abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

這頁面沒有繁體中文版本,現以English顯示

文章

31 十月 2023

作者:
Euractiv

EU: Policymakers to discuss legal presumption of employment as part of Platform Workers Directive

"EU policymakers brace for clash in thorny debate over platform workers’ status", 31 Oct 2023

The directive is a legislative proposal to define the status of those working for gig economy platforms like Uber and Deliveroo. The file entered the last phase of the legislative process – so-called ‘trilogues’, between the EU Council, Parliament, and Commission – back in July.

After months of stalemate, with little to no advances, negotiations are now moving to the details of the legal presumption – a novel mechanism that, if triggered, could enable the reclassification of platform workers from self-employed to employee.

The legal status of platform workers is by far the most sensitive chapter of the platform workers directive – and the EU co-legislators have adopted widely different views.

The initial Commission proposal stipulated that the presumption could be triggered if two out of five criteria which hint to subordination were met – in which case a self-employed platform worker could be reclassified unless the digital platform rebuts the reclassification and brings evidence that the worker is ‘genuinely self-employed’.

The Council raised the bar to trigger the presumption, requiring three out of seven criteria to be met. It added specific caveats to limit the scope of the presumption where it would be “manifest” that it would be rebutted. It also looked to exclude the presumption from social security, tax and criminal proceedings.

The Parliament diverged widely from the Council’s stance, however, removing criteria altogether. Any hint of subordination to platforms could have the presumption be triggered – a broad-sweeping scope which has not been to either the Commission’s or the Council’s taste...

時間線

隱私資訊

本網站使用 cookie 和其他網絡存儲技術。您可以在下方設置您的隱私選項。您所作的更改將立即生效。

有關我們使用網絡儲存技術的更多資訊,請參閱我們的 數據使用和 Cookie 政策

Strictly necessary storage

ON
OFF

Necessary storage enables core site functionality. This site cannot function without it, so it can only be disabled by changing settings in your browser.

分析cookie

ON
OFF

您瀏覽本網頁時我們將以Google Analytics收集信息。接受此cookie將有助我們理解您的瀏覽資訊,並協助我們改善呈現資訊的方法。所有分析資訊都以匿名方式收集,我們並不能用相關資訊得到您的個人信息。谷歌在所有主要瀏覽器中都提供退出Google Analytics的添加應用程式。

市場營銷cookies

ON
OFF

我們從第三方網站獲得企業責任資訊,當中包括社交媒體和搜尋引擎。這些cookie協助我們理解相關瀏覽數據。

您在此網站上的隱私選項

本網站使用 cookie 和其他網絡儲存技術來增強您在必要核心功能之外的體驗。