A new draft convention proposes to establish a comprehensive rights and protections for platform workers globally.
As the International Labour Conference gets underway, with negotiations on a crucial new international instrument for platform work now in motion, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) stands at a pivotal juncture. This is a unique opportunity to shape the future of work within our rapidly evolving digital economies. In anticipation of this significant moment, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Lawyers Assisting Workers Network (ILAW) commissioned a draft Platform Workers Convention, a document I had the privilege to prepare.
My understanding of platform work and algorithmic management has been cultivated over more than a decade, including my tenure as an officer at the ILO and through extensive writing on these critical issues. It was this experience that I endeavoured to bring to bear in support of the standard-setting process, aiming to contribute as constructively and effectively as possible.
Wherever feasible, the drafting of this Convention drew upon the established language of existing ILO instruments that have already garnered tripartite consensus. Examples include the Domestic Workers Convention, which extended vital protections to previously excluded categories of workers, and the Maritime Labour Convention, which addressed the complex transnational challenges inherent in regulation and enforcement. The draft was finalised in 2023 but was intentionally kept unpublished until this point, allowing the ITUC and the Workers’ group of the ILO the necessary space to develop their strategies and engage in thorough discussions of the draft Convention with their members at their own discretion.
It is crucial to understand that this draft Convention is not intended to pre-empt or in any way constrain the strategic direction of the ITUC or the Workers’ group at the ILO, who are the sole legitimate custodians of that strategy. Instead, it offers a structured framework that may assist the ILO Constituents in envisioning what a robust, rights-based regulatory landscape for platform work could look like at the international level.
Four key dimensions of the draft Convention warrant particular attention: its broad and inclusive personal scope, its pioneering approach to the governance of algorithmic management, its commitment to the protection of fundamental working conditions, and its innovative jurisdictional and enforcement design.
A Broad and Inclusive Scope
A fundamental characteristic of the draft Convention is its comprehensive personal scope. It defines platform work based on the organisation and delivery of services through digital means – regardless of whether the work is performed online or in physical locations – and encompasses all individuals who undertake such work in a predominantly personal capacity. Crucially, it does not limit protections based on an individual’s formal employment classification.
Unlike the European Union’s Platform Work Directive, which operates within the legal confines of EU competence and offers only partial protection to self-employed workers, the ILO’s standard-setting authority is not subject to similar constraints. Consequently, the draft Convention extends the full spectrum of protections – relating to working time, pay, occupational safety, access to grievance mechanisms, and algorithmic transparency – to all platform workers, irrespective of their formal employment status.
This approach reflects a core principle of labour law: that the reality of the work performed, rather than legal labels, should be the determining factor in triggering labour protections.
Algorithmic Management: Centring Collective Bargaining
Another significant innovation within the draft Convention lies in its dedicated chapter addressing algorithmic management. While the EU Platform Work Directive introduced important obligations concerning information and transparency, this Convention goes further, firmly rooted in the ILO’s distinct mandate to promote collective bargaining.
Algorithmic systems are not neutral tools; they actively shape critical aspects of work, including access to opportunities, earnings potential, performance evaluation, disciplinary procedures, and even termination of engagement – all matters that have traditionally and unequivocally fallen under the purview of collective bargaining. The draft Convention therefore treats these sophisticated systems as mechanisms of managerial control that necessitate democratic oversight and worker involvement. To this end, it stipulates that digital labour platforms may only introduce or revise algorithmic management systems with the agreement of workers’ representatives or, in the absence of such agreement, with authorisation from public authorities based on demonstrated compliance with the draft Convention’s established standards.
This approach strategically places collective bargaining at the very heart of digital governance. It also mandates essential safeguards such as human oversight, comprehensive impact assessments, the right for workers to receive explanations and seek rectification of decisions, and strict limitations on the processing of sensitive personal data.
In essence, the draft Convention seeks to counterbalance the pervasive influence of algorithmic power not merely through procedural transparency, but through the establishment of substantive worker voice and robust accountability mechanisms.
Decent Working Conditions for All
The draft Convention unequivocally affirms that platform workers are entitled to the same fundamental baseline protections as any other worker. These essential protections include:
- Working time protections, encompassing limits on work quotas that could compromise essential rest periods or access to bathroom facilities.
- Minimum wage guarantees, with pay calculated per task completed and explicitly excluding gratuities.
- Protection against unjust deactivation from a platform, treated with the same considerations as termination of employment.
- Guarantees of non-discrimination, occupational health and safety standards, and access to social security provisions, including those related to parental and maternity status.
- A prohibition on charging fees directly to workers and a clear recognition of the home as a private space deserving of protection.
The draft Convention is therefore not merely an instrument to safeguard the rights of individual workers; it also actively promotes a level playing field for businesses that operate within the bounds of the law. By addressing the regulatory loopholes that some digital platforms have exploited, it helps to prevent unfair competition against employers who diligently comply with established labour standards. Technology, in this context, must not be allowed to serve as a smokescreen to circumvent fundamental rights that would be considered non-negotiable in any other sector of the economy.
Jurisdiction and Enforcement: Preventing Gaps
Finally, the draft Convention proposes a robust jurisdictional model designed to close common loopholes in the governance of platform work. It establishes a dual responsibility for compliance, holding both the country where the platform is legally established and the country where the worker habitually performs their work accountable. Furthermore, it mandates the implementation of a rigorous inspection and certification regime for platform working conditions, including the use of digital certificates that would serve as presumptive proof of compliance.
This dual-responsibility approach is specifically designed to prevent regulatory arbitrage, particularly in cross-border operations, and to strengthen the capacity of national labour authorities to effectively oversee transnational platform companies.
Conclusion
This draft Platform Workers Convention should not be seen as a rigid prescription, but rather as a constructive roadmap intended to stimulate reflection and inform policymaking. It contributes to the growing global consensus that platform workers deserve far more than piecemeal protections or subtle algorithmic nudges; they are entitled to enforceable rights, robust representation, and the fundamental power to negotiate the very terms under which they work.
Valerio De Stefano is a law professor at Osgoode Hall School, York University, Toronto.