The EESC has welcomed the European Commission’s proposal for a directive on improving working conditions in platform work, hailing the initiative as a much needed step towards setting clear and well-defined criteria for classifying employment relations and for governing the use of algorithms when recruiting and employing platform workers.

The EESC said that the use of a binding legal instrument, a directive, to regulate platform work was justified, as the extreme diversity of working conditions and legislation in each Member State often results in the poor treatment of platform workers and in a crumbling of national and EU labour protection standards. The opinion was adopted at its plenary session in March, with 149 votes in favour, 80 against and 17 abstentions.

The rapporteur for the opinion, Cinzia del Rio, said: We see clear examples of discrimination and unequal treatment of platform workers across the EU. The situation in Member States is extremely diverse – it's a regulatory jungle which needs to be disentangled. The proposed directive aims to provide a flexible regulatory framework, which can be adapted at the national level and which would take into account disparities in people's working conditions.

By far the most important issue is the legal classification of the employment relationship and its clear distinction from genuine self-employment. To this end, it is necessary to clearly identify the legally responsible employer, both to ensure proper payment of taxes and social contributions and to enable collective bargaining. In the EESC's view, however, the text of the Commission's proposal is too generic and vague on this issue, as well as on a number of other points, such as the rights of both workers and union representatives to information and consultation.

These legal uncertainties may in some situations favour the emergence and proliferation of undeclared forms of work and deplorable situations of exploitation and competition between the workers themselves, who might be under illegal subcontracting practices, said the EESC. 

The EESC's Employers Group submitted a counter opinion, which obtained more than 30% of the votes cast and was published as an Appendix to the adopted opinion. The Employers' Group opposed the use of a directive to regulate platform work, fearing such binding legislation would represent a "one-size-fits-all" solution. This may become a barrier for innovation and investment in the setting-up and development of digital platforms in the EU.

They also disagree with the introduction of a legal EU definition of who is a worker and who is self-employed on platforms as it would be unable to respect the different models used in different countries or keep up with dynamic developments in labour markets. (ll)