Between risk mitigation and labour rights enforcement: Assessing the transatlantic race to govern AI-driven decision-making through a comparative lens

In this article, we provide an overview of efforts to regulate the various phases of the artificial intelligence (AI) life cycle. In doing so, we examine whether—and, if so, to what extent—highly fragmented legal frameworks are able to provide safeguards capable of preventing the dangers that stem from AI- and algorithm-driven organisational practices. We critically analyse related developments at the European Union (EU) level, namely the General Data Protection Regulation, the draft AI Regulation, and the proposal for a Directive on improving working conditions in platform work. We also consider bills and regulations proposed or adopted in the United States and Canada via a transatlantic comparative approach, underlining analogies and variations between EU and North American attitudes towards the risk assessment and management of AI systems. We aim to answer the following questions: Is the widely adopted risk-based approach fit for purpose? Is it consistent with the actual enforcement of fundamental rights at work, such as privacy, human dignity, equality and collective rights? To answer these questions, in section 2 we unpack the various, often ambiguous, facets of the notion(s) of ‘risk’—that is, the common denominator with the EU and North American legal instruments. Here, we determine that a scalable, decentralised framework is not appropriate for ensuring the enforcement of constitutional labour-related rights. In addition to presenting the key provisions of existing schemes in the EU and North America, in section 3 we disentangle the consistencies and tensions between the frameworks that regulate AI and constrain how it must be handled in specific contexts, such as work environments and platform-orchestrated arrangements. Paradoxically, the frenzied race to regulate AI-driven decision-making could exacerbate the current legal uncertainty and pave the way for regulatory arbitrage. Such a scenario would slow technological innovation and egregiously undermine labour rights. Thus, in section 4 we advocate for the adoption of a dedicated legal instrument at the supranational level to govern technologies that manage people in workplaces. Given the high stakes involved, we conclude by stressing the salience of a multi-stakeholder AI governance framework

Essential jobs, remote work and digital surveillance: Addressing the COVID-19 pandemic panopticon

An unprecedented COVID-19-induced explosion in digital surveillance has reconfigured power relationships in professional settings. This article critically concentrates on the interplay between technology-enabled intrusive monitoring and the augmentation of 1 managerial prerogatives in physical and digital workplaces. It identifies excessive supervision as the common denominator of “essential” and “remotable” activities, besides discussing the various drawbacks faced by the two categories of workers during (and after) the pandemic. It also assesses the adequacy of the current European Union legal framework in addressing the expansion of data-driven management. Social dialogue, workers’ empowerment and digital literacy are identified as effective solutions to promote organizational flexibility, well-being and competitiveness

Essential jobs, remote work and digital surveillance: addressing the COVID-19 pandemic panopticon

COVID-19-induced digital surveillance has ballooned in an unprecedented fashion, causing a reconfiguration of power relationships in professional settings. This article critically concentrates on the interplay between technology-enabled intrusive monitoring and the managerial prerogatives augmentation in physical and digital workplaces. It portrays excessive control as the common denominator for “essential” and “remotable” activities, besides discussing the various drawbacks of the two categories of workers during the pandemic. It also assesses the adequacy of the current EU legal framework in addressing the expansion of data-driven management. Social dialogue, empowerment and digital literacy are identified as effective solutions to promote organisational flexibility, well-being and competitiveness

A Critical Examination of a Third Employment Category for On-Demand Work (In Comparative Perspective)

A number of lawsuits in the United States are challenging the employment classification of workers in the platform economy. Employee status is a crucial gateway in determining entitlement to labor and employment law protections. In response to this uncertainty, some commentators have proposed an “intermediate”, “third,” or “hybrid” category, situated between the categories of “employee” and “independent contractor.” After investigating the status of platform workers in the United States, the authors provide snapshot summaries of five legal systems that have experimented with implementing a legal tool similar to an intermediate category to cover non-standard workers: Canada, Italy, Spain, Germany, and South Korea. These various legal systems have had diverse results. There has been success in some instances, and unintended consequences in others. Accordingly, the authors recommend proceeding with caution in considering the creation of a third category. That is due to the risk of arbitrage between the categories, and the possibility that some workers will lose rights by having their status downgraded into the third category. Cherry and Aloisi posit employee status as the default rule for most gig workers. The authors propose an exception for those working on a de minimis basis or those engaged in volunteerism for altruistic reasons

Demystifying flexibility, exposing the algorithmic boss : a note on the first Italian case classifying a (food-delivery) platform worker as an employee

Published online: June 2021In November 2020, the Palermo Tribunal—a court of first instance in the capital of the region of Sicily—reinstated a Glovo rider and reclassified him as a full-time, permanent employee, to be remunerated according to the collective bargaining agreement for the service sector, on the grounds that his autonomy was merely notional, since the platform could organize the execution of work and discipline noncompliance with rigorous instructions issued through the internal booking system. The judge ordered compensation for wage differentials and reimbursement for the unpaid time the worker spent waiting for orders

Platform work in the EU : lessons learned, legal developments and challenges ahead

Thematic Working Paper for Annual Conference of the European Centre of Expertise (ECE) in the field of labour law, employment and labour market policies 'Exploring ways to improve the working conditions of platform workers: The role of EU labour law'This paper is organised as follows. Aside from discussing the key lessons gleaned from previous studies on platform work, Section 2 briefly touches upon the trends and initiatives in policymaking in France and in Italy. Moreover, it presents and reviews the main outcomes of litigation at the domestic level, with a focus on the role played by algorithms. This section also assesses the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. After introducing the Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), Section 3 critically analyses two key achievements at the EU level, namely the Directive on transparent and predictable working conditions and the Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed. Section 4 assesses the elasticity of the triad of Directives regulating atypical employment. It is argued in this section that the narrow construction of the Directives’ personal scope of application represents an obstacle. An adaptive and purposive approach of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) could, however, result in the classification of platform workers as falling within the scope of the social acquis in some fields. Finally, Section 5 concludes by offering concrete proposals.This publication has received financial support from the European Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation "EaSI" (2014-2020). For further information please consult: http://ec.europa.eu/social/easi

Time to deliver? : assessing the action plan on the European pillar of social rights

The Action Plan on the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) and the Porto Social Summit have created a momentum for the enhancement of the social dimension of the European Union (EU), but, so far, without much to show by way of innovation. The EU should further expand the legislative agenda in the social and labour fields in order to address the risks of precariousness and degradation of working conditions faced by numerous workers in several sectors. The role of the EPSR and of the Social Scoreboard within the European Semester should also be significantly reinforced, so as to establish binding social safeguards supporting the betterment of working and living conditions. A highly crucial challenge for EU policymakers is to ensure that the recovery strategy and the digital and green transitions, beside contributing to job creation, also result in better social standards and good-quality professional opportunities

Crowdworker Economics in the Gig Economy

The nature of work is changing. As labor increasingly trends to casual work in the emerging gig economy, understanding the broader economic context is crucial to effective engage- ment with a contingent workforce. Crowdsourcing represents an early manifestation of this fluid, laisser-faire, on-demand workforce. This work analyzes the results of four large-scale surveys of US-based Amazon Mechanical Turk workers recorded over a six-year period, providing compa- rable measures to national statistics. Our results show that despite unemployment far higher than national levels, crowd- workers are seeing positive shifts in employment status and household income. Our most recent surveys indicate a trend away from full-time-equivalent crowdwork, coupled with a reduction in estimated poverty levels to below national figures. These trends are indicative of an increasingly flexible workforce, able to maximize their opportunities in a rapidly changing national labor market, which may have material impacts on existing models of crowdworker behavior.This work was supported by an EPSRC studentship and EPSRC grants EP/N010558/1 and EP/R004471/1

De-gigging the labour market? : an analysis of the ‘algorithmic management’ provisions in the proposed platform work directive

Published online: 21 July 2022Workers are increasingly being managed by technologies. Before spreading to larger segments of the labour market, algorithmic management systems were a signature feature of platform work. The exercise of power through digital labour platforms is one cause of the precarious working conditions in this area, an issue that could soon concern a wider group of workers in traditional economic sectors. This article elucidates the provisions regulating algorithmic management in the proposed EU Directive on improving working conditions in platform work, which tackles automated surveillance and automated decision-making practices. The proposed Directive mandates the disclosure of their adoption and sets out information and explanation rights regarding the categories of actions monitored and the parameters considered. Unlike rules concerning the presumption of employment status, the provisions on algorithmic management apply to all platform workers, including genuinely self-employed persons. Before offering a reasoned overview of the legal measures envisaged in the proposed text, this article grapples with the process leading to the proposed Directive in order to reveal the background and alternatives to the current formulation. It addresses the interplay between the text and other instruments regulating the deployment of technologies for managing workers. The steps intended to hold platforms to account are remarkable, but the regulatory technique could result in partially overlapping models, thereby increasing legal uncertainty and arbitrage

New Insights on the Role of Vitamin D in the Progression of Renal Damage

n/