The Platform Work Directive (PWD), proposed by the EU Commission in December 2021, provoked platform companies such as Uber and Deliveroo, to vigorously lobby policymakers to ensure that their business model remains untouched.
Following marathon negotiations between the EU Commission, EU Parliament and EU Council a ‘revolutionary’ agreement was produced promising protections for platform workers. All that remained was for Member States to formally ratify the agreement. Hence, there remained a last-ditch opportunity for platform companies to lobby and ensure the PWD is derailed.
Revenues in the EU platform economy grew from an estimated €3 billion to around €14 billion between 2016 and 2020 with the largest profits being in food-delivery and taxi services. The number of workers in the gig economy is expected to rise to 43 million by 2025. A modest estimation puts 5.5 million gig workers as being misclassified. In other words, bogus self-employed is rife in the sector.
The EU Commission sought, on the one hand, to address algorithmic management by improving the transparency of app-based work, and, on the other hand, to introduce criteria to determine whether platform workers are genuinely self-employed or whether they are misclassified and are being denied labour rights and social protections. This latter aspect, the correct determination of workers’ employment status, is the more controversial aspect of the PWD and a real source of concern for the likes of Uber and Deliveroo.
The negotiations between the three EU institutions began in July but encountered difficulties due to a split in the EU council between a more socially-minded grouping, seeking to enhance platform workers’ rights, and a more neo-liberal cohort favouring the status quo.
With time running out and following all-night negotiations, an agreement arrived on December 13, which Nicolas Schmit, Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights, described as “a historic achievement”.
According to the agreement, the presumption of employment exists when two out of five criteria are satisfied. This reverts back to the Commission’s original proposal, which the Council sought to water down by proposing that employment exists where three out of seven criteria are satisfied.
The criteria include upper limits on the amount of money workers can receive; supervision of their performance, including by electronic means; control over the distribution or allocation of tasks; control over working conditions and restrictions on choosing working hours; and restrictions on their freedom to organise their work and rules on their appearance or conduct.
Reaction to the agreement was met with cautious optimism as there remained one last roll of the dice for the platform companies to influence the outcome.
The lobbying expenditure of platform companies has risen exponentially with the prospect of the PWD. Digital platforms could also count on the support of powerful business associations such as Move EU and BusinessEurope to lobby on their behalf. Uber sits on BusinessEurope’s corporate advisory group.
The lobbying activities of the platform companies, both at the national and the EU levels, have been relentless. The MEP in charge of the PWD, Elisabetta Gualmini, critiqued the platforms’ lobbying tactics for “interfering with [the Parliament’s] democratic processes”.
Another MEP closely involved, Leila Chaibi, noted that “until the last moment, the Uber and Deliveroo lobbies worked behind the scenes to sabotage this directive”.
Uber’s ability to curry favour with politicians is well-documented, particularly when it came to President Emmanuel Macron of France, who was particularly receptive to Uber’s advances and its flexploitation business model.
Move EU, which represents Uber and Freenow, was “deeply concerned” by December 13’s agreement and “call[ed] on EU Member States to not approve” it. This would require a coalition of the unwilling between certain national governments and the platform companies.
French Labour Minister, Olivier Dussopt, publicly signalled that he was against the agreement. Ireland’s Enterprise Minister Simon Coveney fudged the question by saying: “It is essential that this proposal delivers legal certainty for both platforms and persons performing platform work”. The fog would lift with decision time.
The decisive meeting was held on December 21. Approval would require a qualified majority of 15 out of 27 EU nations, representing 65% of the bloc’s population.
As expected, the French government voted in favour of the platform companies and against extending rights to platform workers across the EU. Disappointingly, the Irish government following suit. Reactions were tinged with disbelief and anger.
James Farrar, an Irishman who won a landmark case against Uber, stated the decision “has ruined Christmas for millions of the poorest paid, most exploited workers”.
The European Transport Union described it as “unjust” and “a slap in the face” for workers. Gualmini described Macron’s government, and the Irish government by extension, as “the killer of Social Europe”.
With the EU Parliamentary term concluding in April 2024 time is running out. The Irish government faces a dilemma: Either platform capitalism is regulated at EU level, or we will inevitably witness the ‘uberisation’ of other economic sectors and the immiseration and precariatisation of even more workers.
Hopes are hanging by a thread, but as EU elections beckon it would be myopic of Mr Coveney to deny vulnerable platform workers enhanced protections and better-quality jobs.
- Darragh Golden is an Ad Astra Fellow at University College Dublin where he lectures in European Employment Relations.
