system in 2020, about 50 workers were dismissed due to the demonstrations (Hadwiger 2022). Platform workers have limited time to organize due to long working hours needed for survival. In Ghana, platform workers interviewed said that due to their high workload, they did not have time to go to additional meetings of workers’ organizations and get involved in protests, even though they welcomed the associations in general (Segbenya et al. 2022). There is also limited awareness of trade unions or workers’ organizations. Hadwiger (2022) conducted surveys with about 6,700 app-based taxi drivers or delivery workers in Argentina, Chile, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Morocco, and Ukraine to understand platform workers’ access to freedom of association and collective bargaining. The survey reveals that many were not aware of a trade union in which they could participate. Instead, they mostly organized informally using social media such as Facebook or WhatsApp. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 27 Figure 11: Scope of provisions related to Some jurisdictions made changes in the freedom of association and the right to competition laws that harmonize with the collective bargaining Figure 11 labor laws. When platform workers are classified as independent contractors, allowing them to collectively bargain could be seen as anti-competitive and violate competition laws by creating a monopoly Provide the right or cartel of workers who could demand higher wages Harmonize to form or join a and benefits (Lianos et al. 2019). Many jurisdictions competition trade union and prohibit workers who are not in an employment law with to collectively labor law relationship to bargain collectively (Hadwiger 2022). bargain A few jurisdictions explored lifting the prohibition to bargain collectively for self-employed or in some Source: World Bank. sectors or occupations (Daskalova 2017). The need to reform competition regulations was recognized Most approaches concentrate on recognizing the by the EU (2018). The EU drafted the Guidelines on rights of collective bargaining and unionization the application of European Union competition law to for platform workers. Some countries in Europe collective agreements on working conditions of solo reformed ‘competition laws’ which often create a self-employed persons (2022/C 374/02). barrier to collective bargaining for self-employed workers (Figure 11). Therefore, classification of These guidelines outline the conditions under which platform workers is still relevant for workers to self-employed workers who are comparable to access the right to collective bargaining (ILO 2022a). employees can negotiate collectively for improved working conditions, without violating competition Much legislation for platform workers attempts laws in the EU (ILO 2021). The guidelines apply to self- to recognize the legal rights to unionize and employed people “who provide services exclusively collectively bargain. Some clearly state that or predominantly to one undertaking; work side by these rights are applicable to ‘self-employed’ or side with workers; or provide services to or through ‘independent’ platform workers. The bill in Uruguay a digital labor platform” (Eurofound 2023). Other would newly extend rights to collective bargaining countries include Ireland and Australia (OECD specifically to self-employed platform workers 2019b). (Article 19). Collective bargaining agreements can be made on pay and working conditions as long as they Recently, irrespective of these provisions, collective are better than what is provided by law. Article 152-h action by platform workers has emerged in developing of the Chilean law also gives independent workers the countries (Box 7). The Spanish Riders’ Law serves as right to establish unions without prior authorization, a noteworthy example, illustrating how collective and they can negotiate with platform companies. bargaining has the potential to exert influence on legislative changes aimed at enhancing the France is the first country among the EU member working conditions of platform workers (Eurofound states to introduce legal rights for collective 2021; Hadwiger 2022). Beyond legislative impact, bargaining exclusively to self-employed platform engaging in collective bargaining becomes a means workers (Gillis, Lenaerts, and Waeyaert 2022). Law for workers to establish connections with their peers 2016-1088 introduced provisions for self-employed and gain awareness of their rights. Moving forward, platform workers who use one or more digital encouragement of these efforts and creation of an platforms to provide personal services in the labor enabling environment for freedom of association and code (Article L.7341-1). It also extended the right to collective bargaining are needed. There needs to be create trade unions and the right to strike to self- an effective remedy in the event of retaliation against employed platform workers (Article L.7342-6). Other union activities (De Stefano and Aloisi 2018). countries such as Argentina stipulate that platform workers (a third category of workers) should have the right to collective bargaining and freedom of association. The regulation of platform-based work: 28 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Box 7: Collective actions in developing countries leading to better working conditions Trade unions or workers’ organizations provide pathways for platform workers to claim their rights. For example, in Kenya, strikes were organized by the Digital Taxi Association of Kenya, the Public Transport Operators Union, and Ride Share Savings and Credit Cooperative Organization to demand higher wages for drivers who work for ride-hailing companies such as Uber (ILO 2022a). The strikes in Kenya led to negotiations between the Ministry of Transport, the ride-hailing companies, and representatives of the drivers at companies such as Uber. These negotiations resulted in the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that guarantees higher wages for the drivers (Wamai 2021). In Sri Lanka, app-based drivers joined up and established an association with the help of a trade union. Instead of registering as a trade union, they formed a society registered with the local government authority. They successfully concluded an MOU with the platform operator on working conditions (Ranaraja 2022). This outcome shows that forming an association and negotiating with platform operators can be an effective way for platform workers to improve their working conditions. 3.3. Special provisions to protect platform risks. Platform workers, especially on taxi and delivery platforms, experience higher injury rates workers (Howard 2017). Any physical health and safety risks can deteriorate because of a lack of protective Given the nature of platform work, several measures or training. Platform work also increases provisions unique to platform work have been psychosocial risks and stress due to long work hours, developed. These range from OHS, data privacy and algorithmic management, competitive and rating protection, the right to inform, and nondiscrimination mechanisms, or time pressure. In addition, online to accountability in algorithmic management. content reviewers regularly face frequent exposure to violence, crime, abuse, and illegal content, leading OHS is one of the key areas many governments to significant psychological and emotional distress are concerned about since online platform work (Lenaerts et al. 2022). poses a range of both physical and psychosocial 12 Scope of regulations Figure 12: Figure OHS Data privacy, protection Transparency and accountability and portability in algorithm management • Provide training, protective • Protect digital reputation • Prohibit discrimination by equipment, and associated • Provide workers with the automated decision-making costs right to access and transfer systems or algorithm • Mandate platforms to have their personal data • Require companies to a safe working environment • Ensure the protection of inform workers of and preventive measures personal data and prohibit automated decision making • Inform workers of processing personal data and monitoring systems work-related risk • Ensure human oversight of automated systems Source: World Bank. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 29 While labor laws are often differentiated from OHS making mechanisms or requiring companies to laws, in some countries, labor laws for platform inform platform workers of automated monitoring workers include provisions that ensure adequate systems. Platform workers should know the rules and health and safety conditions at work. For example, criteria used by algorithms for task assignment and companies are required to ensure a safe working performance evaluation. Lack of transparency in the environment and provide safety measures for algorithmic management practices and data used by platform workers. A few countries (Argentina, Chile, platforms bears the risk of infringing upon workers’ Ecuador, Greece, Peru, Uruguay) also mandate the rights. Many countries (Argentina, Chile, Portugal, platform to provide workers with training for health Uruguay) highlight that platform companies should and safety, protective equipment such as a helmet, respect, in the implementation of the algorithms, or damage insurance for personal assets of platform the principles of equality and nondiscrimination. workers. Companies should inform all workers about the existence of automated monitoring or decision- An Increasing regulatory focus is on data privacy making systems that affect the working conditions and protection including data portability. These of platform workers (EU, Malta, Spain). provisions state that platforms should take the necessary measures to ensure the protection of For example, the EU directive emphasizes personal data processed by platform companies algorithmic management, which is the first-ever (Chile, Greece, Ecuador, EU, Luxemburg, Peru). The EU rules regulating algorithmic management in employer also needs to inform and train employees the workplace. The provisions include obligations about data protection. Some jurisdictions also and limitations on digital labor platforms in their prohibit platforms from processing any personal use of automated monitoring and decision-making data on platform workers (EU, Malta). Moreover, systems. Article 9 adds a requirement to provide platform workers should have access to data used by platform workers and their representatives with platforms and receive and transmit data processed written information, which may be in electronic by automated systems (Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, format, about the automated monitoring and France, Uruguay). decision-making systems that it uses. Article 10 also require digital labor platforms to carry out regularly Several reforms include provisions on transparency and at least every two years an evaluation of the and accountability of electronic monitoring impact of individual decisions taken or supported or decision-making systems. Measures include by automated monitoring and decision-making prohibiting discrimination by automated decision- systems. Table 3: Country examples - areas beyond traditional labor laws Item Example OHS Greece: Article 71. “Digital platforms have towards service providers (..) the same welfare, hygiene and safety obligations that they would have towards them if they were linked to them by contracts of dependent work (…). Due to the special characteristics of the relationship between a service provider and our collaborative digital platform, it is allowed to agree, instead of providing a protective helmet, to assign its value by adding a certain amount to a certain number of deliveries or transfers.” Chile: Article 152 f. “Training and protection elements for digital platform workers. The digital service platform company must provide the worker: a) Appropriate and timely training that considers the health and safety criteria (…) b) A protective helmet, knee and elbow pads for the digital platform worker who uses a bicycle or motorcycle to provide their services (…) c) Damage insurance that insures the personal assets used by the digital platform worker in the provision of the service, with a minimum annual coverage of 50 UF.” Argentina: Article 40. “Companies must implement a permanent hygiene safety service, which will periodically evaluate the conditions and elements of work, indicated in Title X.” The regulation of platform-based work: 30 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Data privacy, protection France: Article L7342-7 (Article 47 of the LOM). “[Self-employed platform-based workers] and portability have the right to access all platform data concerning their own activities that enable them to be identified. They have the right to receive this data in a structured format and the right to transmit it.” Uruguay: Article 8. “Workers have the right to the intangibility of their digital reputation. Any affectation or impairment of your dignity and any injury to his honor is expressly prohibited and enables preventive and remedial actions. (…)” Transparency and EU: Article 9. Transparency on automated monitoring or decision-making systems. “Member accountability in States shall require digital labor platforms to inform persons performing platform work, algorithm management platform workers’ representatives and, upon request, competent national authorities, of the use of automated monitoring or decision-making systems”. That information shall concern: (a) all types of decisions supported or taken by automated decision-making systems, (…); (b) as regards automated monitoring systems: (i) the fact that such systems are in use or are in the process of being introduced; (ii) the categories of data and actions monitored, supervised or evaluated by such systems, including evaluation by the recipient of the service; (iii) the aim of the monitoring and how the system is to achieve it; (iv) the recipients or categories of recipients of the personal data processed by such systems and any transmission or transfer of such personal data including within a group of undertakings; (c) as regards automated decision-making systems: (i) the fact that such systems are in use or are in the process of being introduced; (ii) the categories of decisions that are taken or supported by such systems; (iii) the categories of data and main parameters that such systems take into account and the relative importance of those main parameters in the automated decision-making, including the way in which the personal data or behavior of the person performing platform work influence the decisions; (iv) the grounds for decisions to restrict, suspend or terminate the account of the person performing platform work, to refuse the payment for work performed by them, as well as for decisions on their contractual status or any decision of equivalent or detrimental effect. Portugal: Article 106 (the Labor Code). “Employers must inform job applicants about the use of algorithms and artificial intelligence (s) the parameters, the criteria, the rules, and the instructions on which the algorithms are based or other artificial intelligence systems that affect decision-making about or access to maintenance of the job, as well as the working conditions (…) “ Malta: Article 18 (1) “Employers shall regularly monitor and evaluate the impact of individual decisions taken or supported by automated monitoring and decision-making systems, as referred to in Article 17(1), on working conditions.” Spain: Article 64.4 lit. d (added) “Be informed by the company of the parameters, the rules, and the instructions on which the algorithms or artificial intelligence systems are based that affect the capture of decisions that may affect the working conditions, the access and the maintenance of the occupation, including the elaboration of profiles.” Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Note: If the laws or bills are originally published in a non- English language, this translation is unofficial and may not reflect the exact wording of the official document. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 31 4. Enforcement and compliance Governments have updated legal provisions, yet effectiveness depends on compliance and enforcement. Limited compliance can render any legal reforms ineffective. Violations of labor laws, including failures to report workers to the social security system or enter employment contracts, have already been recorded in European countries (Kilhoffer et al. 2020). The nature of platform work makes enforcement of the law more challenging in some aspects. A difference also exists in how to regulate location-based platforms compared to web-based platforms. In the latter case, the platform companies are legally registered in other countries, not where workers work. When their contracts are subject to the jurisdiction of the country where the headquarters is located, labor inspectors cannot enforce the laws of the country where the worker is based (Fredman et al. 2021). Public inspection authorities often cannot access personally identifiable information on or profiles of platform workers. As a result, most inspections have been limited to location-based platform work (Samant 2019). The regulation of platform-based work: 32 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 13 Challenges for enforcement of the labor law for platform workers Figure 13: Workers' Lack of clarity in Location of limited Limited data employment platform and awareness of accessibility status and labor workers their rights rights and benefits Source: World Bank. 14 Measures to increase compliance Figure 14: Require Establish companies to Facilitate joint dedicated Define register and inspection government penalties for report their between multiple bodies for noncompliance workers to public agencies inspection agencies Source: World Bank. Note: These measures are not exhaustive. Moreover, the lack of clarity on employment status activities and platform workers so that inspection and workers’ rights makes inspectorates reluctant to agencies can monitor their activities. take any enforcement actions (Lenaerts et al. 2022; Prassl 2018). Finally, workers often have limited Designated public administrators and labor awareness of their rights and benefits. Without a inspectorates play an important role in enforcing clear understanding of how wages are calculated, the regulation (De Stefano et al. 2021). In Canada, what benefits are available, or how working hours the new act highlights the role and responsibility of are counted, there is little opportunity for workers to ‘compliance officers’. Under Article 19, compliance recognize discrepancies in pay and benefits. officers can enter and inspect any place of business to investigate a possible violation of the act (Article In contrast, the digital nature of platforms can 22). Italy established a permanent observatory at generate data and keep track of workplace practices the Ministry of Labor and Social Policies, composed that can be used for inspection and monitoring. With of representatives of employers and workers the appropriate legislation in place, platforms can be (Article 47-octies, Legislative Decree No 101/2019). mandated to report the authorities of information on The observatory is responsible for monitoring and workers, employment conditions, and benefits. verifying the effects of the provisions of the new regulation. Very few countries introduced specific measures to increase law enforcement along with legal Under the EU Directive, Article 24, the authorities reforms. As part of labor law reform, some establish responsible for monitoring the application of dedicated agencies for inspection and compliance. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (on the protection of Some only specify the penalty for failing to comply natural persons with regard to the processing of with regulations. In a few countries, platform personal data and on the free movement of such companies are obliged to declare their business data) must also enforce articles relevant to algorithm The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 33 management.18 The authorities must oversee the policy. Communication and education campaigns are impact of automated monitoring and decision- needed to ensure that companies and workers are making systems on the working conditions of aware of their rights and responsibilities. This can platform workers. be done in partnership with workers’ and employers’ organizations through multiple communication Access to data on platform work is essential for channels (ILO 2022b). inspection. Some countries require platforms to declare information on their business and workers. Ecuadorian and Peruvian bills obligate platform companies to maintain database on their workers and share the information with labor inspection agencies or judicial authorities when requested (Article 3 and Article 19, respectively). According to Article 16 of the EU Directive, platforms must declare work performed by platform workers to the relevant labor and social protection authorities. Platforms must make available information on the number of workers, the general terms and conditions, the average duration of activity, the average weekly number of hours worked per person and the average income of persons performing platform work on a regular basis through the digital labor platform concerned, and the intermediaries the digital labor platform has a contractual relationship with (Article 17). Collaboration between various institutions and digital platforms, including information sharing, will facilitate enforcement activities. In Portugal, the law introduced provisions on inspection and assigned the responsibility to multiple government organizations such as the mobility and transport authority, tax authority, social security institutes, and data protection commission (Article 24). This provision facilitates exchanges of relevant data such as tax and social security data between the labor inspectorate and other agencies (ELA 2022). In their legal reforms, some countries clarify penalties to reduce violations. Malta (Article 29) and Uruguay (Article 21) specify the penalty for noncompliance. In sum, only a few countries have introduced enforcement measures along with legal reforms. First, the enforceability of regulations should inform their design. Particularly when countries have limited enforcement capacity, regulations should be clearly expressed to make it understandable for companies and workers and avoid differing interpretations (ILO 2022b). Second, awareness of new benefits or labor rights is a crucial aspect of implementing any 18  Articles 7 to 11. The regulation of platform-based work: 34 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 5. Conclusion The policy brief has provided country examples of different approaches to regulating platform-based work. To date, fewer reforms have been undertaken in low- and middle-income countries. Given that legislative reforms often take time, judicial rulings, collective agreements, or codes of conduct have emerged as important regulatory instruments for protecting workers. The regulations for platform workers are an evolving field. Beyond traditional labor laws, countries recognize new labor rights such as data privacy and algorithm management or have updated the definition of certain rights (such as working hours and minimum pay). Despite the variety in scope and approaches, several principles emerge from these examples that can help point policy makers in the right direction when considering how to regulate platform work. Providing clarity on the employment status of platform workers and ensuring minimum rights to all platform workers are key. Without clarity on employment status, platform workers face the risk of exploitation, employers face legal uncertainty, and litigation often results. Whether a platform worker is an employee or self-employed will inevitably vary across each jurisdiction, legal provisions to define employment relationships, or the nature of platform work. Many countries studied in this brief strengthen methods to define employment relationships to create legal certainty and enable access to existing rights that other formal wage employees enjoy. Establishing clear methods to define employment relationships creates a level playing field for all stakeholders. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 35 Improving protections for platform workers self-employed workers can have implications for their cannot be accomplished through government tax obligations. While this brief did not examine social regulation alone. Trade unions, cooperatives, online protection schemes, many countries have introduced forums, and employers themselves are part of special social protection schemes targeted directly efforts to establish rules and standards for worker at platform workers or at self-employed workers protection. Recently, certain ‘platform cooperatives’ more broadly (Datta et al. 2023; Lane 2020). These have been spotted in some sectors such as the different areas of regulation interact with each transport or home services industries (Box 8). other and can be considered holistically as any new Many of these actors provide critical forums for regulations for platform workers are developed. workers’ voices to be expressed, heard, and acted upon, particularly in cases of challenges that are Moreover, cross-country harmonization of rules, company or sector specific. Nongovernmental such as regional agreements setting common forms of protection can be more flexible tools that standards or facilitating information sharing, complement labor regulations. will ease the regulation of platform work. This is particularly the case for web-based platforms that Regulating platform work is not just about labor operate across multiple countries (De Stefano and laws. Improving the working conditions of platform Aloisi 2018). workers requires a mix of responses across various policy areas (ILO 2021). For instance, competition Effectiveness depends not only on the content of policy occasionally needs some reforms because it regulations but also on enforcement. Developing affects whether workers have access to the right of countries face greater difficulties than developed collective bargaining. Although the main purpose of countries in enforcing laws because of limited transport regulations is to address issues related to administrative capacity and high levels of informal mobility, road safety, or pollution, they often include economic activity (Bhorat, Kanbur, and Stanwix provisions to improve drivers’ working conditions. 2019). In high-income countries, platform work may increase casualization of work. As countries Tax policy and labor regulations are often related in expand legal coverage for platform workers, it is the context of platform work. This is because the essential to ensure that there are adequate efforts classification of platform workers as employees or for enforcement and compliance. Box 8: Platform cooperative - innovation in platform business models ‘Platform cooperatives’ can be a more sustainable business model to ensure decent work for platform workers in developing countries. Across OECD countries from the United States to Belgium, a number of platform cooperatives have been established to improve working conditions and fair treatment for platform workers (Schor 2021). Platform cooperatives are collectively owned and operated by the workers themselves (Bunders et al. 2022). Unlike privately owned digital labor platforms, platform cooperatives allow their workers to take a participatory decision- making process (Johnston and Land-Kazlauskas 2019). Collective ownership and democratic governance models ensure improved conditions for their workers while continuing to provide income opportunities (Reshaping Work 2022). In Ecuador, for example, Asoclim is a cooperative created by members of the trade union organization ‘National Union of Domestic Workers’ (Fairwork 2023a). It offers cleaning and care services, managed and owned by its members. Platforms with cooperative models such as Asoclim demonstrate fairer conditions—their workers are paid above the minimum wage and receive social security and access to training. They also offer fairer management by not using their algorithms to monitor or penalize workers (Fairwork 2023a). The regulation of platform-based work: 36 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Together with trade unions and workers’ Platform-based work has provided opportunities and organizations, a dedicated body for enforcement challenges in the world of work. Labor regulations and can carry out enforcement-related activities. Some other regulatory fields should be updated to balance require setting up such a dedicated body, for example, flexibility and protection in the digital economy. This a labor council, to monitor the condition of platform often requires tailor-made policies that are based on workers and compliance with the law. This should quality data and a thorough examination of what be accompanied by greater penalties for violations. impacts regulatory changes bring to the lives of Transactions on labor platforms are also traceable workers. (OECD 2018), which can enhance compliance. Given that all the platform activities are tracked in digital technology, it can reinforce efforts of labor administrations to ensure compliance with labor regulations (Gallo and Thinyane 2021; ILO 2020). The data on the platform could be made available to government authorities, or worker organizations, to check for noncompliance (Rogers 2018). More data and more evaluation can help design more effective regulations. The lack of statistics on platform workers and uniform measurement frameworks limits our understanding of the challenges that platform workers face (Datta et al. 2023). Moreover, platforms are often reluctant to share information about the size and profile of their workforce (Howson et al. 2021). In part as a result of data limitations, few empirical studies examine the impact of regulations on workers and employers, especially in low- and middle-income countries (Alzato 2024; Siregar and Nakamura 2022). Where data exist, studies typically concentrate on ride- hailing and food delivery services (Li, Poolla, and Varaiya 2021). A better understanding of platform work can help policy makers design regulations that address the challenges they face while balancing flexibility and protection. One solution is that national labor force surveys collect statistics on nonstandard employment including platform work. As an example, the US Contingent Worker Supplement (CWS) Surveys by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) collect data on contingent and alternative work arrangements, including platform work. In addition, platforms need to disclose information on the number of workers, their contractual or employment status, and the terms and conditions of those contractual relationships on a regular basis. With better data availability, conducting thorough evaluations is crucial to evaluate whether regulations are functioning as intended. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 37 References Alzate, D. 2024. The effects of regulating platform-based work on employment outcomes: A review of the empirical evidence. Washington, DC: World Bank. Bessa, I., S. Joyce, D. Neumann, M. Stuart, V. Trappmann, and C. Umney. 2022. “A Global Analysis of Worker Protest in Digital Labour Platforms.” ILO Working Paper 70. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/legacy/ english/intserv/working-papers/wp070/index.html. Berg, J., U. Rani, M. Furrer, E. Harmon, and M. Six Silberman. 2018. Digital Labour Platforms and the Future of Work: Toward Decent Work in the Online World. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/--- dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/wcms_645337.pdf. Berger, T., C. B. Frey, G. Levin, and S. R. Danda. 2020. “Uber Happy? Work and Well-Being in the ‘Gig Economy’.” Economic Policy 34 (99): 429–477. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiz007. Bhorat, H., R. Kanbur, B. Stanwix. 2019. “Compliance with Labor Laws in Developing Countries.” IZA World of Labor 80. http://dx.doi.org/10.15185/izawol.80.v2. Boeri, T., and J. van Ours. 2013. The Economics of Imperfect Labor Markets: Second Edition. Economics Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt32bc18. Bunders, D. J., M. Arets, K. Frenken, and T. De Moor. 2022. “The Feasibility of Platform Cooperatives in the Gig Economy.” Journal of Co-Operative Organization and Management 10 (1): 100167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jcom.2022.100167. Cherry. M. 2019. “Regulatory Options for Conflicts of Law and Jurisdictional Issues in the On-Demand Economy.” ILO. Conditions of Work and Employment Series, No. 106. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/--- ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_712523.pdf. Cherry, M., A. Aloisi. 2017. “Dependent Contractors” in the Gig Economy: A Comparative Approach.” American University Law Review 66 (3) Article 1. http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr/vol66/iss3/1. City of New York. 2023. Delivery Workers. https://www.nyc.gov/site/dca/workers/workersrights/Delivery- Workers.page. Council of the EU. 2023. “Rights for Platform Workers: Council and Parliament Strike Deal”. Press Release Council of the EU, December 13. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2023/12/13/rights-for- platform-workers-council-and-parliament-strike-deal/pdf. Cusolito, A. P., C. Gévaudan, D. Lederman, and C. A. Wood. 2022. The Upside of Digital for the Middle East and North Africa. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1663-5. Daskalova, V. 2017. “Regulating the New Self-Employed in the Uber Economy: What Role for EU Competition Law?” SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 3009120. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3009120. Datta, N, C. Rong, S. Singh, C. Stinshoff, N. Iacob, N. Simachew Nigatu, M. Nxumalo, and L. Klimaviciute. 2023. Working Without Borders: The Promise and Peril of Online Gig Work. Washington, DC: World Bank. https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/40066. De Stefano, V., I. Durri, C. Stylogiannis, and M. Wouters. 2021. “Platform Work and the Employment Relationship. International Labour Organization.” Working Paper 27 (March/2021). https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/ public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_777866.pdf. De Stefano, V. 2016. “The Rise of the ‘Just-in-Time Workforce’: On-Demand Work, Crowd Work and Labour Protection in the ‘Gig-Economy’.” ILO Conditions of Work and Employment Series No. 71. https://www.ilo. org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/wcms_443267. pdf. De Stefano, V., and A. Aloisi. 2018. “European Legal Framework for ‘Digital Labour Platforms’.” Luxembourg: European Commission Joint Research Centre. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/ publication/698a0e19-d5a7-11e8-9424-01aa75ed71a1/language-en. The regulation of platform-based work: 38 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries De Stefano, V., and A. Aloisi. 2022. A Your Boss Is an Algorithm. Artificial Intelligence, Platform Work and Labour. Hart Publishing. Dube, A., T. W. Lester, and M. Reich. 2010. “Minimum Wage Effects across State Borders: Estimates Using Contiguous Counties.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 92 (4): 945–964. https://doi.org/10.1162/ REST_a_00039. EC. 2021. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Improving Working Conditions in Platform Work. https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14450-2021-INIT/en/pdf. ECCHR. 2022. Term Hard and Soft Law. https://www.ecchr.eu/en/glossary/hard-law-soft-law/. Eurofound. 2021. Riders’ Law (Initiative). Record number 2449. Platform Economy Database, Dublin. https:// apps.eurofound.europa.eu/platformeconomydb/riders-law-105142. Eurofound. 2023. “Collective bargaining and competition law.” In European Industrial Relations Dictionary. Dublin. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/en/european-industrial-relations-dictionary/collective- bargaining-and-competition-law. European Labour Authority (ELA). 2022. “Portugal: Digital Platforms in the Ride-Hailing Industry: Control and Inspection Methodology”. ELA. https://www.ela.europa.eu/en/media/740. EPRS (European Parliamentary Research Service). 2024. Improving the Working Conditions of Platform Workers. EPRS.  https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2022/698923/EPRS_BRI(2022)698923_ EN.pdf. Fairwork. 2021. Fairwork Bangladesh Ratings 2021: Labour Standards in the Gig Economy. https://fair.work/wp- content/uploads/sites/17/2021/12/211207_Fairwork_Report_Bangladesh-2021-1.pdf. Fairwork. 2022. Fairwork South Africa Ratings 2022: Platform Work Amidst the Cost of Living Crisis. https://fair. work/en/fw/publications/fairwork-south-africa-ratings-2022-platform-work-amidst-the-cost-of-living- crisis/. Fairwork. 2023a. Fairwork Ecuador Ratings 2023. https://fair.work/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2023/06/ Fairwork-Ecuador-Report-2023-EN-red.pdf. Fairwork. 2023b. Fairwork Mexico Ratings 2023: Labour Standards in the Platform Economy. https://fair.work/en/ fw/publications/fairwork-mexico-ratings-2023-labour-standards-in-the-platform-economy/. Filipetto, S., A. Micha, F. Pereyra, C. Poggi, and M. Trombetta. 2022. “Labour Transitions That Lead to Platform Work: Toward Increased Formality? Evidence from Argentina.” French Development Agency; Research papers 233. http://hdl.handle.net/11336/219177. Fernández, M. L. R. 2022. “Collective Bargaining for Platform Workers: Who Does the Bargaining and What Are the Issues in Collective Agreements.” E-Journal of International and Comparative Labour Studies 11: 61-82. https://ejcls.adapt.it/index.php/ejcls_adapt/article/view/1162. Fredman, S., D. du Toit, M. Graham, A. C. Vadekkethil, G. Bhatia, and A. Bertolini. 2021. “International Regulation of Platform Labor: A Proposal for Action.” Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society 1(1), Article 1. https://doi. org/10.34669/wi.wjds/1.1.4. Gallo, M., and Thinyane, H. 2021. “Supporting Decent Work and the Transition Towards Formalization through Technology-Enhanced Labour Inspection.” ILO Working Paper 41 Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/ groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/documents/publication/wcms_823772.pdf. Gillis, D., K. Lenaerts, and W. Waeyaert. 2022. France: Lessons from the Legislative Framework on Digital Platform Work. Policy Case Study. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA). https://osha.europa. eu/sites/default/files/Lessons_from_French_legislative_framework_digital_platform_work_EN.pdf Golden, L. 2012. “The Effects of Working Time on Productivity and Firm Performance.” Research Synthesis Paper. International Labour Organization (ILO) Conditions of Work and Employment Series, 33. https:// webapps.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/ wcms_187307.pdf Graham, M., I. Hjorth, and V. Lehdonvirta. 2017. “Digital Labour and Development: Impacts of Global Digital Labour Platforms and the Gig Economy on Worker Livelihoods.” Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 23 (2): 135–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258916687250. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 39 Hadwiger, F. 2022. “Realizing the Opportunities of the Platform Economy through Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining”. ILO Working Paper No. 80. Geneva: ILO. https://doi.org/10.54394/VARD7939. Harris, S. D., and A. B. Kruger. 2015. “A Proposal for Modernizing Labor Laws for Twenty-First-Century Work: The ‘Independent Worker’.” The Hamilton Project. Discussion paper 2015-10. https://www.hamiltonproject. org/assets/files/modernizing_labor_laws_for_twenty_first_century_work_krueger_harris.pdf. Hatayama, M. 2022. Revisiting Labor Market Regulations in The Middle East and North Africa. Jobs Working Paper (64). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/375291643045212797/Revisiting-Labor-Market-Regulations-in-the-Middle-East-and-North-Africa. Howard, J. 2017. “Nonstandard Work Arrangements and Worker Health and Safety.” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 60 (1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22669. Howson, K., F. Ferrari, F. Ustek-Spilda, N. Salem, H. Johnston, S. Katta, R. Heeks, and M. Graham. 2021. “Driving the Digital Value Network: Economic Geographies of Global Platform Capitalism.” Global Networks 22 (4): 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12358. ILO. 1919. Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1). ILO. 1921. Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14). ILO. 1930. Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30). ILO. 1935. Forty-Hour Week Convention, 1935 (No. 47). ILO. 1947. Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81). ILO. 1949. Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95). ILO. 1948. Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87). ILO. 1949. Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). ILO. 1970. Minimum Wage Fixing Convention, 1970 (No. 131). ILO. 1981a. Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155). ILO. 1981b. Occupational Safety and Health Recommendation, 1981 (No. 164). ILO. 1982a. Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 (No. 158). ILO. 1982b. Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1982 (No. 166). ILO. 1984. Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154). ILO. 1992. Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173). ILO. 1997a. Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181). ILO. 1997b. Private Employment Agencies Recommendation, 1997 (No. 188). ILO. 2006a. Employment Relationship Recommendation, 2006 (No.198). ILO. 2006b. Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). ILO. 2006c. Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Recommendation, 2006 (No. 197). ILO. 2016. Minimum Wage Policy Guide: Full Chapters. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/media/423206/download. ILO. 2020. “Ensuring Better Social Protection for Self-Employed Workers.” Paper prepared for the 2nd Meeting of the G20 Employment Working Group. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/--- ddg_p/documents/publication/wcms_742290.pdf. ILO. 2021. World Employment and Social Outlook. The role of digital labour platforms in transforming the world of work. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/media/377641/download. ILO. 2022a. “Trade union revitalization: Navigating uncertainty, change and resilience in the world of work”. International Journal of Labor Research, 11(1), 1-17. https://www.ilo.org/media/367516/download. ILO. 2022b. ILO Curriculum on Building Modern and Effective Labour Inspection Systems. Geneva: ILO. The regulation of platform-based work: 40 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries ILO. 2023a. “A Normative Gap Analysis on Decent Work in the Platform Economy.” 347th Session, Geneva, 13–23 March 2023. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/resource/gb/347/normative-gap-analysis-decent- work-platform-economy. ILO. 2023b. Working Time and Work-Life Balance Around the World. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/ media/363371/download. International Social Security Association (ISSA). 2023. Platform workers and social protection: Recent developments in Europe. Geneva. International Social Security Association. https://www.issa.int/analysis/ platform-workers-and-social-security-recent-developments-europe Johnston, H., and C. Land-Kazlauskas. 2018. “Organizing On-Demand Representation, Voice, and Collective Bargaining in the Gig Economy.” Conditions of Work and Employment Series No. 94. Geneva: ILO. https:// www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/publication/ wcms_624286.pdf Kilhoffer, Z., W. P. De Groen, K. Lenaerts, I. Smits, H. Hauben, W. Waeyaert, E. Giacumacatos, J.- P. Lhernould, and S. Robin-Olivier. 2020. Study to Gather Evidence on the Working Conditions of Platform Workers. Final Report 13 March 2020 CEPS, EFTHEIA, and HIVA-KU Leuven. Brussels: European Commission. https:// op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/a698537c-6e49-11ea-b735-01aa75ed71a1/language- en. Kullmann, M. 2021. “‘Platformisation’ of Work: An EU Perspective on Introducing a Legal Presumption.” European Labour Law Journal 13 (1): 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525211063112. Lenaerts, K., W. Waeyaert, D. Gillis, I. Smits, and H. Hauben. 2022. Digital Platform Work and Occupational Safety and Health: Overview of Regulation, Policies, Practices and Research: Report. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. https://doi.org/10.2802/236095. Leyton, J., M. Bonhomme, A. Arriagada, and F. Ibáñez. 2022. New Regulation of Platform Work in Chile: A Missed Opportunity? https://fair.work/en/fw/publications/new-regulation-of-platform-work-in-chile-a-missed- opportunity/. Li, S., K. Poolla, and P. Varaiya. 2021. “Impact of Congestion Charge and Minimum Wage on TNCs: A Case Study for San Francisco.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 148: 237–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tra.2021.02.008. Lianos, I., N. Countouris, and V. De Stefano. 2019. “Re-Thinking the Competition Law/Labour Law Interaction: Promoting a Fairer Labour Market.” European Labour Law Journal 10 (3): 291–333. https://doi. org/10.1177/2031952519872322. Manning, A. 2021. “Monopsony in Labor Markets: A Review.” ILR Review 74 (1): 3–26. https://doi. org/10.1177/0019793920922499. Melia, E. 2020. “African Jobs in the Digital Era: Export Options with a Focus on Online Labour.” Discussion Paper. https://doi.org/10.23661/DP3.2020. Neumark, D., and W. Wascher. 2007. “Minimum Wages and Employment: A Review of Evidence from the New Minimum Wage Research.” IZA Discussion Paper No. 2570. Bonn. https://docs.iza.org/dp2570.pdf. Nickell, S., and R. Layard. 1999. “Labor Market Institutions and Economic Performance” In Handbook of Labor Economics, 3:3029–84. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-4463(99)30037-7. OECD. 2018. Good Jobs for All in a Changing World of Work: The OECD Jobs Strategy. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264308817-en. OECD. 2019a. Employment Outlook 2019: The Future of Work. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi. org/10.1787/9ee00155-en OECD. 2019b. Negotiating Our Way Up: Collective Bargaining in a Changing World of Work. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1fd2da34-en. Pallini, M. 2019. “Towards a New Notion of Subordination in Italian Labour Law?” Italian Labour Law E-Journal 12 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/9698. Prassl, J. 2018. Collective Voice in the Platform Economy: Challenges, Opportunities, Solutions. ETUC. https://www. etuc.org/en/publication/collective-voice-platform-economy-challenges-opportunities-solutions. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 41 Ranaraja, S. 2022. “Trade Union Responses to Organizing Workers on Digital Labour Platforms: A Six-Country Study.” International Journal of Labour Research 11 (1-2). https://www.ilo.org/media/367236/download Reshaping Work. 2022. Navigating Diverse Forms of Work: How to Advance Decent and Fair Work. Authors: Jovana Karanovic, Jelena Sapic and Zachary Kilhoffer. Future of Work Project, Multistakeholder Dialogue. https:// reshapingwork.net/dialogue/download/6658/?tmstv=1718756193 Rogers, B. 2018. “Fissuring, Data-Driven Governance, and Platform Economy Labor Standards.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Law of the Sharing Economy, edited by Nestor M. Davidson, Michèle Finck and John J. Infranca, 303–315. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108255882.023 Samant, Y. 2019. “The Promises and Perils of the Platform Economy: Occupational Health and Safety Challenges, and the Opportunities for Labour Inspection.” Statement. Geneva: ILO. https://www.ilo.org/ media/71861/download. Scheiber N. 2018. “Gig Economy Business Model Dealt a Blow in California Ruling.” The New York Times, April 30, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/30/business/economy/gig-economy-ruling.html. Segbenya, M., A. D. Akorsu, F. Enu-Kwesi, and D. Saha. 2022. “Organising as a Catalyst for Improving Work Conditions among Informal Quarry Workers in Ghana.” Work Organisation, Labour and Globalisation 16 (2): 59–81. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48691514 Schor, J. 2021. After the Gig: How the Sharing Economy Got Hijacked and How to Win It Back. Univ of California Press. Siregar, R., and S. Nakamura. 2022. “Distributional and Productivity Implications of Regulating Casual Labor: Evidence from Ridesharing in Indonesia.” Job Market Paper. Stoeterau, J. 2024. The Economic Rationale to Regulate Platform-Based Work. Unpublished manuscript. Vandaele, K. 2018. “Will Trade Unions Survive in the Platform Economy? Emerging Patterns of Platform Workers’ Collective Voice and Representation in Europe.” ETUI (The European Trade Union Institute). https://www.etui.org/publications/working-papers/will-trade-unions-survive-in-the-platform-economy- emerging-patterns-of-platform-workers-collective-voice-and-representation-in-europe Visser, J. 2019. Trade Unions in the Balance. ILO ACTRAV Working Paper. Geneva: ILO ACTRAV. https://www. ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_dialogue/@actrav/documents/publication/ wcms_722482.pdf Waeyaert, W, H. Hauben, K. Lenaerts, and D. Gillis. 2022. “A National and Local Answer to the Challenges of the Platform Economy in Italy.” European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA). https://osha. europa.eu/en/publications/national-and-local-answer-challenges-platform-economy-italy. Wamai, W. J. 2021. “Uber Drivers’ Organising in Kenya: Challenges and Initial Successes.” GLU Working Papers. Weber, C. E., M. Okraku, J. Mair, and I. Maurer. 2021. “Steering the Transition from Informal to Formal Service Provision: Labor Platforms in Emerging-Market Countries.” Socio-Economic Review 19 (4): 1315–1344. https:// doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwab008. Wood, A. J., M. Graham, V. Lehdonvirta, and I. Hjorth. 2019. “Good Gig, Bad Gig: Autonomy and Algorithmic Control in the Global Gig Economy.” Work, Employment and Society 33 (1): 56–75. https://doi. org/10.1177/0950017018785616. Wood, A. J., V. Lehdonvirta, and M. Graham. 2018. “Workers of the Internet Unite? Online Freelancer Organisation among Remote Gig Economy Workers in Six Asian and African Countries.” New Technology, Work and Employment 33: 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12112. Wood, A. J. 2023. “Understanding the Socio-Economic Rationale for Regulation.” Workshop presentation. Regulating platform-based work in developing countries: How to balance job opportunities and workers’ protection (May 2–3, 2023). Washington, DC: World Bank. Yassin, J., and U. Rani. 2022. Ride-Hailing versus Traditional Taxi Services: The Experiences of Taxi Drivers in Lebanon ILO Working Paper 85. Geneva: ILO. https://doi.org/10.54394/UUAY6255. The regulation of platform-based work: 42 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Law or Draft Bill: Argentina: Estatuto del Trabajador de Plataformas Digitales Bajo Demanda. https://ignasibeltran.com/wp- content/uploads/2018/12/Estatuto-del-Trabajador-de-Plataformas-Digitales-IF-2020-30383748-APN- DGDMTMPYT.pdf. Belgium: The law of 3 October 2022 on various provisions relating to work. https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/ cgi/article_body.pl?language=fr&pub_date=2022-11-10&caller=summary&numac=2022206360. Brazil: DECRETO Nº 11.513, DE 1º DE MAIO DE 2023. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023- 2026/2023/decreto/D11513.htm. Canada: Bill 88 (Chapter 7 of the Statutes of Ontario, 2022). An Act to enact the Digital Platform Workers’ Rights Act, 2022 and to amend various Acts. https://www.ola.org/sites/default/files/node-files/bill/ document/pdf/2022/2022-04/b088ra_e.pdf. Chile: Law No. 21,431 amending the Labor Code to regulate the services of digital platform employees. https:// www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=1173544. China: Guiding Opinions on Safeguarding the Labor Security Rights and Interests of New Employment Forms for Laborers. https://www-gov-cn.translate.goog/zhengce/zhengceku/2021-07/23/content_5626761. htm?_x_tr_sl=zh-CN&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc. Costa Rica: Bill (File No 21.567) for the Protection of the Worker of Digital Service Platforms by adding a new Chapter XII to Title II of the Tabor Code, Law No. 2, of August 27, 1943, and its Amendments. https://alertas. directoriolegislativo.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/COS.-Exp-21567-laboral-plataformas-digitales. pdf?x32394. Costa Rica: Bill (File No 23.736) for non-collective passenger transportation and digital platforms https://www. imprentanacional.go.cr/pub/2023/05/22/ALCA92_22_05_2023.pdf. Egypt: Law No. 87 of 2018 Regulating Road Transport Services Using Information Technology. http://site. eastlaws.com/GeneralSearch/Home/ArticlesTDetails?MasterID=1907718 Ecuador: Project of the law regulating labor relationship of the workers with digital platform companies. https://www.asambleanacional.gob.ec/sites/default/files/private/asambleanacional/ filesasambleanacionalnameuid-29/Leyes%202013-2017/1452-jmoreira/INFORME%20PARA%20 SEGUNDO%20DEBATE.pdf. EU: Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving working conditions in platform work (on December 6, 2021). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A52021PC0762. EU: Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 24 April 2024 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2024/… of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving working conditions in platform work. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0330_EN.html#title2. France: LAW: n° 2016-1088 of August 8, 2016 relating to work, the modernization of social dialogue and the securing of professional career. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/ LEGITEXT000006072050/LEGISCTA000033013014/#LEGISCTA000033013014. France: LAW n° 2019-1428 of December 24, 2019 on the orientation of mobility. https://www.legifrance.gouv. fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000039666574. Greece: Law no. 4808/2021. https://vdilawfirm.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/%CE%A6%CE%95%CE%9A- %CE%91-101_19062021.pdf. India: Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2020. https://morth.nic.in/sites/default/files/notifications_ document/Motor%20Vehicle%20Aggregators27112020150046.pdf India, Karnataka. Draft Karnataka Gig Workers (Conditions of Service and Welfare) Bill, 2024. India, Rajasthan Platform Based Gig Workers (Registration and Welfare) Act, 2023. https://aioe.in/wp-content/ uploads/2023/09/Gig_Workers_Bill_2023_1690274461.pdf. Italy: Legislative Decree No. 101/2019. https://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:decreto. legge:2019-09-03;101 The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 43 Italy: Legislative Decree No. 81/2015. https://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:decreto. legislativo:2015-06-15;81 Kenya: Legal Notice No. 120 of 2022 relating to the National Transport and Safety Authority (Transport Network Companies, Owners, Drivers, and Passengers) Regulations. https://kenyalaw.org/kl/fileadmin/ pdfdownloads/LegalNotices/2022/LN120_2022.pdf. Luxembourg: Bill relating to work provided by through a platform (May 4, 2022). https://wdocs-pub.chd.lu/ docs/exped/0131/013/262134.pdf Malta: Legal Notice 268 of 2022, Digital Platform Delivery Wages Council Wage Regulation Order 2022. https://legislation.mt/eli/ln/2022/268/eng. Mauritius: The Workers’ Rights Act 2019 Act No. 20 of 2019. https://labour.govmu.org/Documents/ Legislations/THE%20WORKERS%20RIGHTS%20Act%202019/A%20Consolidated%20Version%20of%20 the%20Workers%27%20Rights%20Act%202019%20as%20at%202%20August%202023.pdf. Mauritius: Notice Workers’ Rights (Atypical Work) Regulations (No. 234 of 2019). https://www.mcci.org/ media/230845/the-workers-rights-atypical-work-regulations-2019.pdf. Peru: Opinion issued in the Bills 018/2021-CR, 667/2021-CR; 842/2021-CR; and 1536/2021-CR, Law on Dependent and Independent Workers of Digital Platforms. https://wb2server.congreso.gob.pe/spley- portal-service/archivo/MjY5OTU=/pdf/UNANIMIDAD%20PL%2018%20Y%20OTROS. Portugal: Law No. 45/2018 Legal regime for the activity of individual and remunerated transport of passengers in vehicles deprived of their characteristics from an electronic platform. https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/ detalhe/lei/45-2018-115991688. Portugal: Decent Work Agenda (Agenda de Trabalho Digno), Law No. 13/2023 as of 03 April 2023. https://files. diariodarepublica.pt/1s/2023/04/06600/0000200085.pdf?lang=EN. Spain: Royal Decree Law 9/2021, of May 11, which modifies the revised text of the Law of the Workers’ Statute, approved by Royal Decree Legislation 2/2015, of October 23, to guarantee rights jobs of the people dedicated to the distribution in the area of digital platforms. https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rdl/2021/05/11/9. USA: California Assembly Bill No. 5. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_ id=201920200AB5. USA, NYC. Minimum Pay Rate for App-Based Restaurant Delivery Workers, 2023. https://rules.cityofnewyork. us/rule/minimum-pay-for-food-delivery-workers-updated/ USA, NYC. A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to the disclosure of gratuity policies for food delivery workers, Law number 2021/110, 2021. https://legistar.council.nyc.gov/ LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4296908&GUID=678592C0-D7F3-410A-9D1A-4418397D3F07&Options=ID|Te xt|&Search= Uruguay: Protection of Work Performed Through Digital Platforms. https://parlamento.gub.uy/ documentosyleyes/documentos/repartido/representantes/49/747/0/PDF Case Law: South Africa (2018): Decision of The Labour Court of South Africa in case: Uber South Africa Technology Services (Pty) Ltd v. National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers (NUPSAW) and Others (January 12, 2018). https://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALCCT/2018/1.pdf. Uruguay (2020). Decision of The Labour Court of Appeals in case: Esteban Queimada v. Uber BV (June 3, 2020). https://www.ilawnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/sent2dainst_03-06-20_laboral_uber.pdf. United States (2018). Decision of The Supreme Court of California in case: Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (April 30, 2018). https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme- court/2018/s222732.html. The regulation of platform-based work: 44 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries ANNEX 1: The list of countries examined Region East Asia South Asia Middle East Europe Sub- Latin North and the and North Saharan America America Pacific Africa Africa Labor China India Malta Belgium, Mauritius Argentina, Canada, regulations (guideline) (guideline) EU, France, Chile, United (laws/bills) Greece, Ecuador, States (NYC) Luxembourg, Peru, Italy, Uruguay Portugal, Spain Transport Egypt Portugal Kenya Costa Rica regulations (laws/bills) Source: World Bank. Note: This table covers country examples introducing legislative reforms or guidelines in either labor or transport regulations. In the United States, several jurisdictions such as California, Iowa, Seattle, Washington State, Oregon, and Utah, to name a few, issue special laws or bills. In this brief, only NYC is described. France has two reforms in 2016 and in 2019, and NYC has two reforms in 2021 and in 2023. While Italy had a reform in 2015 (Legislative Decree 81/2015), this brief primarily examines the reform in 2019. ANNEX 2: Fundamental principles and rights at work Figure A2 Fundamental principles and rights at work • Freedom of association and collective bargaining • Elimination of discrimination • Elimination of forced labour • Effective abolition of child labour • Safe and healthy working environment Other key labor standards • Social security • Employment and job creation policy • Access to labour inspection Source: ILO Conventions and Recommendation. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 45 ANNEX 3: Relevant international standards Area Employment Wages/ Working Protection Freedom of OHS Data privacy, Labor relationship Remuneration time against association protection and inspection unfair and the portability dismissal/ right to adverse collective treatment bargaining International Employment Protection Hours Termination Freedom of Occupational Private Labour standards Relationship of Wages of Work of Association Safety and Health Employment Inspection Recommendation, Convention, (Industry) Employment and Convention, 1981 Agencies Convention, 2006 (No. 198) 1949 (No. 95) Convention, Convention, Protection (No. 155) Convention, 1997 1947 (No. 1919 (No. 1) 1982 (No. of the Right (No. 181) 81) Protection 158) to Organize Occupational of Workers’ Hours Convention, Safety and Health Private Claims of Work 1948 (No. Recommendation, Employment (Employer’s (Commerce 87) 1981 (No. 164) Agencies Insolvency) and Offices) Recommendation, Convention, Convention, Right to Promotional 1997 (No. 188) 1992 (No. 1930 (No. Organize Framework for 173) 30) and Occupational Collective Safety and Minimum Forty-Hour Bargaining Health Wage Fixing Week Convention, Convention, 2006 Convention, Convention, 1949 (No. (No. 187) 1970 (No. 1935 (No. 98) 131) 47) Promotional Framework for Weekly Rest Occupational (Industry) Safety and Health Convention, Recommendation, 1921 (No. 2006 (No. 197) 14) Source: ILO Conventions and Recommendations. Note: Conventions and recommendations are not exhaustive. The regulation of platform-based work: 46 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries ANNEX 4: Number of laws/bills by types of platform workers and number of jurisdictions by scope of provisions Figure 4.1 shows whether laws /bills apply to location-based platform workers only or to both location-based and online-based platform workers. For Figure 4.2, jurisdictions are counted if there is more than one of the following provisions in the reform. Employment relationship (clarify a list of criteria or legal presumption for employment relationship); Contract (require having a contract, specify items included in a contract); Remuneration (reference existing statutory minimum wages, introduce specific wage rates to platform workers, provide compensation for overtime or irregular hours, regulate tips, pay work-related costs such as equipment); Working Time (set a specific number of work or overtime hours, reference maximum working hours set in the existing laws, introduce mandatory breaks after a set number of continuous working hours, provide the right to disconnect); Protection against unfair dismissal (require valid reasons for termination, require severance pay, provide advance notice of termination, clarify the definition of unjustified dismissal); Freedom of association and collective bargaining (provide the right to form or join a trade union and to strike); Data privacy, protection, portability (provide workers with the right to access and transfer their personal data, ensure the protection of personal data and prohibit processing personal data); Algorithms management (prohibit discrimination by automated decision- making, require companies to inform workers of automated decision making and monitoring systems, ensure human oversight of automated systems). Figure4.1: Figure A4.1Number of laws/bills by types of platform workers Location-based platform workers only 9 8 Both location- based and online-based platform workers Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Note: It should be noted that some reforms cover broader sectors and sometimes it is not explicit whether the law covers both types of platform workers or not. Please refer to the accompanying Excel sheet for additional data. In addition, this figure should be taken with caution, as the countries and regulations included are not representative of all the regulatory reforms for platform workers worldwide. Figure A4.2 Figure 4.2: Number of jurisdictions by scope of provisions 10 8 # of Juridiction 6 4 2 0 Employment Algorithm Contract Working Remuneration Freedom of Protection Data privacy, relationship management Time association against protection & collective unfair portability bargaining dismissal Source: Based on the laws and bills of the examined countries. Note: This figure includes 11 countries that have a new bill/ law or standalone chapter for platform workers (Argentina, Canada, Chile, Ecuador, EU, Greece, Luxembourg, Malta, Peru, United States, Uruguay). It excludes countries with transport regulations. The provisions can be applied to either dependent or independent workers. For example, some reforms add provisions on remuneration or working hours only for dependent workers (Peru, Uruguay), which are counted in this figure. It is important to note that three countries (Belgium, Portugal, Spain) introduce provision on employment relationship but this figure does not count these countries. This figure should be taken with caution, as the countries and regulations included are not representative of all the regulatory reforms for platform workers worldwide. The regulation of platform-based work: Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries 47 ANNEX 5: Country examples for the definition of platform workers Country Definition Canada Digital platform work is defined to mean the provision of for-payment ride share, delivery, courier, or other prescribed services by workers who are offered work assignments by an operator through the use of a digital platform. Section 1 “worker” means, subject to the regulations, an individual who performs digital platform work and includes a person who was a worker: (“travailleur”). Chile Article 152, Q. Digital platform worker: One who executes personal services, whether on their own account or for someone else, requested by users of an application administered or managed by a digital service platform company (Digital service platform company: An organization that, through title onerous, administers or manages a computer or technology system executable in mobile or fixed device applications that allows a digital platform worker to execute services, for the users of said computer or technological system, in a specific geographic territory, such as the withdrawal, distribution and/or delivery of goods or merchandise, the minor transport of passengers, or others). EU Article 2. Definitions. 1. For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply: (1) ‘digital labor platform’ means any natural or legal person providing a service which meets all of the following requirements: (a) it is provided, at least in part, at a distance through electronic means, such as a website or a mobile application; (b) it is provided at the request of a recipient of the service; (c) it involves, as a necessary and essential component, the organization of work performed by individuals in return for payment, irrespective of whether that work is performed online or in a certain location; (d) it involves the use of automated monitoring or decision-making systems. (2) ‘platform work’ means any work organized through a digital labor platform and performed in the union by an individual on the basis of a contractual relationship between the digital labor platform or an intermediary and the individual, irrespective of whether a contractual relationship exists between the individual or an intermediary and the recipient of the service. (3) ‘person performing platform work’ means any individual performing platform work, irrespective of the nature of the contractual relationship or its designation by the parties involved. (4) ‘platform worker’ means any person performing platform work who has an employment contract or is deemed to have an employment relationship as defined by the law, collective agreements, or practice in force in the member states with consideration to the case law of the Court of Justice. Greece Article 68. Digital platforms. ‘Digital platforms’ are businesses that act either directly or as intermediaries and through an online platform connect service providers or businesses or third parties with users or customers or consumers and facilitate transactions between them or transact directly with them. Article 69. (1) Digital platforms are linked to service providers with dependent labor contracts or independent service or project contracts. Luxemburg Article L. 371-2. For the purposes of this Title, the following definitions shall apply: “person providing or willing to provide a service/work through a platform”: a natural person who provides or is ready to provide a service/work for the benefit of another natural or legal person, called the beneficiary, through a platform, and who can, where appropriate, be qualified as an employee within the meaning of Article L.121-1 of the Labour Code on the basis of the provisions of this Title; “platform” means any natural or legal person who organizes the provision of services/ work for his own benefit or for the benefit of other natural or legal persons called the beneficiary or beneficiaries and who connects a person performing or being willing to provide work/service through him or her and the beneficiary using a digital showcase or any electronic means and who is the potential employer of the person providing or willing to perform work/service through the platform. Uruguay Article 2. For the purposes of this law, digital platforms are considered computer programs and procedures of companies that, regardless of the place of establishment, contact clients with workers, facilitating the services of delivery of goods or urban and onerous passenger transport, carried out in the territory national, being able to participate in the fixing of the price or of the methods of execution of the service. The regulation of platform-based work: 48 Recent regulatory initiatives and insights for developing countries Country Definition Mauritius Section 17, the Workers’ Rights Act 2019. Atypical worker subsection (3) lit. (b) person who “(i) performs work brokered through online platform or through such other similar services”, “(iii) performs works through an information technology system” (‘online platform’ means a digital service that (a) facilitates interactions between 2 or more users and (b) includes individuals, companies, or workers to provide specific services in exchange for payment.) Malta Article 2. Platform worker means (a) any person performing digital platform work and who has entered into a contract of employment or an employment relationship or any other form of arrangement irrespective of the contractual designation with any digital labor platform or multiple digital labor platforms and who is engaged, whether on a regular or on an irregular basis, to provide services consisting of the delivery of any product, and (b) any person performing digital platform work and who has entered into a contract of employment or an employment relationship or any other form of arrangement irrespective of the contractual designation with a work agency and who is assigned to, or placed at the disposal of, whether on a regular or on an irregular basis, any digital labor platform or multiple digital labor platforms to provide services consisting in the delivery of any product. Note: If the laws or bills are originally published in a non-English language, this translation is unofficial and may not reflect the exact wording of the official document. ANNEX 6: Terminology Digital labor platforms. They facilitate work using digital technologies to either (a) ‘intermediate’ between individual suppliers (workers or firms) and clients or (b) directly engage workers to provide labor services (EU 2020). Location-based platforms. They provide distribution of tasks that are carried out in person in specified physical locations by workers and include taxi, delivery, and home services (such as a plumber or electrician), domestic work, and care provision (ILO 2021). Web-based platform. Web-based (online) platforms provide distribution of tasks or work assignments that are performed online or remotely by workers. These may include online freelancing (for example, graphic design, data analysis, and software development) and microtasking (for example, transcribing a video or annotating images) (ILO 2021). Platform work. “Platform work is a form of employment in which organizations or individuals use an online platform to access other organizations or individuals to solve specific problems or to provide specific services in exchange for payment.” (EC 2021) Platform worker (digital platform worker). ‘Platform worker’ means any person performing platform work (EC 2021).