International Labour Law

The Role of International Labour Law in Regulating Gig Economy Workers’ Rights

The gig economy has rapidly reshaped the global labour market, with millions of workers engaged in platform-based, freelance work. However, these workers often face a lack of legal protections, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. This article explores the role of international labour laws, particularly the conventions established by the International Labour Organization (ILO), in addressing the unique challenges posed by the gig economy. Through an examination of current legal frameworks and emerging reforms, the article highlights the urgent need for international standards that safeguard gig workers’ rights in an increasingly digital world.

Introduction

The gig economy has significantly transformed how labour markets operate globally. Digital platforms such as Uber, Deliveroo, and TaskRabbit have enabled individuals to access flexible employment opportunities. However, gig workers often experience precarious working conditions, such as a lack of job security, social protection, and labour rights. International labour laws, particularly those governed by the International Labour Organization (ILO), have traditionally been designed for formal employment relationships. This article investigates the effectiveness of existing ILO conventions and explores potential reforms necessary to ensure gig workers’ rights are protected.

1. The Gig Economy: A New Challenge for Labor Law

The gig economy refers to a labour market characterized by short-term, flexible jobs, often facilitated by digital platforms. While this model provides flexibility, it leaves workers without essential protections, including minimum wage guarantees, social security, and collective bargaining rights. Studies show that gig workers are often classified as independent contractors, exempting them from the protections typically afforded to employees (De Stefano, 2016). The ILO has recognized the rise of non-standard forms of employment, such as gig work, and has sought to address this through various frameworks. The organization’s primary conventions, designed for traditional employees, struggle to fully apply to gig workers due to the complexity of defining employment relationships in the digital age (ILO, 2021).

2. Existing International Labour Standards: Are They Enough?

The ILO’s core conventions, particularly Convention No. 87 (Freedom of Association) and Convention No. 98 (Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining), form the foundation of labour rights globally (ILO, 1948; ILO, 1949). However, these conventions are often ineffective for gig workers who are classified as independent contractors and therefore not considered employees. This classification denies them the ability to unionize or collectively bargain (Graham & Woodcock, 2019). Similarly, ILO Convention No. 102 on social security and Convention No. 131 on minimum wage fixing offer valuable protections to formal employees but remain out of reach for gig workers due to their exclusion from formal employment definitions (ILO, 1952; ILO, 1970). These limitations expose the legal gaps that international labour law faces in addressing gig economy labour relations.

3. Legal Gaps in Protecting Gig Workers

A significant issue in protecting gig workers is the classification ambiguity: Are they employees or independent contractors? Many gig workers fall into a grey area, and this lack of clear classification leaves them without labour protections (Harris & Krueger, 2015). For example, court cases in the UK and the U.S. have debated whether Uber drivers should be classified as employees, leading to varying rulings (Prassl, 2018).

In the UK, a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2021 ruled that Uber drivers should be classified as workers, giving them rights to minimum wage and holiday pay (UK Supreme Court, 2021). Meanwhile, in the U.S., gig workers are often classified as independent contractors, limiting their access to labour protections such as health insurance and unemployment benefits (Cherry, 2021). This legal uncertainty underscores the need for clearer international labour standards that address gig work.

4. Proposals for Reform: New International Labour Standards for Gig Workers

The ILO has begun discussions on updating or introducing new conventions to address the challenges posed by the gig economy (ILO, 2020). Proposed reforms include extending social security coverage to gig workers, ensuring their right to collective bargaining, and clarifying the employment status of workers on digital platforms.

Several countries are already leading the way in implementing national reforms. France, for instance, has passed legislation that requires platforms to contribute to workers’ social protection (Forde et al., 2017), and Spain introduced laws that give delivery workers the right to be recognized as employees (Rodríguez-Piñero, 2021). These reforms highlight the importance of national legislation in supplementing international efforts to protect gig workers.

Legal experts also suggest creating flexible labour laws that can be applied globally, acknowledging the unique nature of gig work without undermining workers’ rights (Berg et al., 2018). The establishment of universal rights, such as minimum wages, social security, and the ability to unionize, should be at the forefront of these reforms (ILO, 2021).

Conclusion

The gig economy presents both opportunities and challenges for the global workforce. While it offers flexibility and new avenues for income generation, it also leaves workers vulnerable to exploitation due to inadequate labour protections. International labour law, rooted in traditional employment models, needs to evolve to meet the needs of this emerging sector. Through international cooperation, led by the ILO, and national-level reforms, it is possible to create a framework that ensures gig workers enjoy the same rights and protections as traditional employees.

References:

1. Berg, J., Furrer, M., Harmon, E., Rani, U., & Silberman, M. S. (2018). Digital labour platforms and the future of work: Towards decent work in the online world. ILO.
2. Cherry, M. A. (2021). Regulating Gig Work: International and Comparative Perspectives. American Journal of Comparative Law.
3. De Stefano, V. (2016). The rise of the “just-in-time workforce”: On-demand work, crowdwork and labour protection in the “gig-economy”. International Labour Office.
4. Forde, C., Stuart, M., Joyce, S., Oliver, L., Valizade, D., Alberti, G., Hardy, K., Trappmann, V., Umney, C., & Carson, C. (2017). The Social Protection of Workers in the Platform Economy. European Parliament.
5. Graham, M., & Woodcock, J. (2019). Towards a Fairer Gig Economy. Meatspace Press.
6. Harris, S. D., & Krueger, A. B. (2015). A Proposal for Modernizing Labor Laws for Twenty-First-Century Work: The “Independent Worker”. The Hamilton Project.
7. ILO. (1948). Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise. International Labour Organization.
8. ILO. (1949). Convention No. 98 on the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining. International Labour Organization.
9. ILO. (1952). Convention No. 102 on Social Security (Minimum Standards). International Labour Organization.
10. ILO. (1970). Convention No. 131 on Minimum Wage Fixing. International Labour Organization.
11. ILO. (2020). World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2020. International Labour Organization.
12. ILO. (2021). Report of the Director-General: The Future of Work.
13. Prassl, J. (2018). Humans as a Service: The Promise and Perils of Work in the Gig Economy. Oxford University Press.
14. Rodríguez-Piñero, M. (2021). The Riders’ Law in Spain: A Pioneer Regulation for Gig Economy Workers. European Labour Law Journal.
15. UK Supreme Court. (2021). Uber BV v. Aslam. UKSC 5.
16. Adams, A., & Berg, J. (2017). When Home Affects Pay: An Analysis of the Differential Pay for Home-Based and Office-Based Teleworkers. ILO.
17. Aloisi, A. (2016). Commoditized Workers: Case Study Research on Labor Law Issues Arising from a Set of “On-Demand/Gig Economy” Platforms. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 37(3), 653-690.
18. Stewart, A., & Stanford, J. (2017). Regulating Work in the Gig Economy: What are the Options? The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 28(3), 420-437.
19. Todolí-Signes, A. (2017). The “Gig Economy”: Employee, Self-Employed, or the Need for a Special Employment Regulation?. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 23(2), 193-205.
20. European Commission. (2021). The Platform Economy and Precarious Work in Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Digital Labor Markets. European Commission.
21. Koutsimpogiorgos, N., van Slageren, J., Herrmann, A. M., & Frenken, K. (2020). Conceptualizing the Gig Economy and its Regulatory Challenges. Journal of Business Ethics, 162(1), 25-39.