Low pay, job insecurity and opaque management systems run by algorithms have long topped the list of grievances for workers tied to digital platforms.<\/p>\n
The International Labour Organization (ILO) is in financial straits. Like other United Nations agencies, it has been swept up in reform plans and cost-cutting efforts. But over the next two weeks, at the work organisation\u2019s annual conference in Geneva, countries will, at least momentarily, put gloom over their ledgers aside as they look to score another point on the multilateralism scoreboard.<\/p>\n
Governments, employers and workers that make up the ILO\u2019s special tripartite structure are due to finalise the first-ever international convention safeguarding workers in the gig economy, in which online platforms provide everything from temp work to dog walking to food delivery services. It comes after a majority of ILO members at last year\u2019s meeting backed the landmark decision to move forward with creating international ground rules, despite resistance from some countries including the United States, Argentina and Pakistan.<\/p>\n
The seven-page draft text, which once adopted and ratified requires countries to translate into domestic law, sets out rules to guarantee core labour rights, fair pay, and safe working conditions for all platform workers, regardless of how companies classify them, whether employees or contractors.<\/p>\n
Lena Simet, senior economic justice researcher and advocate at Human Rights Watch, called it \u201ca major and meaningful step\u201d in regulating platform work, labour markets, and the use of technologies.\u00a0 The rights group has been vocal alongside dozens<\/a> of trade unions and other civil society groups in calling for a binding agreement.<\/p>\n \u201cThe fact that the majority of governments decided that they want a convention that tackles this type of work, which has been expanding so rapidly in so many markets, is something we shouldn’t lose sight of, even if we\u2019re still very critical of some of the aspects,\u201d she told Geneva Solutions.<\/p>\n Unfair tradeoffs<\/p>\n The gig economy \u2013 also dubbed the platform economy \u2013 has grown at breakneck speed over the last two decades, further boosted during the Covid pandemic. It nearly doubled in size between 2016 and 2021, according<\/a> to the ILO, with a market value of roughly $10.2 trillion in 2023. It now counts up to 435 million workers, or 12.5 per cent of the global labour workforce, according to the World Bank<\/a>.<\/p>\n But the model \u2013 which reduces overheads for companies while promising more flexibility and autonomy for on-demand workers compared with traditional employment \u2013 has been far from an equal trade-off. \u201cPlatform companies profit enormously from a business model that strips workers of their rights,\u201d Simet said.<\/p>\n Much of the issue boils down to the question of worker classification. The vast majority of people working for app-based companies are considered independent contractors and do not receive the perks of traditional employment, which puts them on a precarious footing.<\/p>\n Most are denied their rights to minimum wage protections, freedom of association, collective bargaining or social security. Disputes over their status and access to basic rights, including demands by workers to be able to unionise, has embroiled gig economy companies, including Lyft, Uber and Deliveroo, in a spate of global lawsuits.<\/p>\n In a report<\/a> from April, called Algorithms of Exploitation, Human Rights Watch interviewed gig workers across\u00a0 India, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the United Kingdom. It found that across all nine countries, they face low and unstable earnings, unsafe working conditions, and little to no protection when injured or unable to work.<\/p>\n The report also found how the growing use of algorithms by platform companies to set pay, create incentives and assign tasks is increasing pressure on workers to accept jobs quickly, meet tight deadlines and maintain high ratings, with penalties for falling short. One female driver for several platform companies in Kenya described how she felt forced to accept jobs in unsafe areas, or risk losing her rating on the app or being deactivated altogether.<\/p>\n Growing algorithmic control also means employers become increasingly difficult to reach. Another driver working in Nairobi said she had been assaulted by a passenger and received no response when she reported the attack to her company.<\/p>\n Recognising gig workers\u2019 rights<\/p>\n At this week\u2019s gathering, ILO members will pore over the third version of the draft convention on decent work in the platform economy, after going back and forth with amendments and tweaks over the past year.<\/p>\n While far from perfect and divergences between countries remain, Limet stresses that it is \u201cabsolutely critical\u201d that criticisms do not derail the sprint to the finish line. \u201cBecause there\u2019s still some concern that some countries favour a recommendation, there\u2019s a certain risk that if there isn\u2019t an agreement on some of the fundamentals, that those voices would become louder and potentially undermine the convention process,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n The agreement is being drawn up alongside a non-binding but more detailed and practical recommendation, which Simet said allows flexibility for standards to be adapted over time.\u00a0But while the majority of countries back the adoption of the two documents, some countries, including Pakistan, and the majority of employers\u2019 organisations have persisted with calls for a recommendation only.<\/p>\n The International Organisation of Employers, which represents more than 150 businesses, described the convention as \u201coverly lengthy and prescriptive\u201d, especially in areas like automation and pay, which it warned could lead to a lengthy session in June. It believes \u201ca stand-alone recommendation is the most feasible path to consensus in 2026\u201d.<\/p>\n At the same time, the unusual two-part composition has also caused friction over what should be binding or not, and what some countries and rights groups see as attempts to water down the convention. \u201cSimplification should not be used as an argument for removing or transferring to the draft recommendation provisions which concern fundamental rights,\u201d Spain said in comments about the latest draft agreement summarised<\/a> by the ILO.<\/p>\n Many of the components around algorithmic control, for example, have been moved to the recommendation, said Simet \u2013 creating a means for companies to avoid certain obligations when it comes to transparency and the ability of workers to challenge decisions made by automated systems. \u201dThis is going to be a critical one to push back on and ensure that it\u2019s being kept in the convention,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n One of the biggest concerns is that despite the convention covering all gig workers, attempts to create exceptions or weaken language around how independent workers are classified risk creating loopholes for companies to exploit. \u201cThe convention ought to be broad enough to cover all platform workers, regardless of how they are classified,\u201d Limet said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Low pay, job insecurity and opaque management systems run by algorithms have long topped the list of grievances…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":75373,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[7],"tags":[65,18741,24739],"class_list":["post-75372","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-geneva","tag-geneva","tag-ilo","tag-labour-rights"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@ch\/116672727831007648","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75372","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=75372"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75372\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/75373"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75372"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75372"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ch\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75372"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}