Policy Responses to New Forms of Work

Chapter 12. Data collection and coordination

This chapter describes efforts to build better evidence on new forms of work through data collection and through coordination with other countries and across ministries. Policymaking should be based on evidence rather than anecdotes, and where countries are facing similar issues, peer learning can contribute to better policies.

12.1. Improving data collection

A lack of information about the prevalence of new forms of work and the characteristics of the individuals engaged in it could hinder the development of adequate policy. While existing labour force surveys and household surveys already capture information on self-employment, fixed-term and part-time work, they may struggle to identify platform workers, flexible working arrangements (such as variable hours contracts), and the dependent self-employed.

The Finnish response to the questionnaire mentioned various efforts by the Working Life Unit of Statistics Finland to capture emerging forms of employment within their labour force survey. They reported that qualitative interviews among workers in different employment situations had proven to be particularly informative and beneficial for finding the correct measurement approach for new, not yet well-defined phenomena in the labour market (e.g. zero hours contracts; “combo-employment” in which work as employee and as self-employed is combined; platform work). They mentioned a need for more detail on how many individuals receive income from multiple sources.

Austria, Estonia and Belgium noted that they would implement the Eurostat Integrated European Social Statistics (IESS) Framework Regulation, adding questions (on topics such as multiple jobs, the number of clients of the self-employed and the determination of working time) into their core labour force surveys.

12.1.1. Platform work

Many countries reported initiatives to improve data collection in relation to platform work, through labour force and household surveys, as well as directly from platforms themselves.

The Canadian response mentioned that Statistics Canada had added questions to the labour force survey in 2016 as a one-time initiative to gather data on Canadians’ use of platforms offering accommodation and transportation services, and the share of Canadians who provided these services. Switzerland reported that a module of questions on platform work would be added to the Labour Force Survey in 2019.

In the United States, a special supplemental survey on contingent and alternative employment arrangements was conducted in May 2017 as part of the household Current Population Survey. This supplement provided updated information on these employment arrangements that were last collected in 2005. In addition, the supplement asked four new questions on electronically mediated employment, generally defined as short jobs or tasks that workers find through mobile apps that both connect them with customers and arrange payment for the tasks.

The French response said that the latest Family Budget Survey (2016-2017) included new questions on the sharing economy. It noted that the questions, which capture the purchase and sale of goods and services between individuals, would not allow direct measurement of the number of platform workers but could indicate trends in the use of platforms. Estonia and Sweden reported that questions about the use of sharing economy websites or apps for paid work had been added to ICT household surveys.

Some countries noted efforts to get data directly from platforms. The French Inspectorate General of Social Affairs (IGAS) indicated that they had requested access to data from platforms, but had been denied. France, Estonia and Belgium noted that transaction records submitted by platforms to tax authorities could be a useful data source, even if this was not their primary purpose.

12.1.2. Self-employment

A number of countries reported efforts to extract more detail on the nature of the working relationship between self-employed individuals and their clients.

Austria, Belgium, France, Portugal and Ireland mentioned that they had conducted the Eurostat Labour Force Survey module on self-employment in 2017, which included questions to capture the proportion of self-employed persons in situations of economic dependence according to several criteria (such as dependence on a main client, existence of a relationship with a third party, presence of an intermediary).

The Danish response mentioned that they had added different questions to the LFS in 2018 in order to capture dependent contractors. They then linked the data to administrative data to evaluate the effectiveness of the questions. They mentioned that they had also made an application to Eurostat for a grant to perform a similar exercise to capture the platform economy in the Survey on Income and Living Conditions (SILC).

France reported that a new question had been added to the Working Conditions Survey to indicate economic dependence of the self-employed, based on whether the worker decides on their rates or prices.

12.1.3. Flexible working and multi-jobbing

Belgium, Estonia, France and Ireland mentioned various attempts to better capture flexible working arrangements and multi-jobbing.

• Belgium reported some modifications to tax and social security data files including new codes to identify flexi-jobs, a type of secondary job with favourable tax treatment.

• Ireland and Estonia said that their 2019 labour force surveys would include the module on Work Organisation and Working Time Arrangements, which would look at issues like worker autonomy, worker flexibility and variable hours contracts.

• The French response noted the addition of questions on multi-jobbing to the Working Conditions Survey.

12.2. Encouraging coordination

Addressing the challenges associated with new forms of work often requires coordinated policy intervention across different areas. In some countries, there have been efforts to bring different parties together to discuss the potential issues and opportunities, and the best policy response. A number of countries mentioned their involvement in international policy discussions and research streams on new forms of work (as well as topics such as skills, digitalisation, the platform economy, job quality, the future of social dialogue, and the future of work) via the OECD and ILO. Many countries cited ongoing engagement with social partners via employment relations and social dialogue councils as being particularly important in relation to new forms of work, although few new initiatives were reported.

In 2017, the Danish government launched the Danish Disruption Council to seize opportunities, address challenges and adapt to new conditions linked to new technology and digitalisation. The council is chaired by the Danish Prime Minister and the council includes 8 ministers and 30 members representing businesses, social partners and experts. One of the themes addressed by the council has been the Danish flexicurity model in a contemporary context, and one of the main questions in this regard has been how to integrate platform workers into the labour market in terms of securing working conditions and proper classification. The Danish government was due to conclude on the work carried out by the Disruption Council and present a final report on the 7^th of February 2019, summing up the initiatives presented up to that date and presenting new policy.

In October 2017, the Danish government launched a strategy for the platform economy, and in May 2018, the government entered into a political agreement on better conditions for growth in the platform economy. The agreement includes establishing a council with the social partners and the industry, which will advise the Minister of Business on developments in the sharing and platform economy.

The Netherlands and Norway also described specialist committees or working groups set up to assess changes in the labour market linked to technology, including the emergence and growth of the platform economy.

• In 2018, the Dutch government set up an independent commission to review labour market regulation, in light of globalisation and technological changes. The main question for the commission will be whether expected developments in the labour market and in labour relations require changes in labour law, tax law and social protection.

• In Norway, the Sharing Economy Committee was appointed in 2016 by the government to evaluate opportunities and challenges presented by the sharing economy, with social partners.

The Korean and Japanese governments established expert working groups on the topic of workers in between employment and self-employment:

• The Korean government set up a taskforce composed of labour experts to design more concrete policies for non-regular workers, including dependent contractors.

• The Japanese government established an expert study group to analyse “Work Style Similar to Employment” in October 2017, and whether these arrangements should be considered merely business transactions between independent businesses or instead equivalent to relationships between an employer and employee. At the time of writing, the discussion was said to be continuing in the study group (since October 2018).

Ireland reported that the Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation, had established an ILO Interdepartmental Group and that issues around new forms of work were regularly discussed by that group. Australia and Canada also mentioned that they had formed cross-government working groups to better coordinate policy relating to the future of work (including new forms of work).