IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eurjou/v30y2024i2p201-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Platform work meets flexicurity: A comparison between Danish and Dutch social partners’ responses to the question of platform workers’ contract classification

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo Marenco

Abstract

In the broader discussion on how to organize protection in the future of work, social partners sought to tackle the question of whether on-location platform workers are employees or freelancers. Extant literature investigating responses to platform work concentrates on institutions as main explanatory factor. While this provides valuable insights, it overlooks actors’ creativity and motivation as factors that allow to break away with existing constraints. This paper tackles such a shortcoming by developing a theoretical angle that looks at how uncertain actors actively shape institutions through learning processes. Using a qualitative methodology, it compares Danish and Dutch social partners’ responses to the question of platform workers’ contract classification. It finds that Danish social partners agreed on the need to shelter the centrality of collective bargaining for labour market regulation, while their Dutch functional equivalent stressed the urgency to re-think the way flexibility and protection are linked. Positions of Dutch social partners were considerably more polarized than in the Danish case. This work contributes to the i) scholarship on social partners and non-standard work in contemporary capitalist economies and ii) understanding of how the relationship between protection and flexibility is being re-defined in view of the future of work.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Marenco, 2024. "Platform work meets flexicurity: A comparison between Danish and Dutch social partners’ responses to the question of platform workers’ contract classification," European Journal of Industrial Relations, , vol. 30(2), pages 201-220, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:eurjou:v:30:y:2024:i:2:p:201-220
    DOI: 10.1177/09596801231223175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09596801231223175
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09596801231223175?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:eurjou:v:30:y:2024:i:2:p:201-220. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.