BusinessToday Previous Editions

4 NEWS 29.9.2022 In the three years preceding the COVID-19 pandemic, Malta recorded a current account surplus averaging 5.5 per cent of GDP, underlined by a strong service net export balance. However, the COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted the current account balance leading to a current account deficit in 2020 and 2021. During the first quarter of 2022, Malta has similarly recorded a current account deficit, although this has decreased significantly from the previous quarter by 4.1 percentage points. current account THE platform economy is one of those moving targets, which, despite receiving increasing media and policy attention, has proven difficult to regulate. Given the heterogeneity of employment rela- tionships, business models, types of plat- form work and cross-border issues, this is not surprising. Yet, in recent years, an increasing number of initiatives and court rulings across EU Member States have sought to address the employment rights and working conditions of platform workers. Piecemeal regulation has, however, re- vealed its limits. Eurofound research has demonstrated that existing initiatives of- ten fail to provide both platform workers and platform companies with the regu- latory predictability and legal certainty needed for ensuring good working con- ditions and a level playing field. Improving platform working conditions In response, the European Commission made a bold move and, last year, pro- posed a directive that seeks to address the regulatory fragmentation around platform work, improve working condi- tions for platform workers and set com- mon standards for the platform economy in Europe. e proposal has three core components: ensuring that the employ- ment status of people working through platforms is correctly classified; increas- ing the transparency of algorithms; and setting reporting requirements for digi- tal labour platforms. e employment status of platform workers sits at the core of the proposed directive and aims to ensure that plat- form workers who are in a relationship of dependence with platforms are not misclassified as independent contrac- tors. e legal presumption of employ- ment relationship would be applied if at least two out of the five control criteria are fulfilled – these include: controlling remuneration; setting rules with respect to appearance, conduct or performance of work; supervising performance; and restricting both the freedom to organise work and the possibility to independent- ly build a client base. Added to this, the directive would set a minimum floor of rights with respect to the transparency of algorithmic manage- ment systems for all platform workers. ese concern, for example, the right of platform workers to be informed that such systems are in use, the type of deci- sions that are taken or supported by such systems, the parameters used and their weight in either decisions taken or sup- ported by algorithms, and the grounds for decisions that impact on the engage- ment of workers with the platform. Finally, the directive would establish monitoring requirements for decisions taken by algorithms, pave the way to- wards collective bargaining of platform workers and introduce reporting re- quirements for platform companies, in- cluding data on the number of persons performing work through the platforms and the terms and conditions applicable to various contractual relationships. is is a progressive proposal that goes beyond other initiatives we have seen emerge in recent years around the world. e now repealed Proposition 22 in California was much more restricted in scope and dealt strictly with the em- ployment status of platform workers, leaving out complex issues such as al- gorithmic management and collective bargaining by platform workers. Howev- er, questions remain with respect to the 'bite' of the EU directive: are the criteria proposed by the Commission sufficient- ly futureproof? Will the directive, once transposed, be able to address potential outsourcing and subcontracting practic- es that are likely to emerge in the plat- form economy? Will substantive social dialogue take off in the platform econo- my or will it turn into an illusory exer- cise? Building on the platform work proposal e European Parliament certainly feels that the directive should go further. Laying out its response to the Commis- sion's proposal in a draft report pub- lished in May, the parliament called for substantial changes. e proposals in- cluded in the report vastly expand the scope of the proposed directive, notably regarding the employment status of plat- form workers and algorithmic manage- ment systems. e parliament suggests increasing the presumption-of-employment criteria (from five to eleven) and – most impor- tantly – removing them from the body of the directive, relegating them to the recitals section instead. Doing so would mean the control criteria are not binding and therefore would imply that the re- buttable presumption set by the directive would automatically apply to all platform workers. is raises numerous questions. How would the presumption of employment work in practice? How would it impact on those platform workers who are gen- uinely self-employed? And will Member States support such a proposal? e parliament's report also proposes the expansion of conditions for the use of algorithmic management systems by, for example, requiring platforms to im- plement an impact assessment prior to the introduction of such systems and to consult workers and their represent- atives with regard to the planning and introduction of new technologies. But how – given the fluidity and com- plexity of algorithmic management sys- tems, not to mention questions over what actually constitutes new technol- ogies – could meaningful collective bargaining take place? And is such a re- quirement feasible for all platform com- panies or specifically for online labour platforms? ese questions go to the very core of EU efforts to meaningfully regulate plat- form work and highlight the challenges in trying to improve working conditions in a digital age. Considering the different strategies proposed in the directive and the ini- tial reaction of the parliament, it seems that there is still a long way to go until consensus is reached on how to regulate platform work. One aspect remains clear though: regulation needs to catch up with realities on the ground if Europe is to move towards better and more inclu- sive labour markets. Regulating platform work in Europe: A work in progress

• Cover