COLLECTIVE BARGAINING DIGITAL PLATFORMS – FUTURE REFORMS

Introduction

Digital labour platforms have transformed traditional industrial relations by connecting workers, customers and businesses through applications, websites and algorithmic systems. Platform workers may include delivery riders, drivers, freelancers, domestic-service workers and online platform workers. Traditional collective bargaining laws were primarily designed around a clearly identified employer, workplace and employee relationship. Digital platforms create difficulties because workers may be classified as independent contractors, while important employment decisions are increasingly made through algorithms.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) reports that collective bargaining and collective action are developing in the platform economy, but effective recognition of collective bargaining remains limited globally. Recent developments show that collective agreements can address wages, working time, algorithmic management, data protection and other platform-specific issues.

Therefore, future reforms should modernize collective bargaining systems without removing the flexibility and technological advantages associated with digital platforms.

Meaning of Collective Bargaining on Digital Platforms

Collective bargaining on digital platforms means negotiations between platform workers or their representatives and the platform company concerning terms and conditions of work.

These negotiations may cover:

Wages and minimum earnings;

Working hours and availability;

Incentive and bonus systems;

Algorithmic management;

Worker ratings;

Account suspension and deactivation;

Data collection and privacy;

Occupational safety;

Social-security benefits;

Dispute-resolution procedures;

Transparency of automated decisions; and

Human review of algorithmic decisions.

The ILO has specifically identified algorithmic transparency as an important issue because workers may not understand how automated systems affect work allocation, remuneration or access to employment.

Need for Future Reforms

1. Legal Recognition of Platform Workers

Future legislation should clearly determine when platform workers are employees, dependent contractors or genuinely independent businesses. Collective bargaining rights should not disappear merely because a platform labels workers as independent contractors.

The classification issue is particularly important because employment status determines access to collective bargaining and other labour protections.

2. Digital Trade Union Recognition

Traditional union structures should be adapted to digital work. Workers should be able to form or join unions through secure digital systems.

Future reforms may recognize:

Online union membership;

Digital union elections;

Electronic membership records;

Virtual collective meetings;

Digital bargaining notices; and

Secure communication between workers and representatives.

This would make collective organization more accessible to geographically dispersed platform workers.

3. Algorithmic Transparency

A major future reform should establish a statutory right of workers' representatives to obtain information concerning algorithms that materially affect employment.

Information may include:

Allocation rules;

Rating systems;

Pricing algorithms;

Performance metrics;

Deactivation criteria;

Automated disciplinary systems;

Worker-ranking systems; and

AI-based recruitment or termination systems.

Spain provides an important example. Its 2021 legislation gives workers' representatives a right to information about the parameters, rules and instructions underlying algorithms or AI systems that may affect working conditions, access to employment or continuation of employment.

4. Collective Bargaining Over Algorithms

Future collective agreements should expressly treat algorithms as a subject of bargaining.

A collective agreement could require:

Prior consultation before introducing a significant algorithm;

Impact assessments;

Periodic algorithmic audits;

Non-discrimination testing;

Explanation of significant automated decisions;

Human review of adverse decisions; and

Union participation in algorithm governance.

The Just Eat Spain collective agreement is an example of this approach. It requires information to employee representatives concerning algorithms or AI systems affecting working conditions, access to employment and job retention.

5. Creation of Joint Algorithm Committees

Future collective agreements may establish permanent Joint Algorithm Committees consisting of employer and worker representatives.

Such committees could examine:

Algorithmic bias;

Worker ratings;

Automated scheduling;

Pay calculations;

Deactivation decisions;

Data collection;

Surveillance systems; and

Changes to algorithmic management.

The ILO has documented the Spanish Just Eat arrangement in which an Algorithm Commission was created through collective bargaining to address algorithmic management and worker information.

6. Digital Collective Bargaining Procedures

Traditional face-to-face bargaining should be supplemented by digital procedures.

Future reforms could permit:

Electronic notices;

Virtual bargaining sessions;

Secure document exchange;

Electronic signatures;

Online voting;

Digital mediation;

Remote arbitration; and

Digital publication of collective agreements.

This can reduce geographical barriers and allow platform workers operating in different locations to participate collectively.

7. Protection Against Automated Deactivation

Platform workers may lose access to work through automated suspension or deactivation.

Future reforms should require:

Prior notice;

Reasons for deactivation;

Access to relevant evidence;

Opportunity to respond;

Human review;

Independent appeal; and

Temporary protection against arbitrary retaliation.

Deactivation should not be used to undermine legitimate trade-union activity or collective action.

8. Protection of the Right to Strike

Digital platforms create new forms of collective action. Future labour legislation should clarify how traditional strike rights apply to platform workers.

Protection should extend to lawful collective actions such as:

Coordinated refusal of work;

App-based protests;

Digital demonstrations;

Collective log-offs; and

Coordinated bargaining campaigns.

The legal framework should distinguish protected collective action from unlawful interference with property, customers or essential services.

9. Competition Law Reform

Independent platform workers may face competition-law restrictions when attempting to bargain collectively. Future reforms should create clear legal protection for collective negotiations by economically dependent workers where appropriate.

This is important because formal self-employment may otherwise prevent workers from exercising meaningful collective bargaining rights.

The ILO's recent research specifically identifies developments concerning collective bargaining by self-employed platform workers and competition regulation.

10. Cross-Border Collective Bargaining

Digital platforms frequently operate across national borders. A platform may control workers in one jurisdiction while its corporate headquarters are located elsewhere.

Future reforms should therefore encourage:

Cross-border union cooperation;

Regional collective agreements;

International information-sharing;

Cross-border dispute resolution; and

Common minimum standards.

International coordination is particularly important for multinational platforms.

Important Case Laws

1. Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5

The UK Supreme Court considered whether Uber drivers were "workers" for the purposes of UK employment legislation. The Court upheld the finding that the drivers were workers and considered the practical reality of Uber's relationship with its drivers rather than simply accepting the contractual description.

Importance: The case demonstrates why legal classification is fundamental to extending labour protections to digitally managed workers.

2. Deliveroo – Bologna Labour Court, 31 December 2020

The Bologna Labour Court considered Deliveroo's "Frank" reputational-ranking algorithm. The court found discriminatory effects because the system did not sufficiently distinguish between different reasons for workers' absence, including circumstances connected with collective action.

Importance: The case demonstrates that algorithmic management can affect fundamental labour rights and therefore may require collective oversight.

3. Foodora Platform Cases – Italy

Italian litigation concerning Foodora riders addressed the employment status and labour protections of platform workers. Eurofound records the 2018 Turin Tribunal proceedings concerning Foodora riders and subsequent developments.

Importance: These disputes demonstrate the continuing difficulty of applying traditional employment concepts to platform work.

4. Glovo Platform Cases – Spain

Spanish litigation concerning Glovo riders contributed to the broader development of rules concerning employment status and platform control. These developments eventually formed part of the regulatory framework recognizing the significance of algorithmic management in platform work.

Importance: The case-law developments illustrate why future collective bargaining rules should address both employment classification and algorithmic control.

5. Just Eat Spain Collective Agreement

Although a collective agreement rather than a judicial decision, the Just Eat agreement is an important modern industrial-relations development. It provides for information to worker representatives concerning algorithms and AI affecting working conditions and employment.

Importance: It demonstrates how collective bargaining can become a mechanism for regulating technological management.

6. Foodora – Swedish Collective Agreement

Eurofound records a collective agreement between Foodora and the Swedish Transport Workers' Union concluded in 2024.

Importance: The agreement demonstrates that traditional trade-union collective bargaining can be adapted to platform-based work.

Future Model of Digital Collective Bargaining

A modern legal framework could operate through the following model:

Platform Workers → Digital Union/Representative → Data & Algorithm Disclosure → Collective Negotiation → Joint Algorithm Review → Collective Agreement → Digital Dispute Resolution → Periodic Review

This model would combine traditional collective bargaining principles with technological governance.

Role of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence will increasingly affect recruitment, scheduling, performance evaluation, pay calculation and disciplinary decisions. Consequently, future collective bargaining should include an AI Bargaining Clause.

Such a clause may require:

Notification before material AI deployment;

Consultation with worker representatives;

Algorithmic impact assessment;

Non-discrimination testing;

Data-protection safeguards;

Explanation of important automated decisions;

Human oversight;

Periodic independent audits; and

Collective review of significant technological changes.

The ILO's 2025 research on social dialogue and AI reports examples of worker representatives influencing AI-related employment, algorithmic management and working-condition decisions across different regions.

Challenges of Future Reform

Future reforms may face several difficulties:

Worker classification: Different jurisdictions use different legal tests.

Technological complexity: Workers and unions may lack technical expertise.

Commercial confidentiality: Platforms may resist disclosure of algorithms.

Cross-border operations: One platform may operate under several legal systems.

Competition law: Collective action by self-employed workers may create legal uncertainty.

Rapid technological change: Legislation can become outdated quickly.

Data privacy: Transparency must be balanced against legitimate privacy and security interests.

Fragmented workforce: Platform workers may work independently and at different times.

Conclusion

Collective bargaining on digital platforms is likely to become an important part of future labour law. The principal reform should not simply transfer traditional workplace rules to digital applications; instead, collective bargaining must address the distinctive problems created by algorithms, automated decision-making, data surveillance, worker classification and platform-based organization.

Future legislation should recognize meaningful collective bargaining rights, facilitate digital unionization, protect collective action, establish algorithmic transparency, provide safeguards against automated deactivation and create mechanisms for worker participation in technological governance.

The developing international experience shows that collective agreements can already address algorithmic transparency, data protection, employment conditions and worker representation. The ILO's 2025 platform-economy review also notes that such developments remain geographically limited, making further legal and institutional development significant.

Thus, the future of collective bargaining in the digital platform economy lies in combining traditional labour rights with digital transparency, algorithmic accountability, technological participation and flexible collective institutions.