Accommodating platform work as a new form of work in Dutch social security law: New work, same rules?

In the Netherlands, social security rights of platform workers have still not been formally defined. At present, level protection accorded to all is derived directly from labour law qualification. continuing absence in Netherlands specific legislation for workers, specifically as regards and law, existing steering. This means that worker either included using status employee with corresponding extensive package, or self-employed limited protection. For majority this second option applied date. Nevertheless, recent developments point possible improvements position Netherlands. Aux Pays-Bas, les droits à la sécurité sociale des travailleurs plateformes n’ont pour l’heure pas été officiellement définis. Actuellement, le niveau de qui leur est accordé dépend directement qualification activité en vertu du droit travail. Comme il n’existe toujours législation visant spécifiquement ces travailleurs, particulier ce concerne travail et sociale, c’est existante s’applique. Il s’ensuit qu’un travailleur peut être considéré comme un salarié bénéficier large attachée statut, ou indépendant n’avoir ainsi accès qu’à une limitée. La majorité relèvent deuxième statut. Toutefois, évolutions récentes laissent penser qu’ils pourraient voir situation matière s’améliorer. En los Países Bajos todavía no se han definido formalmente derechos seguridad trabajadores las plataformas digitales. Actualmente, el nivel protección que ofrece a todos depende directamente cualificación otorgue su actividad virtud legislación laboral. Teniendo cuenta sigue sin haber una específica para plataformas, concretamente lo respecta laboral y social, existente es aplica. Esto significa al trabajador realiza través plataforma o bien incluye sistema como empleado, con amplio paquete que, tal, corresponde, independiente, limitada. A día hoy, mayoría aplica segunda opción. No obstante, evolución reciente apunta posible mejora situación respecto Bajos. den Niederlanden sind die Rechte der sozialen Sicherheit von Plattformbeschäftigten noch immer nicht formell verankert. Derzeit leitet sich das Sozialschutzniveau aller Arten Beschäftigten direkt ihrer arbeitsrechtlichen Einstufung ab. Da weiterhin an besonderen gesetzlichen Vorgaben für Plattformbeschäftigte fehlt, insbesondere was Arbeitsrecht und Recht anbelangt, gibt aktuell bestehende Gesetzgebung Weg vor. Dies bedeutet, dass entweder als Angestellte mit dem entsprechenden weitreichenden Schutzpaket oder aber Selbstständige einem eher beschränkten Sozialschutz betrachtet werden. Für Mehrheit wird derzeit zweite Option angewendet. Dennoch deuten jüngsten Entwicklungen auf mögliche Verbesserungen Sozialversicherungssituation niederländischer Plattformbeschäftigter hin. В Нидерландах все ещё формально не установлены права работников цифровых платформ на социальное обеспечение. настоящее время уровень социальной защиты, предоставляемой всем работникам, определяется непосредственно их квалификацией в соответствии с трудовым законодательством. отсутствие особого законодательства для платформ, особенно рамках трудового и о социальном обеспечении, по-прежнему применяется действующее законодательство. Это означает, что точки зрения социального обеспечения работники рассматриваются либо как наёмные соответствующим расширенным пакетом защиты самозанятые лица ограниченной защитой. к большинству второй подход. Тем менее последние события указывают возможное улучшение ситуации социальным обеспечением Нидерландах. 在荷兰, 平台工人的社会保障权利仍未正式确定。目前, 所有工人享有的社会保障保护水平均直接源自于劳动法赋予的资格。在荷兰缺乏针对平台工人的专门立法, 特别是劳动法和社会保障法期间, 现行立法仍然发挥指导作用。这意味着平台工人要么使用雇员身份参保, 获得相应广泛的保护范围, 要么使用自雇人员身份参保, 社会保护相对有限。对大多数平台工人而言, 截至目前都适用于第二个选项。然而, 近期的一些变化表明荷兰平台工人的社会保障地位可能会有所改善。 في هولندا، لم يجر تحديد حقوق الضمان الاجتماعي للعاملين على المنصات بشكل رسمي بعدُ. وفي الوقت الحالي، يستند مستوى الحماية بالضمان الممنوحة لجميع العمال مباشرة إلى مؤهلات قانون العمل. استمرار غياب تشريع مُحدد يُعنى بالعاملين لا سيما فيما يتعلق بقانون العمل وقانون الاجتماعي، فإن التشريع القائم هو الحَكَم. وهذا يعني أن العاملين مشمولون سواء باستخدام الوضع الوظيفي مع حزمة المكثفة المناسبة أو وضع لحسابهم الخاص بحماية اجتماعية محدودة. وينطبق هذا الخيار الثاني حتى اليوم معظم المنصات. ولكن، تشير التطورات الأخيرة تحسينات محتملة موقف إزاء هولندا. Na Holanda, os direitos seguridade dos trabalhadores em digitais ainda não foram definidos. momento atual, nível proteção da concedida deriva diretamente qualificação do direito trabalhista. Diante prolongada ausência na Holanda uma legislação digitais, notadamente relação ao trabalho e é está sendo usado diretriz. Isto trabalhador digital incluído empregado, com abrangente pacote correspondente, autônomo, Para maioria destes trabalhadores, esta opção aplicada até presente. entanto, avanços recentes apontam possíveis melhorias posição Holanda. Platform work offers multiple opportunities worker, well consumer (SER, 2020; TNO, WRR, 2020). example, it often easily accessible way generate income. Even those who are (yet) on job market, form can be suitable source income leads, among other things, greater financial independence. addition, flexibility very attractive factor, autonomy taken into consideration when considering switching work. addition positive aspects, there negative aspects associated These always immediately apparent but longer-term bearing workers’ well-being. mainly concerns lack clarity uncertainty about low levels legislation. 11 overview significant gaps coverage crowdwork platforms, see also Behrendt, Nguyen Rani (2019). contribution, we focus precisely latter element. The main research question follows: what state affairs regard protection? To start address question, 2020, does yet any workers. reason has assumption – would remain marginal. remained unchallenged considerable period. It assumed market best suited were attracted new However, strong growth size group 22 See CBS StatLine opendata (in Dutch). sometimes owing emergence work, classic assignment forced Dutch government take action. secure these non-standard ensure decent times need), longer leave such decisions i.e. platforms themselves. 33 Concerning definitions concepts standard below. Coalition Agreement October 2017, Government promised investigate options wider improved “solo self-employed” known “self-employed without personnel” Dutch: zelfstandige zonder personeel zzp). 44 solo synonymous persons personnel. term “freelancer” used. statutory insurance incapacity supplementary old-age insurance. 55 more information, VVD al. (2017, pp. 25–26). Dutch. steps towards extended including now taken, materialized law. We will return Figure 1 shows continous number By comparison, numbers staff assisting family member relatively constant over last two decades. Source: (2020). Given lacking rules apply employees used determine qualify access better contrast, whose much less generous contingencies illness, old age unemployment. performed (solo) person part-time (Schoukens, Barrio Montebovi, 2018, 232–233). Therefore, departure, important analyse framework current provided. regulations adapted era. That raised doubts provoked discussions future direction society, at national legislator. COVID-19 pandemic made clear how vulnerable under urgent need framework. framework, prevail. Like many European Union (EU) Member States, distinguishes classically between self-employed. 66 www.missoc.org comparison countries concerning their regulations. What differ fundamentally States minimum provided risks. most EU insured, voluntarily otherwise, same risks employees, although different conditions (e.g. waiting periods lower benefits). 77 comparative study 12 Klosse Montebovi (2020); ter Weel, Bussink van Kesteren (2019, 8–10). compulsory health (Zorgverzekeringswet), pension (first pillar, Algemene Ouderdomswet), child benefit (Algemene Kinderbijslagwet) survivors’ nabestaandenwet). aligned subsistence 88 Only previously compulsorily insured option, strict conditions, out voluntary Employee Insurance Agency (Uitvoeringsinstituut Werknemersverzekeringen UWV) insurances. 2019, only 2 per cent use option. Scheepers Zegers 3–4). Decree Assistance Support (Besluit bijstandverlening) temporary support established starting self-employment. 99 Decision assistance 2004 bijstandverlening zelfstandigen 2004). Another scheme supports older partially incapacitated former aged had terminate business professional activities because permanently below minimum. 1010 Act Income provision act 1987; IOAZ (Wet Inkomensvoorziening oudere gedeeltelijk arbeidsongeschikte gewezen 1987). cannot provide necessary costs existence, through Participation (Participatiewet). three (income support) schemes, which administered paid by municipality, article, contribute full With legal universal schemes package include benefits Sickness Benefit (Ziektewet ZW; short incapacity), WIA werk inkomen naar arbeidsvermogen; long-term assessed least 35 cent) Unemployment (Werkloosheidswet WW). replacement rate 70–75 earned wages (except certain parts WIA). Employees eligible basic Act. Moreover, may receive supplements top via supra-statutory collective bargaining agreement, employer. case role, Civil Code (article 729 Book 7), according employer obliged continue payment maximum 104 weeks employed contract. applicable not, longer, while ill fixed-term contract ends during illness). spite normally fundamental distinction self-employed, situations challenged category assimilated employees. fictitious employment relationship and, therefore, fall include, musicians, artists high-level athletes home behalf another person. 1111 Identification Employment Relationship aanwijzing gevallen waarin arbeidsverhouding dienstbetrekking wordt beschouwd 1986 (Rariteitenbesluit)). They perform personal remuneration socially economically equivalent relationship. 1212 artikel 5 Ziektewet Werkloosheidswet. Up until decades ago, placing one categories sufficient accommodate almost entire force. 1313 As 2003 National Bureau Statistics (CBS), started count separate part force (CBS, 2020a). model offered own arrangements respective degree straightforward, based being (or equivalent) entrepreneurs usually fully aware they risk event crisis, bankruptcy, age). taking private having secured equity capital household property business. (see 1) special person/entrepreneurs produced people adequately insure themselves privately against (IBO zzp, 2015, 66–69). result, excluding approximately million currently under-insured There progress following areas: Reducing incentives contracts promoting adequate … Tackling bogus expected inform Parliament announced measures addressing self-employment spring 2019 (EC, p. 5). Survey points increasingly flexible offering protection, share forms self-employment, risen rapidly. An increasing covered sickness disability risks, tax further migration close 17 total employment. tackle challenges posed developments, proposes range reforms. suggests supported inclusive manner, phase-out permanent deduction introduction regardless type. summary, long absent, must rely groups: practice, common categorized consequently leads 1616 Clarifying (employee self-employed) issue. few cases brought before court permit define policy. themes discussed. first fragmentation market. phenomenon European-level concern. Further examination various types therefore worthwhile. identify workers; task explore groups wide disparities pose threat society. theme addressed refers related sustainable Specifically, poverty risk, solidarity issues sustainability. third concerned transformations expected, already started, policy law-making process. concluding section final thoughts pace legislative change characterized undesirable growing dichotomy. On hand, indefinite period assured good precarious situation, client, affect adversely limit Notably, Commission (EC) referred dichotomy its adverse effects working (such “flex workers”, “freelancers” “platform workers”). than occasion, EC remarked making too little process improving 2–3; EC, 5; 2020b, employed, elaborated next section. both full-time considered Conventionally, up core company’s supplemented, if necessary, hiring Increasingly period, come complement How differentiated terms Despite flexibilization largest proportion job. 1717 opendata. consider “standard employees”. denominator employee” generally understood mean bound time (Schoukens Barrio, 2017). mark dividing line between, (the “non-standard workers”) varied includes following: short-term contracts, on-call contractors, flex stated, Of country’s 7.5 5.5 relationship, (Centraal voor Statistiek CBS). 1818 data Employed force; countries, acount determining however, Europe; defined involuntarily hours week. 1919 Part-time. 9 (i.e. self-employed), half jobs. short, increasing. Non-standard differentiate grounds some also, alternately, entrepreneur so-called hybrid employee). International Labour Organization (ILO) four (ILO, 2016, 21 47–116). 2) 3) where several parties involved, 4) disguised dependent (Figure 2). ILO (2016, 21). All employment, typified ILO, occur so 3). depicted occupy absolute terms, make small importance persons, irrespective formal status, additional 2020 estimation population works worked economy. Werff (2020, 4). General Association Temporary Agencies (ABU) around 10 willing (once often) platform. De Micheli (2018, 11). paradigm divided roughly (with comprehensive coverage) covergae) tenable. become highly diverse Whereas (shopkeeper, craft lawyer, hairdresser, etc.) dominant, joined enterprises personnel (solo), feature When talking “classic” personnel, reference professions greengrocer baker. sell products 11–12). enormous “new” (also freelancers). offer services, construction, agricultural professions, retail, cultural sector events recreation sector, journalism, IT, consultancy, on. medical specialists freelancers. 2121 IBO zzp (2015, 11–13). Since mores studie article) published sharpen analysis. done order situate Some find clients. presents challenge policy-makers. New argues limiting expense, thus (Commissie Regulering Werk, 10; 26, 97). Figures 1.1 900,000 whom regarded (freelancers) 200,000 2222 online population; Out people, number. awareness Concerns expressed levels: reports recommendations, annual country-specific recommendations 2019), international level, views OECD (OECD, 2018). World Bank pr