European Union Lawmakers Agree To New Rules That Bolster Gig Worker Rights (techcrunch.com) 43
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Some two years of talking about gig worker rights later and European Union lawmakers have finally reached a deal on the final shape of the Platform Worker Directive. [...] The Commission presented its original plan to reform labor laws to boost protections for platform workers back in December 2021, setting out a presumption of employment for workers in a bid to flip the odds on gig economy exploitation. But the proposal proved contentious, with heavy industry lobbying from tech platforms such as Uber pushing for gig workers to be carved out of Europe's employment protections. There were also divisions between Member States over how much worker protection vs platform shielding they were prepared to commit to. But after a final trilogue, lasting more than 12 hours, a provisional agreement has been clinched.
The deal that's been provisionally agreed means a presumption of an employment relationship between a gig worker and a platform will be triggered when two out of a list of five "indicators of control or direction are present," as the parliament's press release puts it. "This list can be expanded by Member States. The presumption can be triggered by the worker, by their representatives, and by the competent authorities on their own initiative. This presumption can be rebutted if the platform proves that the contractual relationship is not an employment relationship," it adds. The agreement also contains transparency provisions that will require platforms to provide information to individuals performing platform work (and to their representatives) about how the algorithms that manage them work; and how their behavior affects decisions taken by automated systems. [...] The provisionally agreed new rules will also ban platforms from taking "certain important decisions," such as dismissals or decisions to suspend an account, without human oversight.
Per the parliament, the agreed text also ensures "more human oversight on the decisions of systems that directly affect the persons performing platform work"; and obliges platforms to "assess the impact of decisions taken or supported by automated monitoring and decision-making systems on working conditions, health and safety and fundamental rights". So conducting data protection impact assessments looks set to be a hard requirement for complying with the new law. Another prohibition that's been agreed is a ban on platforms from processing certain types of personal data of workers, including personal beliefs, private exchanges with colleagues, or when a worker is not at work -- with the Directive billed as beefing up data protection rights for platform workers.
Other provisions in the provisional deal include a requirement for platforms to share information on self-employed workers in their employ with competent national authorities and representatives of those performing platform work, such as trade unions. Measures to prevent platforms from circumventing the rules by using intermediaries has also been agreement -- a practice that's stepped up considerably in Spain since the country introduced its own labor reform, back in 2021, with the aim of forcing platforms to hire delivery workers. Some key details of exactly what's been agreed remain under wraps -- and full visibility and analysis of the ramifications will likely have to wait for a consolidated text to emerge in the coming weeks/months. [...] The final text still needs to be voted on by the Council and Parliament before it can be adopted as pan-EU law. What implementation period has been agreed also isn't yet clear. But today's political deal signals the train has now left the station.
The deal that's been provisionally agreed means a presumption of an employment relationship between a gig worker and a platform will be triggered when two out of a list of five "indicators of control or direction are present," as the parliament's press release puts it. "This list can be expanded by Member States. The presumption can be triggered by the worker, by their representatives, and by the competent authorities on their own initiative. This presumption can be rebutted if the platform proves that the contractual relationship is not an employment relationship," it adds. The agreement also contains transparency provisions that will require platforms to provide information to individuals performing platform work (and to their representatives) about how the algorithms that manage them work; and how their behavior affects decisions taken by automated systems. [...] The provisionally agreed new rules will also ban platforms from taking "certain important decisions," such as dismissals or decisions to suspend an account, without human oversight.
Per the parliament, the agreed text also ensures "more human oversight on the decisions of systems that directly affect the persons performing platform work"; and obliges platforms to "assess the impact of decisions taken or supported by automated monitoring and decision-making systems on working conditions, health and safety and fundamental rights". So conducting data protection impact assessments looks set to be a hard requirement for complying with the new law. Another prohibition that's been agreed is a ban on platforms from processing certain types of personal data of workers, including personal beliefs, private exchanges with colleagues, or when a worker is not at work -- with the Directive billed as beefing up data protection rights for platform workers.
Other provisions in the provisional deal include a requirement for platforms to share information on self-employed workers in their employ with competent national authorities and representatives of those performing platform work, such as trade unions. Measures to prevent platforms from circumventing the rules by using intermediaries has also been agreement -- a practice that's stepped up considerably in Spain since the country introduced its own labor reform, back in 2021, with the aim of forcing platforms to hire delivery workers. Some key details of exactly what's been agreed remain under wraps -- and full visibility and analysis of the ramifications will likely have to wait for a consolidated text to emerge in the coming weeks/months. [...] The final text still needs to be voted on by the Council and Parliament before it can be adopted as pan-EU law. What implementation period has been agreed also isn't yet clear. But today's political deal signals the train has now left the station.
Gig work... (Score:5, Insightful)
Gig work is just a way of treating people like disposable labour without the overhead of regular labour. To get desperate people to burn through whatever they've managed to accumulate trying to stay afloat for the company's profit.
It ought to be illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a big enough pool of really desperate people, you get the best aspects of slavery without all the expense.
It's a win-win!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Always side with the corporations"? Um, did you actually read the post? This is the EU siding with the workers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you have a big enough pool of really desperate people
The gig workers I know don't do it out of desperation. They do it because they like the flexibility to work the hours they want without a boss looking over their shoulder. Many work for more than one company, such as driving for both Uber and Lyft and taking whichever fare comes in first, thus cutting their idle time and boosting their income.
They also like the income boost from the algorithm giving them more gigs because they have good reviews.
Oh, and they also like the pay, which is usually higher than a
Re: (Score:3)
So in your view, the driver of a motor vehicle with passengers in it is a "no-skill worker"? Interesting!
Re: (Score:2)
So in your view, the driver of a motor vehicle with passengers in it is a "no-skill worker"?
Driving a vehicle isn't much of a skill.
I grew up on a farm and drove the hay truck when I was ten.
By the time I was twelve, I could lift the bales, so my nine-year-old sister drove the truck.
Re: (Score:2)
The ones driving for Uber and Lyft eventually do the maths and figure out they're losing money.
Re:Gig work... (Score:4, Informative)
Here's the counterpart (from actual experience).
Programmers *used* to do all kinds of hourly work at really high rates in the 80s. You could literally work 6 months and take 6 months off.
Then a ruling *very* similar to this one meant that they could no longer be a contract programmer unless they were under another company and that depressed wages *quite* a bit because the middle man typically took 20%.
It also meant.. you couldn't simply walk away from a bad gig any more. Because the contracting houses controlled the market.
This ruling could also be a way to force free gig workers back into an employee mode but with less benefits and rights.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I am incorporated. Incorporation doesn't change my tax rate. The taxes are passed through to my individual tax returns.
The benefit is that incorporation makes it much harder for the IRS to claim that I am an "employee" of the contractees I work for. It keeps the contracting relationship clean and simple, and makes contractors more willing to hire me.
Incorporation also makes it much easier to deduct home office expenses.
Incorporation costs about $200 and takes 20 minutes. Anyone who does contract work should
Re: (Score:1)
I was incorporated. Had a CPA too. Still had to go through a contracting house.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples & oranges (Score:2)
The difference is that the jobs are one and done. The reason you could work 6 months wasn't because of worker protection rules, it was because the company only needed you 6 months and they paid through the nose for consultancy services.
But there were plenty of jobs that required
Re: (Score:2)
There are such things as L
Re: (Score:2)
Right. Contractors. As opposed to the majority of us, who were employees, and take 6 months off? ROTFL!!!!!
I was making $25k-$27k for about a decade, '83-'94.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on what you do and who for....
There's DBAs and SysAdmins that can 1099 for easily $75/hr - $200/hr.
Re: (Score:2)
In the 80's? Most of us, nope. Hell, I started at a community college as a programmer, and was making under $14k/yr in '80.
Re: (Score:2)
There were people making the equivalents of those hourly rates I quoted you in 80's dollars, yes.
Re: (Score:1)
I knew a guy who got 4 hours minimum per support call. He broke the compensation system when he got 32 support calls in one week.
And knew many folks who were making $25 an hour ($75 today) and it wasn't for 6 months either.
Re:Gig work... (Score:4, Funny)
Gig work is just a way of treating people like disposable labour without the overhead of regular labour. To get desperate people to burn through whatever they've managed to accumulate trying to stay afloat for the company's profit.
It ought to be illegal.
See, this is why we have Brexit!
Just watch the UK economy soar over Europe now.
Nigel Farage was a genius.
Re: (Score:1)
Gig work is also known as "contracting".
Contracting is something that has been around LONG before Uber and the other modern controversies.
I incorporated myself decades ago...I'm in the US so I went S-Corp and I've been contracting corp-to-corp and have made quite a happy and lu
The five criteria (Score:5, Informative)
For some reason they talk about 5 criteria but fail to list them. The five criteria are as follow: The platform (employer):
* fixes the price of the service;
* supervises remotely the execution of the service;
* does not allow the worker to choose time table or to refuse a particular service;
* requires use of uniform (branded clothing) during contact with customers;
* prohibits the worker from working for other platforms.
If a platform matches at least two of the following criteria, the workers will be upgraded to full employee (and enjoy the usual worker's rights).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The five criteria (Score:2)
No it will be owned by an local small DPS
Full time employment benefits are a scam (Score:3, Interesting)
Now lets contrast this to the regulated full time market. An employer who takes on a young worker must guarantee a minimum number of hours plus severance if they no longer need them. If the new employee isn't able to perform at the expected tasks the employer might have difficulty firing them. Thus the risk of hiring a new employee drives their value down to the employer. At the same time the employer must pay for benefits for the employee like healthcare and life insurance. A young employee is likely healthier than an older employee and has a significantly lower chance of death or disability. Thus the full time benefits are really an income transfer from the younger worker to the older worker. Younger workers are under paid when full time benefits and other "protections" are forced on them.
If you want better pay for people give them opportunities in a free market economy. Get rid of the building restrictions so landlords can be profitable in building new housing where there are good jobs. Stop propping up dying industries and companies full of older workers and let people create new enterprises.
I'm sure this will voted -10000000 by the left. The right might not be able to find reality with a map but at least they will listen to opinions they disagree with.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I hate when the left gleefully screws over younger workers. Gig workers are a commodity.
No. Gig workers are peopleI hate when the right treats people like line items on a fucking balance sheet.
They are paid the commodity rate. If that rate is too low then the gig workers don't take the job. (hint if someone isn't at least as productive as their wage then someone else is subsidizing their wage). As long as their is transparency between the workers and the employers the free market should set the correct pay.
Funny, I haven't heard from you Tea Party loons for a while now. Most gig workers are in a position where they take whatever they can get, even if it's not enough to live on, then (guess what!) it falls to the tax payer to keep them bobbing up and down around the breadline.
What the free market brigade always seem to miss is that free markets only work so long as both parties are free to say no. People li
Gig worker labour is a commodity (Score:4, Interesting)
Gig worker labour is an externality (Score:2)
You can't privatize social responsibility on the employer.
No but you can stop them taking advantage of the state to provide corporate welfare for their wage bill.
If you think everyone deserves a minimum amount of income then tax everyone and pay for it.
That is still allowing company X to externalise their wage bill onto company Y and taxpayer Z. I'm not adverse to my taxes feeding people as a social safety net, but why should I pay to keep your failing business afloat because you can't afford to pay well enough?
If a person has a choice between starving or working for employer X then obviously they are better off because employer X offered them a job.
The problem is you have people whose only choice is to work for company X and starve! You have people working full time jobs (sometimes 2!) and
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is you have people whose only choice is to work for company X and starve! You have people working full time jobs (sometimes 2!) and still qualifying for SNAP, etc. because their pay rate is so low.
You are looking for a short term solution here. You are even looking at the wrong problem. The problem isn't that company X pays so little it's that no other company will pay the worker more. If this worker really is more productive then why doesn't someone else hire them? If you can find a market failure then concentrate on fixing that. If you solution is to say employers must pay more, the market will solve the problem by not hiring the employee at all. Y
Re: (Score:2)
To treat it any other way creates far more problems. You are not entitled to a living wage.
Sez you. I say otherwise.
You can't privatize social responsibility on the employer.
Sez you. I say otherwise.
If you think everyone deserves a minimum amount of income then tax everyone and pay for it.
I support the idea of universal income, tax and no minimum wage.
If a person has a choice between starving or working for employer X then obviously they are better off because employer X offered them a job.
That's a stupi
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
How many gig workers are asking for this? (Score:3)
Most of the gig workers I know make good money by being selective. A few have languished with poor pay due to trying to take too many gigs that nobody else wanted (when there were plenty of full time jobs available offering steadier pay at the very least).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I would if I knew any.
Re: (Score:2)
They still will be able to be selective after that. What This law does is to draw the line between the contractors and the employees. It will oblige the platforms to make a clear choice of the employment model, they either keep "independent contractor" model but then give them all sort of freedoms (e.g. can work elsewhere as well, can choose their own prices, no electronic monitoring); or the platform prefers to choose everything but then hire actual employees. I believe platforms like Uber will want to con
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds a bit janky. First off, why put the choice on the platform instead of in the hands of the worker?
As it stands, gig workers can opt out at any time and the worst case scenario is that they get banned from the platform for something like abandoning a gig in the middle.
Like let them decide if they want to be a full time employee with bennies or not.
Also how is "no electronic monitoring" supposed to work? Many gigs offer customers knowledge of where the contractor is as a part of delivery of goods or se
Re: (Score:2)
why put the choice on the platform instead of in the hands of the worker?
I general in life you never choose your kind of employment. An employer decides they want an employee, full time or part time, publishes an ad, and you apply if you want. It does not rule out the possibility for you to choose if the platform you work for accepts both kinds. The status of employee does not imply full time, you can always agree with your employer how many hours a week you want to work.
Also how is "no electronic monitoring" supposed to work?
The original draft https://www.europarl.europa.eu... [europa.eu] (link provided by an AC) refers to "use of algorithms t
Re: (Score:2)
That's not entirely true. Some companies hire both full time employees and contractors. You can apply/bid for different positions depending on how you want to involve yourself with the company.
Many companies do not negotiate on hours, at all. Especially not ones hiring low-level/low-skill employees as would be the case with many gig work platforms were they forced to an employer/employee model.