Regulating the New Self-Employed in the Uber Economy: What Role for EU Competition Law?

Daskalova, Victoria Ivanova

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3075197

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…31). This stance was applauded by some as it enforced the principles of solidarity and labour protection (Ankersmit, 2015), and criticised by the others for establishing a vague test of little or no use for new forms of work (Daskalova, 2017;Pennings 2015). Advocate General Wahl went a step further and, drawing parallels with American solutions which provide an explicit antitrust exception for labour unions, suggested that the Albany exemption should be extended to collective agreements concluded by trade unions representing both employees and self-employed persons, to avoid the risk of 'social dumping' (where, without an agreement, workers could be replaced by self-employed persons at lower cost) (Opinion of Advocate General Wahl, 2014, paras.…”

Section: Białostockie Studia Prawniczementioning

confidence: 99%

Collective agreements on working conditions of solo self-employed persons: perspective of EU competition law

Jurkowska-Gomułka,

Piszcz,

Pais

2024

Białostockie Studia Prawnicze

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2022 Guidelines of the European Commission on the application of EU competition law to collective agreements regarding the working conditions of solo self-employed persons apparently introduced a fresh approach towards collective agreements in a gig economy era. The main aim of this paper is to discuss whether the 2022 Guidelines are an appropriate tool to address the problems of solo self-employed persons (i.e. persons who are not in a formal employment relationship and who rely primarily on their own personal labour to provide services) from the perspective of EU competition law. To this end, we first present key competition problems related to collective agreements (section 1). Second, we analyse the regulatory framework for exemptions from competition law, with a view for a potential exemption relevant for collective agreements, as well as an approach to collective agreements in EU case law (sections 2 and 3). Third, the background for adopting the Guidelines, and their goals, is analysed (sections 4 and 5). Fourth, the Guidelines are discussed in more detail in sections 6 and 7 from the perspective of exemptions from Art. 101(1) TFEU. Finally, we examine the relationship between the Guidelines and a proposal for a platform work directive. The article attempts to verify the hypothesis that the Guidelines may be considered a pseudo-development.

show abstract

Section: Białostockie Studia Prawniczementioning

confidence: 99%