Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands

Published date01 March 2024
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/13882627241236489
AuthorEleni De Becker,Hyojin Seo,Valeria Pulignano,Paul Schoukens
Date01 March 2024
Mapping social protection
coverage for platform workers:
A comparative analysis
of Belgium, Italy and
the Netherlands
Eleni De Becker
Institute for Public Law, Free University Brussels and Institute for Social Law,
KU Leuven, Belgium
Hyojin Seo
Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Belgium
Valeria Pulignano
Centre for Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Belgium
Paul Schoukens
Institute for Social Law, KU Leuven,Belgium and Tilburg University, the Netherlands
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to examine if and how the reclassif‌ication of platform workers from self-
employment status to employment status can provide them with adequate social security protec-
tion. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platfo rm workers adequate social
protection within the social protection scheme for employees. National social security schemes, in
particular income replacement benef‌it schemes, often (still) depart from the standard employment
relationship, leading to lower protection for atypical work forms. Platform workers combine sev-
eral of the characteristics of atypical forms of work, such as low earnings, irregular working pat-
terns and working. Integrating platform workers into employee social security schemes faces
additional challenges due to the online nature of their work, algorithmic management, high levels
of unpaid labor, and employer identif‌ication diff‌iculties. This paper focuses on unemployment pro-
tection, as EU Member States struggle to provide adequate protection for workers with irregular
work patterns and income f‌luctuations, in the case of (short term) income replacement benef‌its.
By constructing nine ideal work patterns ref‌lective of diverse nature of platform work and current
Corresponding author:
Eleni De Becker, Institute for Public Law, Free University Brussels and Institute for Social Law, KU Leuven, Belgium.
Email: eleni.debecker@kuleuven.be
Article
European Journal of Social Security
2024, Vol. 26(1) 326
© The Author(s) 2024
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13882627241236489
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejs
practices among platform work, we analyse how different types of employedplatform workers
may fare within the legislation of three EU countries (Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands). This
approach allows us to assess the applicability of unemployment protection to different working
patterns among employedplatform workers, considering formal, effective, and adequate access
to unemployment schemes as outlined in the Council Recommendation on access to social pro-
tection for workers and the self-employed (2019).
Keywords
Social security, atypical work, platform work, EU, Recommendation on access to social protection,
unemployment protection
Introduction
The aim of this paper is to examine whether and to what extent the reclassif‌ication of the status
of platform workers, from self-employment to employment, can provide them with adequate
social security protection. Case law in several EU Member States has clarif‌ied, on a
case-by-case basis, the legal classif‌ication of platform workers, in particular those working
on demand through an app. Several national courts have found that such workers should be con-
sidered as employees (Hiessl, 2022). In order to provide more legal certainty, initiatives have
been launched at both EU and national level to provide further guidance on the legal status of
platform workers (e.g. in Belgium, adopted in September 2022). The proposal for an EU
Directive (2021) to improve the working conditions for platform workers includes several cri-
teria to distinguish between employed and self-employed platform workers (for a discussion,
see also Menegatti (2023)).
1
Nevertheless, while this instrument can serve as an important tool to increase legal certainty, it
does not contain provisions on how to ensure adequate social protection for (employed and/or self-
employed) platform workers (see also the discussion in Barrio (2023), Hooker and Antonucci
(2022) and Spasova and Marenco (2023)). Little is known about how the transition from self-
employment or even undeclared work to employee statuswould guarantee platform workers
adequate social protection within the social protection scheme for employees. National social secur-
ity schemes, in particular income-replacement benef‌it schemes, are often based on an assumed
standard employment relationship (i.e. full-time work with a contract of indef‌inite duration)
(Schoukens et al., 2022: 95; Forde et al., 2017: 69). For those in atypical forms of work, such as
part-time work, temporary work or on-call work, there are often several barriers to accessing
social security systems (Hooker and Antonucci, 2022: 9). Such workers may not be formally
enrolled in the social security scheme (lack of formal access), or they may f‌ind it diff‌icult to com-
plete the required qualifying period, or may receive only low benef‌its due to, for example, low
working hours or irregular working patterns (lack of effective access) (Forde et al., 2017: 70;
Spasova et al., 2017 and De Becker, 2023). The access of platform workers to social security is
limited due to characteristics they share with atypical workers, such as low earnings, irregular
1. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving working conditions in platform
work, COM [2021] 762 f‌inal.
4European Journal of Social Security 26(1)

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT