title: Moving past the uncertain classification of platform workers
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Menegatti, Emanuele
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2022-09-29T13:46:26Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2022-09-29T13:46:26Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2022
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Menegatti, Emanuele. 2022. “Moving past the uncertain classification of platform workers”. Russian Journal of Labour & Law 12: 167–175. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu32.2022.112
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu32.2022.112
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/37998
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: Workers under gig-economy arrangements have sharply increased in number over the last few
  years. However, they still struggle to achieve the rights and entitlements typically accorded
  by national labor laws to employees. The crux of disputes involving platform workers raised
  around the world — over 100 in the EU alone — evolved around their classification. Obviously,
  the aim of the litigation of gig workers was to open the main door leading to employment
  and social security rights, i.e. to obtain “worker” status. The outcome of the disputes has
  been rather mixed, even though there has been a clear stabilization. Many lawsuits have so far
  been promoted across to challenge the “independent contractor” status accorded to platforms
  to gig-workers, with mixed success. These decisions show that the traditional employment
  tests do not completely understand this new model of work, so maintaining a high degree of
  legal uncertainty around platform workers. Some possible solutions to get past this situation
  are on the table, ranging from a new legislative definition of “employment” to the creation of
  new intermediate categories of “dependent contractors.” However, the best way to address the
  problem is by working out a different distribution of employment protections between “employee”
  and self-employed workers.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Russian Journal of Labour & Law;Volume 12
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: gig-economy
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: platform workers
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: classification
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: independent contractor
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: employee
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: employment test
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: employment rights
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Moving past the uncertain classification of platform workers
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 167-175.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/37998/1/167-175.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 623,95 kB