First published in 1948, the International Social Security Review is the principal international quarterly publication in the field of social security.
Studies on the social protection of platform workers in Spain have focused on the bike couriers (or “riders”) who deliver meals to customers’ homes and whose services are used by some of the best-known platforms on the country’s social and economic scene. Most of these workers are covered by the social security scheme for self-employed workers. However, a Supreme Court ruling issued on 25 September 2020 reclassified the relationship between Glovo and its couriers as a contract of employment. This decision has changed the outlook for platforms and prompted the Spanish Government to regulate platform work in Spain. Nonetheless, the government ruling is limited to couriers, whereas, in reality, the issue is much broader. In this article, we look at the current reality of Spain’s platform workers vis-à-vis the social security system and the latest court rulings.
In the Netherlands, the social security rights of platform workers have still not been formally defined. At present, the level of social security protection accorded to all workers is derived directly from the labour law qualification. In the continuing absence in the Netherlands of specific legislation for platform workers, specifically as regards labour law and social security law, the existing legislation is steering. This means that the platform worker is either included using the status of employee with the corresponding extensive protection package, or the status of self-employed with limited social protection. For the majority of platform workers, this second option is applied to date. Nevertheless, recent developments point to possible improvements in the social security position of platform workers in the Netherlands.
This article compares social security coverage for the self-employed and for employees on digital platforms in Switzerland. It sheds light on the particularities that have acted to slow down the evolution of Swiss social legislation to the new emerging forms of work, and summarizes the solutions provided by case law. These solutions are still being fine-tuned, but lean towards the reclassification of contracts as salaried work. Finally, despite the hesitance of the Swiss authorities to take political steps to encourage these new forms of work, which offer significant economic potential, and while also seeking to prevent the risk of precarity in work, we discuss the options available.
In a changing world of work, platform workers struggle to gain adequate protection, and effective access to the benefits provided by the social security system form a part of this. Social security benefits in Romania are particular in that access is based on a person having a professional income, regardless of the legal status of the worker (subordinate or self-employed). As a rule, all workers are covered in the event of illness and changing family circumstances as well as for pensions. In contrast, coverage for self-employed workers for unemployment benefits, workplace injury and occupational disease benefits, paid leave in the event of illness, protection against the risks related to pregnancy or to care for a sick child is voluntary. Given the diffusion of platform work, the article addresses the specific situation of platform workers in Romania, formally covered by the social security system, but who face obstacles related to eligibility criteria, administrative formalities, the risk of the automatic termination of work and intermittent work patterns.
Platform work confronts traditional social security law in two dimensions. First, it makes the distinction between dependent and independent work uncertain and unclear, as the borderlines between these blur. This is a profound challenge for social security law, because the criteria of dependent and independent work have to be precise. In the determination of work as dependent or independent, German law illustrates that a shift has taken place in determining employment status, moving from external and objective criteria to the contracting parties’ decision, which is to be executed under private law, but also respected under social security law. Second, platform work is heavily intertwined with digital communication, which has established a global environment for communication. Thereby, platform work can also facilitate international trade by making transnational work more accessible and efficient. Therefore, it seems necessary to examine the implications of platform work in international law. International law makes possible the choice of law, executed by the contracting parties. As a consequence, the protection of employees by social security law is related to the private law arrangements between the service provider and the service recipient. Gaps in social security protection of service providers are widespread. In many countries, awareness of the social protection deficits of platform workers has grown and responses to improve the social status of platform workers have come under scrutiny. Analysis reveals that there is a joint responsibility of the service provider and the service recipient to be bound to social security coverage under the same national legislation. Nevertheless, from an international law perspective, it is shown that reforms are confronted with restrictions under international law.
Are online platform “workers” in Denmark effectively and adequately protected against social and labour market risks? This article discusses this fundamental issue in the context of the Danish labour market, which is known for having high levels of job insecurity but a rather generous social security system. The article finds that the Danish statutory social security system provides a necessary cushion against risk, but also identifies gaps in protection, which brings into question the system’s effective coverage and the adequacy of benefits.
This article highlights the debate on social security regimes applicable to platform workers in Italy. As social security regimes differ according to the type of employment or self-employment relationship, Italian case law dealing with platform workers’ employment status will be illustrated. Italian legislation, case law and collective bargaining on health and safety at work will then be presented, clarifying the coverage to which platform workers are entitled in the event of accidents at work and occupational diseases, with a focus on the COVID-19 pandemic impact. In turn, the two main Italian minimum income schemes and the related scholarly debate will be outlined, as well as their impact on the ability of digital labour platforms to avoid their responsibilities as regards workers’ rights, including access to adequate social protection.
This special issue of the International Social Security Review addresses the important topic of social protection for digital platform workers in Europe. The special issue highlights the risk that social protection systems may be largely undermined by a decline in social solidarity in favour of individualism, the partial or full privatization of social security, and a reduction in protection levels, all as a result of the emergence of digital platforms and the support they receive from legislators in most countries.
Addressing the social protection of platform workers, the French legislator in 2016 and then in 2019 made moves to incorporate these workers into the general social security regime with regard to certain covered risks (work injury and occupational diseases), and to improve adequacy (enabling possible access to complementary coverage). However, these moves rest on radically opposed perspectives. Rather than reasserting the legal responsibility of the employer vis-à-vis workers’ health and safety, we see responsibility placed with the platform, but only on a voluntary basis under the aegis of corporate social responsibility. This risks fragmenting social benefits, to be determined by each platform, thus weakening the practices of mutual protection and risk pooling among enterprises and workers that lie at the heart of social security. In doing so, the legislator has broken the link that had as its historic objective the goal of social inclusion and has encouraged in different ways the privatization, or a re-commodification, of social security in the commercial interest of private insurance companies. Moreover, this has been done using the Trojan Horse of the French labour code. This approach is in contrast to the converging position of international organizations, such as the European Union, International Labour Organization or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, recommending that States establish a right to social protection for all atypical workers and non-salaried workers. Instead of identifying the common challenges that face workers who work for platforms, and offering responses specific to their situation, rather, it considers platform work as one of the new forms of atypical work undertaken by those who may have the status of employee or self-employed.
The right to social security is enshrined in article 23 of the Belgian Constitution. It is the role of the legislator to implement it, to guarantee the right of all to lead a life in accordance with human dignity. Studies show that platform workers face major difficulties in terms of social protection. The aim of this article is to highlight the limits of existing legislative provisions regarding their ability to implement the fundamental right to social security for platform workers. With regard to these legislative provisions, we are interested in both the general regulations that shape the Belgian social security system and the recent measures adopted by the Belgian legislator with regard to the so-called sharing economy. An analysis of these provisions reveals that a number of platform workers are excluded from social security, both de facto and de jure. At the very least, this raises the question of whether the Belgian legislator is complying with the positive obligation to fulfil the constitutional right to social security for platform workers, and the negative obligation, at least, not to undermine it.
The Member States of the European Union entered the financial crisis with very different pension systems. Although the use of standard adequacy measures suggest small impacts from the crisis, alternative measures based on pension wealth estimates indicate stronger effects. While the largest continental systems were left relatively unscathed by the crisis, Mediterranean systems were cut back significantly. This should lead to considerable convergence in system generosity across countries. Despite the cuts, state pensions in the stressed economies should still be generous enough to keep the majority of pensioners out of relative poverty, but this depends on a relatively quick turnaround in labour market performance in these countries.
Attempts to replace pay-as-you-go pension schemes with private funded systems came to a halt in Central and Eastern Europe after 2005. However, more recently, the region has witnessed two belated reformers: the Czech Republic and Romania. Both countries decided to partially privatize pensions despite the rising tide of evidence concerning the challenges associated with the policy. We argue that while part of the domestic political elite remained supportive of private funded pensions, the difficulties experienced by earlier reformers and reduced support from International Financial Institutions led to the adoption of small funded pension pillars. Such cautious attempts at privatization might become more common in the future as large reforms have proven politically unsustainable.
Social protection is widely considered to have a positive effect on children, including supporting improvements in nutritional, educational and health outcomes. Much less is known, however, about the impact of interventions on children's care. This article considers the impact of a social cash transfer targeted at poor households – Ghana's Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) programme – on child well-being, quality of care and preventing children's separation from their parents as perceived by programme and non-programme beneficiaries in a context of vulnerability, large households and widespread informal kinship care. Findings suggest that cash transfers can improve both material and non-material aspects of well-being and contribute to the quality of care and have the potential to prevent children's separation from their parents. At the same time, not all children appear to benefit equally, with non-biological children being disadvantaged. The combination of large household sizes with programme design and implementation challenges, including low transfer amounts, a cap on the maximum number of eligible household members and poor sensitization and follow-up, undermine the positive role that cash transfers can play.
Longevity insurance annuities are deferred annuities that begin payment at advanced older ages, such as at age 80. Such annuities would benefit some older retirees who have drawn down their savings, but the private sector has problems in providing them. Originally, social insurance old-age benefits programmes in some countries were structured as longevity insurance programmes, with 50 per cent or less of those entering the workforce surviving to receive the benefits. Over time, however, as life expectancy has improved, the benefits these programmes provide have slowly transformed into benefits that most people entering the workforce ultimately receive. This article argues that the reintroduction of longevity insurance benefits as part of social insurance old-age benefit programmes could be an important policy innovation, in particular because this benefit is generally not provided by the private sector. China has introduced longevity insurance benefits as part of its social insurance system, offering a model for other countries, particularly those providing modest social insurance old-age benefits.
This article offers a critical analysis of the methods by means of which data relating to the performance of second pillar pension schemes are collated, compared and reported. This is done with regard to the performance of mandatory private second pillar pension funds in Eastern Europe. By critically examining data published in a number of World Bank studies, and through the identification of data problems and irregularities, the article argues that a much more elaborate and transparent approach to the collation, comparative analysis and reporting of data is needed. Required is the establishment of a consensus regarding what should represent a robust basis for making credible policy recommendations, not least with regard to pension re-reforms in the countries of Eastern Europe and elsewhere. In the absence of such a consensus, unresolved data problems and irregularities may potentially continue to influence the formulation of incomplete national policy conclusions regarding the performance of second pillar pension funds and, in turn, the ability of policy-makers to evaluate appropriately the need for, and assess the feasibility of implementing in a sustainable manner, pension re-reform.