Platform unionism in Georgia: Rocky path toward better social security

This article intends to show the added value of an interdisciplinary approach to researching the protection of on-location platform workers in producing a more fruitful understanding of the current socio-legal problems regarding the classification of these platform workers and their possible solutions. It explores how food delivery platform workers in Amsterdam experience their social rights, the conditions under which they would wish to change their situation, and the legal reforms needed to realise the changes. The empirical findings suggest that not only solo self-employed but also employed riders appreciate the ability to decide when and whether to accept an assignment. In addition, both types of food delivery riders express the desire to be protected under labour and social security law. The legal analysis highlights various obstacles to meeting the demands of the platform workers. It concludes that it is worthwhile rethinking the dichotomy of the employed and self-employed, both at the EU and national levels, and to offer platform workers (some) employment and social security protection.

This special issue of the European Journal of Social Security explores the complexities of extending unemployment insurance to the self-employed and platform workers in the EU Member States and the steps taken at EU level to enforce the protection offered at national level. Traditionally, social security systems have been designed for standard employment relationships, leaving a typical workers and the self-employed inadequately protected. The European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), adopted in 2017, and the subsequent 2019 Recommendation on access to social protection have marked a shift towards more inclusive social security frameworks. However, significant gaps in coverage remain, in particular with regard to unemployment protection for the self-employed and platform workers. The special issue is divided into three parts: national perspectives, comparative studies and EU-level discussions.

The right to social security is enshrined in article 23 of the Belgian Constitution. It is the role of the legislator to implement it, to guarantee the right of all to lead a life in accordance with human dignity. Studies show that platform workers face major difficulties in terms of social protection. The aim of this article is to highlight the limits of existing legislative provisions regarding their ability to implement the fundamental right to social security for platform workers. With regard to these legislative provisions, we are interested in both the general regulations that shape the Belgian social security system and the recent measures adopted by the Belgian legislator with regard to the so‐called sharing economy. An analysis of these provisions reveals that a number of platform workers are excluded from social security, both de facto and de jure. At the very least, this raises the question of whether the Belgian legislator is complying with the positive obligation to fulfil the constitutional right to social security for platform workers, and the negative obligation, at least, not to undermine it.

Constitutional right to social security

The aim of this paper is to examine if and how the reclassification of platform workers from self-employment status to employment status can provide them with adequate social security protection. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platform workers adequate social protection within the social protection scheme for employees. National social security schemes, in particular income replacement benefit schemes, often (still) depart from the standard employment relationship, leading to lower protection for atypical work forms. Platform workers combine several of the characteristics of atypical forms of work, such as low earnings, irregular working patterns and working. Integrating platform workers into employee social security schemes faces additional challenges due to the online nature of their work, algorithmic management, high levels of unpaid labor, and employer identification difficulties. This paper focuses on unemployment protection, as EU Member States struggle to provide adequate protection for workers with irregular work patterns and income fluctuations, in the case of (short term) income replacement benefits. By constructing nine ideal work patterns reflective of diverse nature of platform work and current practices among platform work, we analyse how different types of ‘employed’ platform workers may fare within the legislation of three EU countries (Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands). This approach allows us to assess the applicability of unemployment protection to different working patterns among 'employed' platform workers, considering formal, effective, and adequate access to unemployment schemes as outlined in the Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed (2019).

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 asserts that social security is an inalienable human right. Realizing this human right is often considered, simply, as a matter of political will and of administrative aptitude. In these terms, the progressive realization of the human right to social security may be viewed as the outcome of an appropriately‐resourced political and bureaucratic process. Such a perspective, however, is clearly inadequate. Characteristically, bureaucracies are designed to cater to the needs of all, based on common procedures and common deliverables designed for the “typical” case. Yet such approaches often lack the necessary flexibility and resources to make a distinction between individuals, which acknowledge their respective differences and needs. To meet the international commitment to progressively realize universal social security coverage, social security administrations are key actors. However imperative this role may be, if the pursuit of this commitment fails to respect people's differences this will put at risk the meeting in full of what is envisioned by the human right to social security. To this end, this special issue aims to foster an understanding that the goal of universal coverage must necessarily also respect and respond to the individual needs of each and every person.

During and after the months of pandemic control measures, newly formed unions of platform and gig workers in India started leveraging electoral contests, campaigns and politics to advocate for and with laws that would regulate platform work and provide workers with social security. This signalled the adoption of direct political interventionism as a bargaining strategy for gig and platform workers’ rights. This strategy was built upon the strengths and abilities of workers to coordinate tactically and organise independently, without conforming entirely to existing political formations and ideologies – reminiscent of the historical ‘third-wave’ movements for informal workers’ legal empowerment in India. Drawing on examples of practices of ‘political and civil society’ amongst gig and platform labour organising in India, this paper demonstrates the unique ways in which new unions of gig and platform workers are both following and deviating from earlier trajectories of third-wave labour movements, as well as from gig and platform workers’ movements in the global context. We show in the paper how this is allowing unions to make greater claims for gig workers’ social protection and expand the remit of welfare politics in India. We then deliberate whether this signifies a potential movement towards a new ‘fourth wave’ of labour’s legal empowerment for workers in India under digital capitalism.

This study investigates youth platform workers’ labor process and their attitudes towards social insurance, based on 12 in-depth interviews with workers between 19 and under 34 years of age. Possibly due to cut-throat competition among platform workers, participants demonstrated liberal principles such as meritocracy and individualism. The non-transparency of the algorithmic management system severely restricted autonomy of young platform workers. In order to resolve the tension between the promised autonomy and tight technical control, participants seemed to develop the entrepreneurial self. It was found that the main characteristics of the platform labor process could influence the perception of social policy. Despite the labor process that diminished the importance labor and social rights, participants demonstrated the needs for social insurance. This study concludes with policy suggestions for enhancing labor and social rights of platform workers.

IIn recent years, the number of platform-employed personnel in China has generally shown an upward trend, with employment forms becoming increasingly diversified, mainly manifested as independent entrepreneurship, freelance work, part-time employment, and flexible employment by organizations. The employment fields of platform workers are mainly concentrated in the service industry, with a differentiated distribution of the employment groups. From the current situation of labor rights protection for platform workers, the average income is relatively high but with significant internal differentiation and weak bargaining power; during the work process, low rights protection is exchanged for high income; the coverage rate of various social insurances is low, with limited participation channels, and the pilot of occupational injury protection has made good progress; the union participation rate is low, and some platform-employed workers use non-institutional means to protect their rights. The main reasons are the difficulty in identifying labor relations, the social security system is hard to match with the employment model of platform workers, and traditional regulatory methods are not adapted to the platform business model. In terms of the regulation of labor rights protection for platform workers, at the legal policy level, the government initially regulated platform enterprises mainly through industry regulation. Recently, various labor rights protection policies have been introduced successively, and pilot reforms for the occupational injury insurance system for new forms of employment workers have begun. At the collective level, the Trade Union Law has been amended, and guidance has been issued. At the industry and enterprise level, industry enterprises have strengthened self-discipline, taken the initiative to assume corresponding social responsibilities, supplemented the insufficiency of social insurance through commercial insurance, adjusted algorithms and regulations, and provided various employee care services, etc. The following measures are recommended: strengthen standardized guidance and promote sustainable development through multiple measures; deepen market reforms to maximize the development of employment resources and opportunities; clarify the identification of labor relationships; strengthen the protection of workers’ basic rights; improve trade union guarantees for workers’ rights; and enhance government public services.

In the Netherlands, the social security rights of platform workers have still not been formally defined. At present, the level of social security protection accorded to all workers is derived directly from the labour law qualification. In the continuing absence in the Netherlands of specific legislation for platform workers, specifically as regards labour law and social security law, the existing legislation is steering. This means that the platform worker is either included using the status of employee with the corresponding extensive protection package, or the status of self‐employed with limited social protection. For the majority of platform workers, this second option is applied to date. Nevertheless, recent developments point to possible improvements in the social security position of platform workers in the Netherlands.

Digital platforms have transformed traditional business models, fostering communication, innovation, and flexibility across industries. The growth of digital labour platforms expands job options through greater internet access and remote work. The active participation of platform workers has further driven this expansion due to the flexibility and variety of job opportunities available. However, platform workers are facing various labour issues, including inconsistent payment, unfair account suspensions, and inadequate compensation while working on the digital labour platform. The current regulatory framework prohibits platform workers from forming and joining trade unions, hindering platform workers’s rights to unionise and directly affecting their chance to improve their employment contract. This study examines the issues faced by platform workers and recommends improvements that can be made to the current regulatory framework to improve the association rights of platform workers in Malaysia. A qualitative research method in the form of a semi-structured interview with platform workers and the committee member of the E-Hailing Coalition Malaysia is conducted. Content analysis is used to examine parliamentary statutes, academic articles and interview feedback to identify key themes and patterns in the study. The findings reveal gaps in current legal protections and suggest recommendations for reclassifying platform workers as employees to ensure they can engage in collective bargaining and protect their labour rights. This study contributes to the growing discourse on digital labour platforms by advocating for policy reforms that foster a more equitable, sustainable, and just working environment for platform workers in Malaysia.

In today’s world, the rapid development of digital technologies and the gig economy has led to the emergence of new forms of employment that significantly change traditional labor relations. The platform economy, based on short­term contracts and freelance work, has become an important element of the labor market, offering new opportunities for workers, but at the same time presenting them with numerous challenges. The legal status of platform workers remains uncertain in many countries. Platforms often classify their workers as «independent contractors», «economically dependent independent workers» or «self-employed», which allows them to avoid obligations related to labor laws. This leads to legal gaps that jeopardize the social protection of workers on digital platforms. Different approaches to the legal status and social guarantees of workers in different countries create additional complexities in regulation. The issue of legal classification of digital platform workers remains unresolved, affecting their labor rights and social security. The authors consider the challenges that arise in connection with new forms of employment that displace traditional labor relations. The main attention is paid to the legal uncertainty of the status of gig workers, their social protection and the lack of a unified approach to the regulation of this sphere in different EU countries. The article analyzes legislative initiatives and case law in France, Germany, Austria and Spain, where the legal status of platform workers varies from employed to self-employed. Particular attention is paid to recent court decisions that affect the classification of platform workers and their social rights. The study reveals significant differences in the national legislation and judicial practice of different EU countries, which indicates the need to develop a unified European approach to the regulation of new forms of work. The authors emphasize the need to adapt national legislation to the new realities of the labor market, in light of the new EU Directive (Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving working conditions in platform work), which aims to ensure the correct classification of employment status and the protection of the rights of gig workers.

Digital labour platforms in Malaysia have seen rapid growth, providingflexible employment options for workers across sectors. However,platform workers lack social security protection while performing theirwork due to their informal employment status. The current studyexplores the existing regulatory framework for social security protectionin Malaysia and the issues faced by platform workers. It also highlightsimprovements that should be made to the Employment Act 1955 and theEmployee Social Security Act 1969. The study employs qualitativemethod, in the form of semi-structured interviews conducted withplatform workers and relevant authorities, in order to get their views indepthon issues surrounding social security protection in digital labourplatforms. The findings reveal that platform workers are susceptible towork-related injuries without appropriate compensation and retirementbenefits due to gaps in the current legal framework. This study providesvaluable insights for policymakers in devising social security protectionfor platform workers. The paper recommends the inclusion of ‘platformworker’ and ‘gig worker’ as employees under section 2 of theEmployment Act 1955.

The article deals with the problems of legal regulation of the work of platform workers, which is an important aspect of modern labor law. Platform workers are part of a growing economy sector that operates through digital platforms such as taxi-hailing or food-delivery apps. Despite significant advantages such as flexible working hours, this type of employment also brings with it elements of precarious jobs, which necessitates legal intervention to safeguard the rights of these workers. Enhancing the quality of life for platform workers, it is proposed to establish basic protection of their social and labor rights. The article deals with examples from international practice, including EU directives and legislation from countries such as Singapore, Spain, India, Belgium, and Portugal. These examples demonstrate different approaches to solving the problem, such as introducing mandatory social contributions for platform companies and granting collective bargaining rights to employees. Furthermore, a nuanced consideration of the Social Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan alongside the Labor Code is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of platform employment, as the Social Code provides a detailed framework for regulating the civil-legal relationships inherent in platform work. Special emphasis is placed on substantiating the need to develop and adopt the Law "On Legal regulation of labor of platform workers" in Kazakhstan. The article provides a general description of the proposed draft law with an emphasis on specific issues that should be reflected in it. Among them are the definition of the legal status of platform workers, the establishment of minimum wage standards, and ensuring the rights to social insurance and safe working conditions. The adoption of such a law will contribute to the creation of fair working conditions for all market participants and increase welfare support for platform workers in Kazakhstan.

Working through the platform brings about insecurity and working without paying taxes and social security premiums within the gig economy. In the study, the web pages of the platforms were examined using the qualitative data collection technique. Approximately 550,000 workers are registered on the examined platforms in Türkiye. Some of the workers receive their wages on the platform. The platforms deduct between .025% and 25% of workers' earnings. The platform workers in Türkiye are not usually the taxpayer. This situation negatively affects the social security of the workers. Although the platform workers seem to work with a work contract, they are economically dependent on the platform due to their work. The fact that the platforms charge commission fees from the employees, the employees pay their wages after the customer accepts the service, and they cover some of the damage caused by the employee brings the status of the work closer to the labour contract. The aim of the studies is to examine the status of platform workers in the tax and social security law in Türkiye.