MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033757614

Self-employment and quasi self-employment: a challenge for labour law

2015· article· en· W7033757614 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRealmLabour lawOrder (exchange)PhenomenonWork (physics)DeclarationAction (physics)Labor relationsIndependent contractor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the years the (Dutch) labour market has witnessed a growing number of workers outside the realm of the employment contract. At the end of the past century the number of (in Dutch) ‘self-employed without personnel’ (a.k.a. independent contractor, a.k.a. sole trader) was around one in seventeen of all workers. Nowadays the estimation is one in ten and labour market analysts predict that the peak of this development has not yet been reached. A majority of them is truly self-employed, for others the qualification ‘would-be self-employed’ or ‘quasi employee’ is more fitting. This phenomenon is not exclusively Dutch. Many EU member states as well as Canada and the US have witnessed the influx of workers operating under the flag of independent contracting in many areas of the labour market. This development raises several questions. The first one is that of differentiation. Suppose one wants to approach ‘dependent’ self-employed workers as well as their ‘customers’ with labour law regulations, how does one separate them from the group that can be considered truly independent? Or is this the wrong order and should one begin with a declaration of the basic protection one feels desirable for all workers for whom the qualification ‘real entrepreneur’ is not fitting? A more fundamental question, should one want to do that, is whether labour law is still able to regulate labour relations which we feel should be regulated. This question has become even more pressing with the entry of what is referred to as 'labour on demand'. In promos this work type is sometimes depicted as win-win situation. For instance the website crowdwork.com sells its product to potential workers with slogans like ‘create your own schedule and work when you want, where you want’. And: ‘Learn new skills while doing work for some of the largest companies in the world’. And under the heading ‘Contribute’: "Your work will be in the lights of hundreds of websites including Staples, Overstock, Walmart and ThredUp." Now, who would not want that? As far as we are concerned the problem lies in the qualification ‘product’ or ‘commodity. Is labour becoming just that once again? In this paper we approach the topic from a Dutch (or EU) perspective, but the questions are, we believe, universal. We begin with some data about the influx on the labour market of self-employment and its subcategory independent contracting (section 2). After that (section 3) we turn to the European legal context of independent contracting. In section 4 we discuss the issue at hand by looking at the entry on the (Dutch) labour market of two ‘new’ or better, unorthodox forms of self-employment. We conclude with some observations about the effects of this development for labour law and social policy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam)Same topicDigital Economy and Work TransformationFrench-language works237,207