Towards Legal Regulation of Platform Work: Theory and Practice

Towards Legal Regulation of Platform Work: Theory and Practice

Authors Darcy du Toit, Sandra Fredman & Mark Graham

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Emeritus Professor and Coordinator, Labour Law 4.0 niche area, University of the Western Cape; Rhodes Professor of the Laws of the British Commonwealth and the USA, University of Oxford; Professor of Internet Geography, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 41 Issue 3, 2020, p. 1493 – 1523

Abstract

Digital platform work, while playing an increasingly important part in low- as well as high-income countries, is characterised by an absence of effective labour regulation. In particular, the norm is for workers to be classified as ‘independent contractors’, thus placing them beyond the ambit of labour legislation. The article, based on interactive research by the Fairwork project,2 examines ways of protecting workers’ basic rights in this environment. This is seen as part of the long-standing effort to include non-standard workers within the framework of labour legislation. However, the premise is that dedicated regulation rather than a simple extension of existing labour rights is required. The article starts by considering the category of dependent ‘workers’ who are deserving of such protection over and above ‘employees’, while excluding genuinely independent entrepreneurs. It then uses five standards of decent work developed by the Fairwork project (fair earnings, fair conditions, fair contracts, fair management and fair representation) as a basis for working out forms of regulation that would bring about the effective protection of workers’ rights. While reputational pressure exerted by Fairwork’s rating system provides a critical impetus for improvement, it is argued that binding legal rules are needed to prevent exploitation by platforms that reject voluntary compliance. It concludes by considering the practical prospects of implementing legislative reform, and the importance of generating the political will to do so on the part of policy-makers, with reference to the precedent of the enactment of labour legislation during the first and second industrial revolutions.

Albinism in the South African Workplace: A Labour Law Perspective

Albinism in the South African Workplace: A Labour Law Perspective

Author L Fourie

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer in the Department of Mercantile Law, University of the Free State, LLB LLM PDFP (UFS) PhD Candidate (Leiden University)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 41 Issue 3, 2020, p. 1524 – 1546

Abstract

Persons living with albinism represent one of society’s most defenceless groups. An estimated one in 5 000 Africans living south of the Sahara are affected by albinism. Persons with albinism experience a lack of melanin, resulting in physical impairments, including poor vision and skin cancers. These disorders set the scene for such people to be subjected to different treatment on the basis of their racial affiliation, colour, and disability — thus requiring that they receive special protection against unfair discrimination. The South African Constitution provides for a right to equality and prohibits the unequal treatment of persons on the basis of their race, colour and disability. This constitutional right is promoted within the labour market by way of the Employment Equity Act, which aims to achieve fair treatment by eliminating unfair discrimination in employment. A vital measure against discrimination that can be executed to achieve equality in the workplace is the reasonable accommodation duty of employers. This duty constitutes one of the affirmative action measures designed to redress disadvantages in employment experienced by designated groups (identified as black people, women and people with disabilities). While the duty to reasonably accommodate is thus legally recognised, no enforceable legal instrument elaborates on the meaning and scope thereof. Furthermore, the law in respect of applying affirmative action measures is silent on how colour and disability should be understood. Bearing in mind that persons affected by albinism will experience difficulties in demonstrating that they fall within the black or disabled category in order to share the benefits of the designated groups, their entitlement to reasonable accommodation will also be restricted. This article aims to illustrate to what degree South African law currently fails to protect persons with albinism in the workplace and in what way it should be amended in order to serve their needs.

The Right Not To Be Discriminated Against in Employment in Kenya

The Right Not To Be Discriminated Against in Employment in Kenya

Author Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of the Western Cape
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 41 Issue 3, 2020, p. 1547 – 1567

Abstract

Section 5(3)(a) of the 2007 Kenyan Employment Act prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on specified grounds. Likewise, article 27(4) of the 2010 Constitution also prohibits discrimination on certain grounds some of which are not included in the Employment Act. Jurisprudence dealing with discrimination matters from the Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC) (formerly known as the Industrial Court) indicates the extent to which the court has protected employees’ right to freedom from discrimination. There are cases, however, in which the ELRC has reached debatable conclusions, for example, by holding that the list of grounds under s 5 of the Act is exhaustive. There are also cases in which employees have alleged discrimination by employers where the court has placed more emphasis on the Constitution as opposed to the Employment Act. The author analyses these cases by focusing on the following issues: the definition of discrimination; prohibited grounds of discrimination; permissible discrimination; burden of proof and standard of proof when an employee alleges discrimination; and employers’ accountability for discrimination. Where necessary, the author suggests ways in which the ELRC can better approach the issue of discrimination.

Note: Section 189(1) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995: Irrational, Unreasonable or Neither? Association of Mineworkers & Construction Union & others v Royal Bafokeng Platinum Ltd & others (2020) 41 ILJ 555 (CC)

Note: Section 189(1) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995: Irrational, Unreasonable or Neither Association of Mineworkers & Construction Union & others v Royal Bafokeng Platinum Ltd & others (2020) 41 ILJ 555 (CC)

Author Rochelle le Roux

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor, Department of Commercial Law, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 41 Issue 3, 2020, p. 1568 – 1587

Abstract

None