Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands
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 protection. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platform workers adequate social protection wi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of social security 2024-03, Vol.26 (1), p.3-26 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 26 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 3 |
container_title | European journal of social security |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | De Becker, Eleni Seo, Hyojin Pulignano, Valeria Schoukens, Paul |
description | 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 protection. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platform 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 several of the characteristics of atypical forms of work, such as low earnings, irregular working patterns 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 protection, 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 practices among platform work, we analyse how different types of ‘employed’ platform 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 'employed' platform workers, considering formal, effective, and adequate access to unemployment schemes as outlined in the Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed (2019). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/13882627241236489 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3033855756</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_13882627241236489</sage_id><sourcerecordid>3033855756</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c321t-6bac8cadaca548aa45cf3ddf135c87bbe9b55399163194e3017cfd2ad621a3ee3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1PwzAMhiMEEmPwA7hF4kpHkzRtwm1MfEwacAGJW-Wm6ehom5KkQ_v3ZCoSB8TFluPnteMXoXMSzwjJsivChKApzWhCKEsTIQ_QhDIpIyoTcYgm-360B47RiXObOI5lxtMJGh6h7-tujZ1RNTS4t8Zr5WvTYWW22sJa48pY3DfgQ27xl7Ef2rprPA9A24MFX281hg6anasdNhW-0c26HtpLvPThMbRK7N81ftIh2iaU7hQdVdA4ffaTp-j17vZl8RCtnu-Xi_kqUowSH6UFKKGgBAU8EQAJVxUry4owrkRWFFoWnIcjScqITDSLSaaqkkKZUgJMazZFF-PccNbnoJ3PN2aw4asuZzFjgvNgQqDISClrnLO6yntbt2B3OYnzvbv5H3eDBo8arUxXu1-FkDyRJM7eAjIbERdM_F38_8xv6nCGhw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3033855756</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>De Becker, Eleni ; Seo, Hyojin ; Pulignano, Valeria ; Schoukens, Paul</creator><creatorcontrib>De Becker, Eleni ; Seo, Hyojin ; Pulignano, Valeria ; Schoukens, Paul</creatorcontrib><description>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 protection. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platform 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 several of the characteristics of atypical forms of work, such as low earnings, irregular working patterns 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 protection, 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 practices among platform work, we analyse how different types of ‘employed’ platform 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 'employed' platform workers, considering formal, effective, and adequate access to unemployment schemes as outlined in the Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed (2019).</description><identifier>ISSN: 1388-2627</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2399-2948</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/13882627241236489</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Access ; Adequacy ; Comparative analysis ; Earnings ; Employment status ; Legislation ; Mapping ; Self employment ; Social protection ; Social security ; Unemployment ; Unpaid ; Work ; Workers</subject><ispartof>European journal of social security, 2024-03, Vol.26 (1), p.3-26</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c321t-6bac8cadaca548aa45cf3ddf135c87bbe9b55399163194e3017cfd2ad621a3ee3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3399-0421</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/13882627241236489$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13882627241236489$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>De Becker, Eleni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Hyojin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pulignano, Valeria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schoukens, Paul</creatorcontrib><title>Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands</title><title>European journal of social security</title><addtitle>European Journal of Social Security</addtitle><description>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 protection. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platform 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 several of the characteristics of atypical forms of work, such as low earnings, irregular working patterns 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 protection, 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 practices among platform work, we analyse how different types of ‘employed’ platform 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 'employed' platform workers, considering formal, effective, and adequate access to unemployment schemes as outlined in the Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed (2019).</description><subject>Access</subject><subject>Adequacy</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Earnings</subject><subject>Employment status</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Mapping</subject><subject>Self employment</subject><subject>Social protection</subject><subject>Social security</subject><subject>Unemployment</subject><subject>Unpaid</subject><subject>Work</subject><subject>Workers</subject><issn>1388-2627</issn><issn>2399-2948</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1PwzAMhiMEEmPwA7hF4kpHkzRtwm1MfEwacAGJW-Wm6ehom5KkQ_v3ZCoSB8TFluPnteMXoXMSzwjJsivChKApzWhCKEsTIQ_QhDIpIyoTcYgm-360B47RiXObOI5lxtMJGh6h7-tujZ1RNTS4t8Zr5WvTYWW22sJa48pY3DfgQ27xl7Ef2rprPA9A24MFX281hg6anasdNhW-0c26HtpLvPThMbRK7N81ftIh2iaU7hQdVdA4ffaTp-j17vZl8RCtnu-Xi_kqUowSH6UFKKGgBAU8EQAJVxUry4owrkRWFFoWnIcjScqITDSLSaaqkkKZUgJMazZFF-PccNbnoJ3PN2aw4asuZzFjgvNgQqDISClrnLO6yntbt2B3OYnzvbv5H3eDBo8arUxXu1-FkDyRJM7eAjIbERdM_F38_8xv6nCGhw</recordid><startdate>20240301</startdate><enddate>20240301</enddate><creator>De Becker, Eleni</creator><creator>Seo, Hyojin</creator><creator>Pulignano, Valeria</creator><creator>Schoukens, Paul</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3399-0421</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240301</creationdate><title>Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands</title><author>De Becker, Eleni ; Seo, Hyojin ; Pulignano, Valeria ; Schoukens, Paul</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c321t-6bac8cadaca548aa45cf3ddf135c87bbe9b55399163194e3017cfd2ad621a3ee3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Access</topic><topic>Adequacy</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Earnings</topic><topic>Employment status</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Mapping</topic><topic>Self employment</topic><topic>Social protection</topic><topic>Social security</topic><topic>Unemployment</topic><topic>Unpaid</topic><topic>Work</topic><topic>Workers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>De Becker, Eleni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seo, Hyojin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pulignano, Valeria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schoukens, Paul</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>European journal of social security</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>De Becker, Eleni</au><au>Seo, Hyojin</au><au>Pulignano, Valeria</au><au>Schoukens, Paul</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands</atitle><jtitle>European journal of social security</jtitle><addtitle>European Journal of Social Security</addtitle><date>2024-03-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>3</spage><epage>26</epage><pages>3-26</pages><issn>1388-2627</issn><eissn>2399-2948</eissn><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 protection. Little is known about how this transition would guarantee platform 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 several of the characteristics of atypical forms of work, such as low earnings, irregular working patterns 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 protection, 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 practices among platform work, we analyse how different types of ‘employed’ platform 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 'employed' platform workers, considering formal, effective, and adequate access to unemployment schemes as outlined in the Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed (2019).</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/13882627241236489</doi><tpages>24</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3399-0421</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1388-2627 |
ispartof | European journal of social security, 2024-03, Vol.26 (1), p.3-26 |
issn | 1388-2627 2399-2948 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3033855756 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List |
subjects | Access Adequacy Comparative analysis Earnings Employment status Legislation Mapping Self employment Social protection Social security Unemployment Unpaid Work Workers |
title | Mapping social protection coverage for platform workers: A comparative analysis of Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T06%3A40%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Mapping%20social%20protection%20coverage%20for%20platform%20workers:%20A%20comparative%20analysis%20of%20Belgium,%20Italy%20and%20the%20Netherlands&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20social%20security&rft.au=De%20Becker,%20Eleni&rft.date=2024-03-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=3&rft.epage=26&rft.pages=3-26&rft.issn=1388-2627&rft.eissn=2399-2948&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/13882627241236489&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3033855756%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3033855756&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_13882627241236489&rfr_iscdi=true |