World Social Security Forum

34th ISSA General Assembly

Marrakech, Morocco, 24–28 October 2022

Employment and social protection for platform

workers: Recent developments and trends

Philippe Deraeve
Marc Rogiers
Michiel Segaert
National Employment Office
Brussels

Technical Commission on Employment Polices and Unemployment Insurance

International Social Security Association
Geneva
The International Social Security Association (ISSA) is the world’s leading international organization for
social security institutions, government departments and agencies. The ISSA promotes excellence in social
security administration through professional guidelines, expert knowledge, services and support to enable
its members to develop dynamic social security systems and policy throughout the world.

The ISSA technical commissions play a central role in the Association. They are the backbone of its knowledge
development and technical work. Organized along 13 clusters of topics, they allow ISSA members to focus
their efforts in their particular area of interest.

The opinions expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect those of the ISSA or its member
organizations. For copyright terms, conditions and privacy policy, please consult the ISSA website:
www.issa.int/site-policy.

© International Social Security Association 2022

Employment and social protection for platform
workers: Recent developments and trends

Philippe Deraeve
Marc Rogiers
Michiel Segaert
National Employment Office
Brussels
Technical Commission on Employment Polices and
Unemployment Insurance
International Social Security Association
Geneva

1. Context of the study: the ISSA Guidelines 1

on the Promotion of Sustainable Employment
The International Social Security Association (ISSA), which is the world’s leading international
organization in the social security area, promotes excellence in social security administration through
professional guidelines, expert knowledge, services and support. To structure its activities, the
ISSA defined “Social security coverage in a changing world” as one of the topical priorities for the
triennium 2020–2022.
In this line, the revised ISSA Guidelines on the Promotion of Sustainable Employment, prepared
by the Technical Commission on Employment Policies and Unemployment (TC-Employment),
comprises a new part about responding to new labour market challenges (ISSA, 2022). A specific
guideline in the new Part G addresses the issues of “Regulating new forms of work and adapting
social protection scheme”, stating that the management should propose and implement appropriate
solutions concerning the activities of digital platforms related to issues such as:
• reliable recording and statistics for activities;
• status of service providers in labour law: employee, self-employed or intermediary
status;
• arrangements for workers’ affiliation to social security, collection of contributions and
entitlement to benefits;

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

2. The issue of platform work: Building on the report

The platform economy published in 2019
The TC-Employment presented a report on the platform economy at the World Social Security Forum
2019 (Defossez, 2019). Based on a survey carried out among ISSA members in 2018, the report
defines platform economy as: “all paid services carried out via online markets or platforms, such as
Uber or Upwork. It does not include activities linked to the sale of goods or rental of property via
platforms (such as Etsy or Ebay). Neither does it cover online networks, such as LinkedIn, that do
not offer paid services.” (Defossez, 2019). This report aimed to provide a brief assessment of the
debate about platform workers at global (International Labour Organization), European, and national
levels involving Belgium, Ireland and Sweden.
The current report updates this previous analysis and focuses on two of the recommendations
presented in Section 6 of Defossez (2019):
• develop more accurate statistical monitoring;
• clarify the conditions of coverage of platform workers and exchanging best practices.
Since the analysis presented in the TC-Employment report (Defossez, 2019) and the ISSA report (La
Salle and Cartoceti, 2019), the coronavirus pandemic raging worldwide has caused immense economic
and social consequences. One of these consequences is that many people worldwide changed their
2 social and economic behaviour from one day to the next due to forced total or partial lockdown.
One should expect that this gave an enormous boost to this - until then - a relatively new form of
work and thus also urged governments to proceed with the creation of an adequate legal framework.
Based on the recommendations mentioned above, this report will address recent developments and
trends since the report (Defossez, 2019) and extend the analysis scope to Argentina, France, Malaysia
and the BRICS countries with a specific focus on China based on the input of TCEmployment
members1.

3. Navigating the statistical landscape

While trying to find useful statistical data on the number and evolution of platform workers, one
gets the impression of being confronted with both scarcity and information overload due to a lack
of universal statistical definitions and measuring methodologies.
Eurofound provided an update of their overview of work types in 2020, one of which is platform
work. For all European Union member states, Norway and the UK, an overview is given of
known measurements or estimates of the scale and scope of platform work.2 Their approach maps
66 measurements of platform work and illustrates a variety of measurement definitions and unit
concepts provided for approaching these questions. From this, we can generally distinguish the
following measurement approaches:

1.  Argentina, Belgium, China, France, Ireland, Malaysia and Sweden are represented by a Vice-President in the TC-
Employment
2.  Eurofound (2020, p. 14–21).

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

• people having worked at least once via platforms, during/without a reference period;
• people working through platforms at least once every week/month/year (sometimes
“currently active”);
• people performing platform work for at least/no more than a certain percentage of their
income or for a certain percentage of their working time;
• number of acknowledged/active platforms;
• people aware of the existence of platform work.
Many studies on the subject of platform work use these types of research overviews as a basis for
mapping the statistical landscape3. When trying to distil state-of-the-art data from these examples,
Kilhoffer (2021) distinguishes different possible source types to achieve quality data:
• survey data (from official or unofficial economic statistics);
• administrative and big data (from government sources, platform sources or other
sources such as financial institutions).
In the search for state-of-the-art data that can be used for a broad range of research, there are some
initiatives attempting to systematically capture statistics on platform workers in different countries.
At a European level, for instance, a lot of research was based on the results of the Eurobarometer
and/or the COLLEEM surveys,4 which have an overlapping time frame and scope. However, a 3
comparison of these two resources quickly shows how even relatively minor differences in concepts
and definitions can lead to a large variety in estimation results.5
When looking for a systematic international approach, the Online Labour Index (OLI) – a collaboration
between the ILO and the Oxford Internet Institute - deserves special consideration. This index
combines a range of data sources in order to create a timely and consistent series covering the largest
English-language online labour platforms, representing at least 70 per cent of the market, as well
as several others in Spanish and in Russian.6 An important nuance, however, is that the types of
platform work measured only concern online work, while more than half 7 of digital labour platforms
exclusively concern on-location work.

3.  Cf. among others Codagnone, Biagi and Abadie (2016, pp. 77–115): a list of 140 analytical accounts on different types
of platforms and aspects of the “sharing economy” and pp .65–71: a list of 70 analytical accounts on crowd work research;
as well as OECD 2019: overview of surveys by non-official agencies (pp. 9–11) and by official agencies (pp. 15–16)
4.  For the Eurobarometer, see Flash Eurobarometer 438 (EC, 2016) and Flash Eurobarometer 467 (EC, 2018). For
COLLEEM, see Pesole et al. (2018); Urzì Brancati, Pesole and Fernández-Macías (2020); as well as the first results from
the survey published in EC (2021b), section 5.1.1. Methodological note: The Eurobarometer definition of collaborative
platforms is slightly larger than the ILO definition of platform work, cf. Flash Eurobarometer 438 (EC, 2016, p. 2):
“Collaborative platforms are internet-based tools that enable transactions between people providing and using a service.
They can be used for a wide range of services, from renting accommodation and car sharing to small household jobs.”
The COLLEEM definition seems closer to the one used by ILO (cf. Pesole et al., 2018, p. 14).
5.  As was concluded for instance by OECD (2019, p. 14).
6.  Stephany et al. (2021).
7.  Number based on European measurements in EC (2021a, p. 45). Methodological note: This publication uses a dataset
on Digital Labour Platforms active in Europe between 2016 and the start of 2021 created from primary and secondary
sources but aimed at covering recent data on the platforms themselves rather than their workers. Limited data were
collected on platform workers, but variables and conclusions integrated models created by the ILO, COLLEEM and
Eurofound.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

3.1. Platform workers estimates worldwide

A survey among members of the TC-Employment confirms these statistical difficulties. While all
members can provide some statistical context on platform work based on national or other research
(in itself an improvement compared to the results in 2019), only four could put actual numbers
to the amount of platform workers in their countries. Comparing these numbers is an impossible
task, however, due to observed effect of wide disparities in results caused by even relatively minor
differences in concepts and definitions. If national estimates show that platform workers represent
1 per cent of workers in Argentina, 13.46 per cent of 19.3 per cent self-employed in Malaysia8 and
20 per cent of 12 per cent self-employed in France, this sheds some light on the still emerging
importance of platform work in these countries but provides no grounds to compare the relative
prevalence of this work from one country to another. To a certain extent, the same can be said about
the numbers recently provided by the ILO, providing a “compilation” (rather than “comparison”) of
results from different statistical approaches for different countries or regions.9
A recent estimate10 of the number of platform workers worldwide based on the OLI (excluding the
presumably quite large numbers of workers through local gig economy platforms), arrived at the
rather wide range of 163 million to 205 million registered workers on online labour platforms, of
which 14 to 75 million have ever worked through this medium (0.2–1 per cent considering a world
population of 7.87 billion people11). Regardless of these ranges of absolute numbers, the OLI is
considered particularly useful in providing information on evolutions of platform work, providing
4 an index starting from 2016 up until the present day.12 As seen in most of contemporary research on
the subject, the OLI seems to have become a go-to statistic in this domain.

3.2. Evidence from the European Union

Platform workers estimates for Europe largely depend on sources and concepts used. However, even
within one coherent statistical framework, large disparities appear when comparing different member
states.13 One factor in explaining these differences is a correlation of the prevalence of platform work
and the degree of urbanisation.
Based on their compilation of sources, Eurofound estimates that currently 10 per cent of the European
workforce is occasionally performing platform work, and 1–2 per cent has platform work as a main
job – these numbers probably increasing due to the COVID-19 fallout (EC, 2021a, p. 26).
The most recent COLLEEM-methodology estimation arrives at 28,288,000 people actively working
through platforms in the EU, which is 8 per cent of the adult population of the EU-27 according
to the LFS - a remarkable increase compared to the 3 per cent-7 per cent estimated for 2018.

8.  Department of Statistics of Malaysia (DOSM) and author’s calculations. Department of Statistics Malaysia Official
Portal (dosm.gov.my).
9.  ILO (2021, p. 49).
10.  Kässi, Lehdonvirta and Stephany (2021).
11.  World population estimates and UN projection.
12.  See for instance ILO (2021, pp. 56–57).
13.  For instance EC (2018): While on average for all member states 6.0 per cent of respondents ever offered a service
via a collaborative platform, these percentages ranged from 2.2 per cent (Cyprus) to 17.2 per cent (Latvia). Regular
service providers (1.3 per cent on average) ranged from 0.2 per cent (Germany) to 2.1 per cent (Spain).

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

This reveals a large influx of platform workers during the pandemic: 57.7 per cent of European
platform workers in 2021 started this work in 2019-2021. Other sources, such as the new Digital
Labour Platform dataset (DLP), confirm this rising trend of platform work. The DLP shows an
increase of 12 per cent of active platforms in the European Union between 2016 and 2020 (EC,
2021a, p. 26).

3.3. Evolution of platform workers in the BRICS Countries

Analysis of indicators on the evolution of platform workers in the BRICS-countries reveal a more
differentiated image. According to the Online Labour Suppliers OLI-statistics,14 Brazil shows a rare
downward trend of the general evolution of platform workers, which may be inverting during the
last semester of 2022 (Figure 1). China, India and South Africa show a steadily increasing number
of platform workers. For India, this increase was even reinforced during the height of the global
pandemic, China and South Africa showing a sharp increase again in the second half of 2021. While
the Russian Federation has the steepest growth of platform workers during the 2016–2019 period,
their growth more or less stagnated during 2019 and the global pandemic. This last semester, their
numbers show a remarkable drop. While this drop corresponds approximately to the start of the
Ukrainian conflict, based on historical data it’s yet too early to draw any conclusions as to causality.

Figure 1.Evolution of online labour supply in the BRICS countries 5

230

210

190

170

150

130

110

90

70

50

30
2017_05_08
2017_06_19
2017_07_31
2017_09_11

2018_11_05

2019_06_03
2017_10_23
2017_12_04
2018_01_15
2018_02_26
2018_04_09
2018_05_21
2018_07_02
2018_08_13
2018_09_24

2018_12_17

2021_04_12
2021_05_24
2021_07_05
2021_08_16
2021_09_27
2021_11_08

2022_06_06
2019_01_28
2019_03_11
2019_04_22

2019_07_15
2019_08_26
2019_10_07
2019_11_18
2019_12_30

2021_12_20
2022_01_31
2022_03_14
2022_04_25
2020_02_10

2020_08_03
2020_03_23
2020_05_04
2020_06_15

2020_09_14
2020_10_26
2020_12_07
2021_01_18
2021_03_01

Brazil China India Russian Federation South Africa BRICS average

Note:Trend lines based on sliding averages of 20 observation points.

Source:OLI 2020 (onlinelabourobservatory.org).

14.  Stephany et al. (2021).

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

According to the estimation of the International Labour Organization, the value generated by China’s
platform economy accounts for 22 per cent of the world’s platform economy. In line with the growing
market size, the total number of platform workers in China also seems to be rising. According to
estimates made by the Chinese Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security (MoHRSS) the
total number of flexible workers in China may amount to 200 million, including platform workers.
The annual Sharing Economy Report by the State Information Center estimates that the number of
service providing platform workers increased from 50 million in 2015 to 84 million in 2020. Platform
enterprises also provide data themselves, such as Meituan (the largest food delivery platform in
China) which counted 5.27 million riders earning income on its platform in 2021.

4. The current legal position of platform workers

4.1. At a European level
At the European level there is currently no legislation regarding platform work. By consequence, the
legal position of a platform worker is regulated by national legislation. The European Commission
tries to remedy this lacune by launching a proposal (see 5.1).

4.2. At a national level

6 4.2.1. Belgium
Until the new legislation regarding the platform workers comes into force (see below) platform
workers are always treated as independent workers, having the same social protection as any other
independent worker. However this also means that they lack the more proficient protection that
employees benefit, especially in regards to the right to unemployment benefits.

4.2.2. France
French legislation doesn’t impose any particular legal status for the exercise of platform work on
French territory.
Thus, in practice, the vast majority carry out this activity as self-employed workers, under the various
legal statuses provided for in French legislation.
While the employee status is a minority, some platforms have chosen to conclude an employment
contract with (at least some of) their workers. According to French case law, the existence of an
employment relationship depends neither on the will expressed by the parties nor on the name they
have given to their agreement, but on the factual conditions in which the activity is carried out.
Several court decisions reclassified the commercial relationship between the “delivery person or
driver” as an employment contract.15
In order to secure the economic model of platforms by reducing the risks of requalification as
employees, new legislation reinforces the effective autonomy of platform workers in the exercise of
their activity, while at the same time promoting better working conditions.

15.  Cour de cassation, 28 novembre 2018, plateforme Take Eat Easy; Cour de cassation, 4 mars 2020, plateforme Uber;
Tribunal correctionnel de Paris, 19 avril 2022.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

4.2.3. Ireland
In Ireland there is no specific legislative definition of platform workers. Whether a person associated
with a platform is employed or self-employed, is to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Notably, there
is the criterion of mutual obligation, that of control, that of company integration, that of replacement,
etc. The list of factors is far from exhaustive and does not constitute a checklist for deciding.
The position for platform workers’ welfare entitlements reflects the status of their employment.
Platform workers deemed as employees have access to the full range of social insurance benefits
as other employees. The self-employed have entitlement to a large proportion of social insurance
benefits, however barring those not currently available to the self-employed, such as Illness Benefit,
Carer’s Benefit, Health and Safety Benefit and Occupational Injuries Benefits.

4.2.4. Sweden
Sweden has no specific rules on unemployment benefits for platform workers. The Swedish
Unemployment Insurance Act (1997:238) covers employees and self-employed persons. The legislation
contains both general rules for these two groups and special rules for the self-employed. If a platform
worker is to be eligible for unemployment benefits, they must fulfil the conditions stipulated for
employees or self-employed workers.
The most important criteria in assessing whether a person should be defined as self-employed or as an
employee is his or her independence to the client and the client’s activities. Each of the 7
unemployment insurance funds conducts this assessment case by case.
A condition for unemployment benefit eligibility for self-employed is that their business activity
needs to be either terminated or put on hold. Unlike employees, self-employed cannot be partially
unemployed and receive benefits.
The claimant has to show his or her unemployment insurance fund that he or she has terminated
all business operation according to the Income Tax Act (1999:1229), the funds thereafter make an
assessment of the information from the claimant.

4.2.5. Argentina
The vast majority of digital platform workers are considered self-employed and are registered under
the simplified tax regime for small taxpayers, Law No. 26.565 (monotributo). This regime simplifies
and unifies the collection of tax and social security obligations, through a fixed monthly payment,
based on the worker’s income category. With a single paiement, they gain access to several tax funded
social security schemes (hence monotributo = singletax).
Workers registered under this regime have access to three of the five components of social security:
i) benefits under the pension system (retirement, disability retirement, survivor’s pension, advanced
old-age pension), ii) a number of benefits under the family allowance system, based on their category
(in no case are they entitled to maternity, childbirth or marriage allowances) and iii) a basic medical
insurance plan (Mandatory Medical Program) through the social security healthcare system.
Household members might also be added to the plan by means of an additional fixed contribution
for each member. However, the workers are not covered by: i) an occupational accident insurance
and ii) the unemployment insurance.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

4.2.6. Malaysia
Malaysian Platform workers are not yet defined as “worker” under the country’s Employment Act
1955 (Act 265), Labour Ordinance (Sabah Chapter 67) and the Labour Ordinance (Sarawak Chapter
76). Given the legal restriction, platform workers are not subject to the National Wages Consultative
Council Act 2011 (732) as well as the Minimum Wages Order (PGM 2020).
Based on existing tribunal and court decisions, platform workers are regarded as self-employed and
therefore protected under the Self-employed Social Security Act (Act 789). They do not qualify for
unemployment or loss of employment benefits under the Employment Insurance System Act 2017
(Act 800).

5. New legal initiatives regarding the social protection

of platform workers
5.1. Europe16
On the 9th of December 2021 the European Commission launched the Directive proposal on improving
the working condition in platform work.
The most important measure is creating a legal presumption that an employment relationship exists
8 between the digital labour platform and a person performing platform work, if the digital labour
platform controls certain elements of the work performance. Member States are required to establish
a framework ensuring that the legal presumption applies in all relevant administrative and legal
proceedings and that enforcement authorities can also rely on that presumption. The presumption can
be rebutted by proving that there is no employment relationship by reference to national definitions.
Therefore article 4 of the proposal defines criteria indicating control of the work performance by
the digital labour platform. The fulfilment of at least two indicators should trigger the application
of the presumption.
Those criteria are:
a) effectively determining, or setting upper limits for the level of remuneration;
b) requiring the person performing platform work to respect specific binding rules with
regard to appearance, conduct towards the recipient of the service or performance of
the work;
c) supervising the performance of work or verifying the quality of the results of the work
including by electronic means;
d) effectively restricting the freedom, including through sanctions, to organise one’s
work, in particular the discretion to choose one’s working hours or periods of absence,
to accept or to refuse tasks or to use subcontractors or substitutes;
e) effectively restricting the possibility to build a client base or to perform work for any
third party.

16.  Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving the working conditions in
platform work, 9 December 2021.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

Furthermore new material rights for people performing platform work are introduced. These include
the right to transparency regarding the use and functioning of automated monitoring and decision-
making systems, which specifies and complements existing rights in relation to the protection of
personal data. The proposed Directive also aims at ensuring human monitoring of the impact of
such automated systems on working conditions with a view to safeguarding basic workers’ rights
and health and safety at work. To ensure fairness and accountability of significant decisions taken
or supported by automated systems, the proposed Directive also includes establishing appropriate
channels for discussing and requesting review of such decisions.
With certain exceptions, these provisions apply to all people working through platforms, including
the genuine self-employed.
Finally, concrete measure propositions aim at enhancing transparency and traceability of platform
work with a view to supporting competent authorities in enforcing existing rights and obligations in
relation to working conditions and social protection. This includes clarifying the obligation for digital
labour platforms which are employers to declare platform work to the competent authorities of the
Member State where it is performed. The proposed Directive will also improve labour and social
protection authorities’ knowledge of which digital labour platforms are active in their Member State
by giving those authorities access to relevant basic information on the number of people working
through these platforms, their employment status and their standard terms and conditions. These
measures will help authorities in ensuring compliance with labour rights and in collecting social
security contributions, thus improving working conditions of people performing platform work. 9

As a result of actions to address the risk of misclassification, between 1.72 million and 4.1 million
people are expected to be reclassified as workers. This would grant them access to the rights and
protections of the national and EU labour acquis.
These actions could result in up to EUR 4.5 billion increase in costs per year for digital labour
platforms. Businesses relying on them and consumers may be faced with part of these costs, depending
on how digital labour platforms decide to pass them onto third parties.
Although many welcome the Commission’s proposal, there are several issues that still need to be
tackled before the proposal can be ratified.
The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EP) proposed, in May 2022, a series of
amendments in its draft report on the proposal of the European Commission. In July 2022 the
Economic and Social Committee also handed in her opinion.17 The European Social Insurance
Platform (ESIP), which represents statutory social security institutions from 17 European Member
States and Switzerland, underlined several issues in the proposal such as providing sufficient leeway
to national administrations in implementing the Directive, as many countries already have their own
national criteria to determine the status of workers.18,19

17.  EUR-Lex - 52022AE0256 - FR - EUR-Lex (europa.eu)

18.  Draft Report by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, 3th of May 2022, 2021/0414, Eur-Lex PR_
COD_1amCom (europa.eu)
19.  esip.eu/images/pdf_docs/ESIP_position_paper_on_the_Directive_on_the_working_conditions_of_platform_
workers_11072022.pdf

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

5.2. At a national level

5.2.1. Belgium
On 17 June 2022, the Belgian government agreed on a big labour deal that includes a chapter tackling
platform worker rights. By analogy of and inspired by the European commission’s proposal there is
a presumption of employment if a set of criteria is met. The Belgian government opted for 8 criteria,
including the 5 criteria already determined by the European commission’s proposal (see above).
The three extra criteria are:
• demanding exclusivity in relation to its field of operation;
• using a geolocation mechanism for purposes other than the proper functioning of its
basic services;
• restricting the freedom of the platform worker in the way in which the work is carried
out.
When a platform worker meets two of the five European criteria or three of the eight total criteria,
there is «a rebuttable presumption» that they are employees and no longer self-employed. The platform
they work for must then take the necessary social responsibility (in terms of social contributions
and the like).
10 The labour deal also stipulates that all platform workers must have compulsory insurance against
accidents at work, even if they are self-employed.

5.2.2. France
Platform workers benefit from the same type of compulsory cover as employees for sickness,
maternity, family, basic and supplementary pension and disability benefits. However, this is not the
case for benefits aimed at compensating for loss of income, and supplementary health insurance is
not covered by the platform for half of the contribution, as it is by an employer.
With regard to the risk of unemployment, self-employed workers can claim, under certain conditions,
a specific allowance created in September 2018 (allowance for self-employed workers - ATI, of a
maximum of €800 for a maximum of 6 months).
A set of protective legislation for platform workers has been gradually put in place since 2016
(introduction of a «social responsibility of platforms» towards the workers with whom they
collaborate, in particular with the assumption of responsibility for occupational accident insurance
contributions and the contribution to professional training, recognition of the right to unionize and
an “equivalent” to the right to strike). It was expanded in December 2019 (e.g. obligation to provide
full information on the proposed service, right of refusal, choice of periods of activity and inactivity,
right to disconnection, access to vocational training).20

20.  Loi No. 2019-1428 du 24 décembre 2019 d’orientation des mobilités.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

5.2.3. Ireland
While this issue is continuously being carefully monitored in Ireland, there are at the present no
specific national legal initiatives currently being implemented.

5.2.4. Sweden
A new legal framework proposal for the Swedish unemployment insurance was presented in 2020.
Currently, time employed is the main determinant of the right to unemployment insurance, but the
proposal instead suggests that the insurance should be constructed around the monthly income
data that employers register for all employees at the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket). One of
the intentions with the proposal is to create a legal framework that reduces the administrative work
for, for example, the unemployment insurance funds. The proposal does not target platform
workers specifically, but aims to be more predictable for the individual than the current insurance
scheme. And in that regard it can be more predictable for those who work within the “new
economy”. The proposal is not yet decided.

5.2.5. Argentina
Although the monotax (monotributo = “singletax” as “one” down payment opens several rights)
system provides for basic benefits, the main issue is the lack of coverage for occupational accidents.
The Ministry of Labor, Employment and Social Security has prepared a draft law Estatuto del 11
Trabajador de Plataformas Digitales Bajo Demanda (statute of the on-demand digital platform
worker), which seeks to ensure platform workers’ access to all social security subsystems, including
occupational accident insurance and unemployment insurance.
In particular, it establishes a special regime for the collection and withholding of social security
contributions through the payment of a replacement fee for personal and employer contributions,
in accordance with the rates established for workers in a dependent relationship. Concurrently, it
determines that the companies managing digital platforms are responsible for withholding and paying
the abovementioned fee to the Federal Administration of Public Revenue (AFIP).
Two other parliamentary initiatives should also be mentioned: a) the draft law Régimen Especial
de Contrato de Trabajo para la Persona Humana Trabajadora de Plataformas Digitales (special
employment contract regime for human digital platform workers), which proposes the creation of
categories according to the number of hours worked per week, based on which the social security
coverage and contribution is determined, enabling workers to make voluntary contributions so as
to exceed the minimum amount required to gain access to benefits they otherwise can’t access; and
b) the draft law Regulación de la Actividad de los Trabajadores Contratados mediante Plataformas
Digitales (Regulation of the activity of workers hired through digital platforms), which
defines the inclusion of platform workers within the framework of the Ley de Contrato de Trabajo
(employment contract law), and which facilitates access to coverage of the different social
security subsystems through a particular mechanism of collective bargaining of social security
(Law No. 26.377).

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

5.2.6. Malaysia
The Ministry of Human Resources is currently amending the Employment Act 1955 (Act 265) to
include a new section 101 (c) to define better terms for employees and employers, hoping the new
definition would shed light on employer-employee relations, especially for platform workers. The
amendment will include a more transparent classification of workers on contract of service, defined
under the first schedule of Act 265. Since the amendments will take effect in September 2022, results
from the amendment have yet to surface in labour tribunal such as new precedent cases regarding
the definition of employment of platform workers.
However, social protection for platform workers has existed since 2017, with the onset of a legislative
act under the Self Employment Social Security Scheme (SESS) 2017 (Act 789) under Social Security
Organization Malaysia (SOCSO). After piloting the scheme for the transportation section for
two years, the scheme was extended to all self-employment sectors in 2020.The extension had
accommodated sectors that platform workers are highly drawn to. Currently, the scheme is mandatory
for self-employed in the Transportation Businesses while self-employed in the remaining sectors can
voluntarily contribute to the scheme.
SOCSO’s self-employed platform worker scheme encompasses a broad protection against work related
risks such as employment injurie and occupational diseases, which includes monthly allowances
as well as physical and vocational rehabilitation for self-employed suffering from a temporary or
12 permanent impairment. For death cases during work injury, the dependents will be eligible for a
monthly dependents benefit and pension.
In the long run, SOCSO will gradually extend its coverage to risks of invalidity as well as
unemployment benefits, as currently benefitted by formal workers. For the years 2021 and 2022,
unemployment benefits are provided to non-registered jobseekers including platform workers through
a temporary program called EIS Jobseeking Allowance Plus. Under the program, non-registered and
unemployed jobseekers are qualified for three months of unemployment benefits with the condition
that they can demonstrate sufficient job seeking activities such as participating in SOCSO career
fairs or attending employment interviews.

6. Platform workers: legal situation and new initiatives

in the BRICS countries21

6.1. China
The legal status of platform workers in China is not uniformly determined. They can be defined as:
i) workers; ii) or as a self-employed person, to provide labour. However, in practice, the majority
are self-employed. Since the Document 56 issued in 2021, the third working relationship can be
developed with the platform, mainly based on whether these people have great autonomy on work
or not. They are subject to the management and control of the platform to some extent and their
basic rights and social protection should be taken into consideration. However, clear and specific
identification standards for the third category are not yet available.

21.  ILO and ISSA (2022).

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

Existing laws apply for platform workers identified as workers or self-employed, but in the third
category they can be entitled to the most basic labour rights and interests specified in Document 56,
including the rights to fair employment, minimum wages, rest, work safety. The rights to participating
in social security systems and in algorithms-decision and working rules when the platform enterprises
formulate these management rules are also stipulated in this document. Last but not least, the revised
Trade Union Law provides a channel for platform workers to participate in trade unions.

6.2. Brazil
Brazilian platform workers are categorized as self-employed. A contributory social security program
is mainly implemented through the General Social Security System (RGPS) organized by the National
Institute of Social Security (INSS). The mandatorily insured include among others also self-employed
workers. RGPS pays benefits for temporary or permanent incapacity for work, accident assistance,
maternity allowance, family allowance, pension for death and retirement pension. However, accident
allowance does not cover individual contractors to whom many professionals who work on digital
platforms belong. Although individual taxpayers (including platform workers) are mandatorily
insured, they may fail to contribute to the INSS due to various reasons such as low income and lack
of awareness. Recently, Brazil made enhanced efforts in strengthening social protection for digital
platform workers. Between 2015 and June 2021, for example, a total of 126 bills on digital platforms
work were presented at the National Congress.
13
In order to cover “the missing middle” workers (who are excluded by both contributory social
insurance and non-contributory social assistance schemes), over the past few years, countries such
as Argentina and Brazil have implemented a “monotax” or similar mechanisms, simplifying tax and
social security contribution collection for small contributors (see 4.2.5).

6.3. Russian Federation

In the Russian Federation, in the absence of specific social security regulations for platform workers,
the majority of citizens in platform activities should register and enjoy social protection as self-
employed.
The growth of the self-employed population, including platform workers, among various factors, is
caused by the introduction of a special tax regime, applied in all Russian regions since July 2020. The
tax rate for PIT (Professional Income Tax) payers, or the self-employed, is 4 per cent for individuals
and 6 per cent for individual entrepreneurs22. They only pay tax for the income actually received,
being exempt from paying mandatory social insurance contributions (Litvinova, 2022). Mandatory
pension insurance can be affiliated on a voluntary basis. However, the self-employed participate in
the compulsory health insurance system enabling access to free medical care.
Further development of national social security legislation is needed to bridge the gap in reliable tools
and mechanisms for financing and accounting for social security rights of this vulnerable category
of workers. A working group chaired by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and involving
representatives of platforms, employers and trade unions as well as small enterprises is working on
new amendments to legislation concerning platform work.

22.  www.economy.gov.ru/material/file/57f967e2931b6fb9b1785d69d1bee7b3/samozanyatye_pamyatka.pdf

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

6.4. India
The Indian Government enacted Code on Social Security (CoSS) in 2020. This code defines ‘Gig
and Platform Workers’, replacing nine legislations which provided social security to the employees.
It envisages establishing a National Social Security Board which will recommend to the Central
Government welfare schemes for gig workers and platform workers and monitor these schemes. It
also mandates the Central Government to establish a social security fund for gig workers and platform
workers, which is to be used for their social security and welfare (Majumdar, 2021).
CoSS takes the first step towards universalising access and making social protection inclusive, i.e.,
extending the coverage of social security schemes to include all kinds of workers regardless of the
nature of their relationship with the job creator. It mandates compulsory registration of both gig
workers and platform workers on an online portal (E-shram portal) to avail benefits under the Code
which shall be specified by the Central Government.
However, operational measures implementing social security protection for platform workers are yet
to be formulated by the Central Government.

6.5. South Africa

In South Africa, the employment relationship is the basic means to trigger the application of labour
14 laws. Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 defines an employee as excluding an
independent contractor. Similar definitions are given in the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75
of 1997 and the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998. This enabled the owners of platforms to avoid
social protection obligations under labour regulations by classifying platform workers as independent
contractor instead of employees (Osiki, 2020).
As platform workers don’t have formal employers paying contributions to the Unemployment
Insurance Fund (UIF) and hence can’t apply for unemployment benefits such as the Temporary
Employee Relief Scheme which pays a proportion of salaries for temporarily laid off workers, the
government of South Africa created (in response to Covid-19) a special Social Relief of Distress
grant to be administered by the national Social Security Agency, available to those who receive no
other social grants (UIF, pension, disability or child support grant). A straightforward registration
system was put in place by using WhatsApp and alternative channels for those without smartphones.
It pays benefits to both unemployed South Africans as well as legally registered migrants and refugees
(Fairwork, 2020). However, much remains to be done to adequately classify the status of platform
workers. A Presidential Commission on the 4th Industrial Revolution was set up so as to properly
deal with the relevant social and economic impacts including social protection for digital platform
workers.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

7. Conclusion
Reliable recording and statistics for activities seem to remain a problem, but as shown above progress
has been made. At the European level as well as in general, an influx of platform workers evolved
throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
We also witnessed quite a lot of initiatives to identify platform workers and clarify and improve
their conditions of coverage, which is without doubt a positive response to the ILO Centenary
Declaration and Global Call to action upon a human-centred approach to the future of work, ensuring
adequate protection of all workers and enhancing the universal access to comprehensive, adequate
and sustainable social protection.
In November 2021, the Governing Body of the ILO decided to convey a Meeting of Experts on
decent work in the platform economy, in line with the resolution concerning the second recurrent
discussion on social dialogue and tripartism, adopted by the International Labour Conference on
7 June 2018. The Meeting of Experts will take place in October 2022 and, subject to the approval of
its conclusions by the ILO Governing Body, will offer the opportunity to develop the first tripartite
guidance to the ILO specific to the topic.

8. References
Codagnone, C.; Biagi, F.; Abadie, F. 2016. The passions and the interests: Unpacking the “sharing 15
economy”. Seville, European Commission – Joint Research Centre.
Defossez, A.; ISSA Technical Commission on Employment Polices and Unemployment Insurance.
2019. The platform economy. Geneva, International Social Security Association.
EC. 2021a. Digital labour platforms in the EU: Mapping and business models – Final report.
Brussels, European Commission – Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.
EC. 2021b. Study to support the impact assessment of an EU initiative to improve the working
conditions in platform work: Final report. Brussels, European Commission – Directorate-General
for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.
EC. 2018. Flash Eurobarometer 467: The use of collaborative economy. Brussels, European
Commission.
EC. 2016. Flash Eurobarometer 438: The use of collaborative platforms. Brussels, European
Commission.
Eurofound. 2020. New forms of employment: 2020 update (New forms of employment series).
Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
ILO. 2021. World Employment and Social Outlook 2021: The role of digital labour platforms in
transforming the world of work. Geneva, International Labour Office.
ILO; ISSA. 2022. Protecting workers in new forms of employment (background report to the BRICS
Labour and Employment Ministers’ Meeting held online in July 2022). Geneva, International Labour
Office, International Social Security Association.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 World Social Security Forum, Marrakech, 24–28 October 2022

ISSA. 2022. ISSA Guidelines on the promotion of sustainable employment. Geneva, International
Social Security Association.
Kässi, O.; Lehdonvirta, V.; Stephany, F. 2021. «How many online workers are there in the world?
A data-driven assessment», in Open Research Europe, 15 October (Version 4).
Kilhoffer, Z. 2021. State-of-the art: Data on the platform economy. Leuven, InGRID.
La Salle, D.; Cartoceti, G. 2019. Social security for the digital age: Addressing the new challenges
and opportunities for social security systems. Geneva, International Social Security Association.
Litvinova, M. 2022. “Живое участие: какую поддержку получат самозанятые в 2022 году”
[Active participation: What kind of support will the self-employed receive in 2022?], in Izvestia,
10 January.
Majumdar, S. 2021. “The case for social security benefits to gig workers in India”, in Chambers
and Partners Articles, November.
OECD. 2019. Measuring platform mediated workers (OECD Digital Economy paper, No. 282). Paris,
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Osiki, A. 2020. “Platform policies: The growth of indecent work in SA”, in Daily Maverick, 5 March.

16 Pesole, A. et al. 2018. Platform workers in Europe: Evidence from the COLLEEM Survey,
Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union.
Stephany, F. et al. 2021. “Online Labour Index 2020: New ways to measure the world’s remote
freelancing market”, in Big Data & Society, 15 September.
Urzì Brancati, C.; Pesole, A.; Fernández-Macías, E. 2020. New evidence on platform workers
in Europe: Results from the second COLLEEM survey. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the
European Union.

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert

 Employment and social protection for platform workers: Recent developments and trends

Acknowledgements
Special acknowledgement to:
The vice-presidents and staff representing Argentina, China, France, Ireland, Malaysia and Sweden
in the ISSA Technical Commission on Employment Policies and Unemployment Insurance (TC-
Employment)
Eduardo Salvador Maria LEPORE, Director Nacional de Coordinación de los Regímenes de la
Seguridad Social Secretaría de Seguridad Social Ministerio de Trabajo, Empleo y Seguridad Social
(Argentina)
Rong MO, Director-General of the Chinese Academy of Labor and Social Security (CALSS) and
Dr. Wei TU, Associate Professor of CALSS (PRC)
Christophe VALENTIE, Director-General, Union nationale interprofessionnelle pour l’emploi dans
l’industrie et le commerce (Unédic) and Céline JAEGGY, Directrice des affaires juridiques et
institutionnelles Unédic (France)
Niall EGAN, Assistant Secretary, Department of Social Protection (Ireland)
Gayathri VADIVEL, Head of Employment Services Department, Employment Insurance Office,
Social Security Organization Malaysia (Malaysia)
17
Patricia SÖDERSTRÖM, Examiner, Swedish Unemployment Insurance Inspectorate (Sweden)
Yukun Zhu, coordinator of TC-Employment, Technical Specialist and Project Manager at International
Social Security Association (ISSA)

Philippe Deraeve, Marc Rogiers, Michiel Segaert