Whether they are self-employed, atypical employees, or self-employed using an umbrella company, there is still almost no social protection against unemployment or partial loss of activity in Switzerland for platform workers. The same can be said for the self-employed in general. This contribution shows that platform workers, irrespective of their exact legal status, and the self-employed in general, risk sanctions for taking on unsuitable work, for being insufficiently available for decent work or unable to prove a loss of income. However hard they try, they cannot even contribute to a voluntary unemployment insurance scheme. We show that the Swiss social protection scheme, a product of years of federal direct democracy, is hardly able to adapt to the fast-moving platform work environment, thus increasing the risks of precariousness and the burden on the cantons’ social assistance for the next generation.

Improving the social security protection of atypical workers has been high on the EU agenda in recent years. With the adoption of the European Pillar of Social Rights in 2017, the EU wished to break away from a decade of austerity measures. The EU further developed the right to adequate social protection in the Pillar through the Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed. This instrument urges EU Member States to ensure adequate access to social protection for workers, regardless of their employment relationship, and the self-employed. As part of the EU's recovery strategy during and after the Covid-19 crisis, several financial instruments were developed to support EU Member States. Through the Temporary Support to Mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency, EU Member States received support for job retention schemes. The EU also adopted the Recovery Resilience Facility, which provided grants and loans. Another support instrument was the European Social Fund Plus. This article discusses those recent EU initiatives, focusing on unemployment and the protection of atypical workers and the self-employed. With the introduction of the European Employment Strategy (1997), a closer link was made at EU level between unemployment, increasing labour market participation and activation measures. Less attention was paid to ensuring adequate unemployment protection. In recent years, however, it appears that the EU has been playing an increasing role in providing funding for temporary support and in introducing changes to EU Member States’ policies.

Shaping solidarity, guaranteeing basic subsistence, maintaining income and employment activation can be seen as basic values underlying social security law in many European welfare states. This article argues that the meaning of these values or concepts is determined by legitimating discourses within which they are interpreted. While so far Rawls's theory of justice and related egalitarian liberal philosophies have had a great impact on these discourses, the ecological crisis has given rise to new discourses which are inspired by neo-republican theory and green republicanism. Instead of legitimising a capitalist economy based on economic growth, these discourses promote a post-productive society that seeks to realise human flourishing and meaningful lives. The aim of this article is to contribute to the emerging debate on social security reform by explaining how neo-republican theory and green republicanism can fill social security law's basic values or concepts with meaning that is more in line with current ecological concerns. In contrast to previous contributions that have sought to rethink labour and social security law (‘social law’) in a way that is more compatible with our ecological and climate crisis, this article builds on Poststructuralist Discourse Theory to develop its argument.

Discrimination in healthcare is a pervasive issue faced by patients, affecting their access to treatment and overall well-being. This article examines the forms of healthcare discrimination recognised by Scandinavian equality boards through a comparative analysis of their decisions. While social science studies have established the existence of discrimination based on ethnicity, race, gender, sexuality, and age, proving such discrimination in legal terms poses significant challenges. An analysis of board decisions reveals that patients face barriers in establishing legally actionable discrimination, as perceived discriminatory conduct may not meet the criteria for legal claims. Additionally, equality boards are often hesitant to intervene in medical decision-making processes, further complicating the path to legal recourse. Lack of evidentiary support, especially in cases of unconscious bias, makes it difficult for some patients to substantiate claims of discrimination. The findings underscore the complexities of addressing healthcare discrimination through legal means. To effectively combat discrimination, there is a need to clarify the goals of discrimination law in the healthcare context and consider its future application within the broader context of human rights and equality.

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).

This case law report discusses two cases before the European Court of Human Rights and two cases before the European Committee of Social Rights. The first case (Pająk and others v. Poland) concerns the introduction of a lower and different retirement age on the basis of sex for judges of the Polish Constitutional Court. In the case X and others v. Ireland, the ECtHR had to examine the extent to which the residence requirement for child benefits violated Article 14 ECHR, read in conjunction with Article 8 ECHR and Article 1 of the Additional Protocol to the ECHR. Child benefits were paid only to claimants who were fully resident in Ireland, and the applicants, who were awaiting a decision on their residency status, did not fulfil this requirement under Irish law. The collective complaint no. 167/2018 (Sindacato autonomo Pensionati Or.S.A. v. Italy) concerned an alleged violation of Article 12 (3) ESC due to the total or partial suspension of the automatic indexation of a large share of pensions in 2011. The measure was extended in 2015 and revised in 2018, taking into account the position of particularly vulnerable persons. In the last case (collective complaint no. 185/2019, European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v. Belgium), the applicants argued that their right to social assistance had been violated, as they had not received social assistance benefits following a police investigation. The ECSR did not go along with the applicants’ claim.

This article aims to address the stigma and stereotypes inherent in the system of social assistance by addressing poverty as a matter of discrimination. Through the lens of discrimination, the article argues that the welfare system reproduces the very structures it aims to abolish in its alleged care for people living on the margins.

This case report discusses six judgments of the Court of Justice of the EU rendered between September and 19 December 2023. The first judgment reported is in case C-422/22 Zaklad v TE, in which the Court took the opportunity to clarify that the duty for the issuing institution to verify that the conditions for issuing an A1 (posting) certificate are met arises not only at the moment of the issuance but also continuously during the posting period. The case report also covers the case C-45/22 HK v Service fédéral des Pensions, in which the Court interpreted for the first time Article 55(1) (a) of Regulation 883/2004 on the method of calculation for overlapping benefits of a different kind. The case report ends with two rulings dealing with infringement procedures against the Netherlands: C-459/22 and C-360/22 European Commission v Kingdom of The Netherlands. In these judgments, the Court considered that the Dutch tax rules on transfer of pension capital were an infringement of the free movement of workers (Article 45 TFEU). Finally, we report on two cases on social security benefits for EU officials and two cases dealing with Covid-19 measures.