IE Repository | Browsing by Author "Aloisi, Antonio"

Browsing by Author "Aloisi, Antonio"

Now showing 1 - 20 of 42

A Critical Examination of a Third Employment Category for On- Demand Work (In Comparative Perspective)
(Cambridge University Press, 2018-11-18) Cherry, Miriam; Aloisi, Antonio; Davidson, Nestor M.; Finck, Michele; Infranca, John J.; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
During the past fi ve years there have been a number of lawsuits in the United States as well as in Europe challenging the employment classifi cation of workers in the gig economy. Classification of a worker as an employee is an important “gateway” to determine who receives the protections of the labor and employment laws, including the right to organize, minimum wage, and unemployment compensation, as well as other obligations such as tax treatment. In response to both litigation and widespread confusion about how gig workers should be classifi ed, some commentators have proposed a “third” or “hybrid” category, situated between the categories of “employee” and “independent contractor.” Proponents often note that creating a third category would be a novel innovation, appropriately crafted and tailored for an era of digital platform work. However, as we have noted in a previous article, such an intermediate category of worker is actually not new. In this chapter we will provide snapshot summaries of fi ve legal systems that have experimented with implementing a legal tool similar to a third category to cover non- standard workers: in Canada, Italy, Spain, Germany, and South Korea. These various legal systems have had diverse results. There has been success in some instances, and misadventure in others. We believe that examining these experiences closely will help to avoid potential problems that are beginning to surface in discussions about the third category and the gig economy. This chapter largely will forgo the background on how platforms operate or the description of the tasks workers do, instead focusing on the classification problem.
A Solution in Search of a Problem? Collective Rights and the Antitrust Labour Exemption in Italy
(Cambridge University Press, 2022-05) Aloisi, Antonio; Gramano, Elena; Paul, Sanjukta; McCrystal, Shae; McGaughey, Ewan; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
This chapter investigates potential conflicts arising in the Italian legal framework between collective labour rights and the application of competition law to the constellation of personal labour relations that escape binary taxonomies. Its overarching goal is to understand whether and to what extent concerted wage-fixing practices are granted a special immunity. Historical evidence suggests that collective agreements covering the kaleidoscopic group of non-standard workers have never been targeted by the Italian competition authority. We situate the examination of labour antitrust exemption in the broader picture of the adequacy of the current mechanisms of “collective self-regulation” for self-employed workers. This chapter illustrates the Constitutional framework and case law developments on whether self-employed workers fall within the personal scope of collective rights. It also argues that several provisions corroborate that the Italian lawmaker often entrusts social partners in regulating specific aspects of the relationship of certain categories of self-employed workers. The chapter also presents a selection of collective agreements for non-standard workers, and then discusses how long-established trade unions have included non-standard workers in their membership through multiple, not necessarily successful, attempts. Finally, it presents practical hurdles that make it difficult to build impactful solidarity amongst non-standard workers.
“A Worker is a Worker is a Worker” Collective Bargaining and Platform Work, the Case of Deliveroo Couriers
(SSRN, 2019) Aloisi, Antonio; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
The focus of this commentary is the compatibility of Section 296(1)(b) of the 1992 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A) with Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), insofar as it excludes workers who do not provide their service personally from being represented by a union on the negotiation of pay and terms and conditions of work. The case shows how the domestic term worker may be equivocal and its interpretation seems at odds with various international standards, including the ILO’s instruments. This confusion raises the question of whether steps should be taken to “bring domestic law into alignment [with European law] in the interests of legal certainty.”
Actividades esenciales, trabajo a distancia y vigilancia digital. Estrategias para hacer frente al panóptico de la pandemia de COVID-19
(Wiley, 2022-06-02) Aloisi, Antonio; European Union's Horizon 2020; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
La expansión de la vigilancia digital a raíz de la COVID-19 ha reconfigurado las relaciones de poder en los entornos profesionales. Aquí se analiza críticamente la interacción entre esa vigilancia intrusiva y la ampliación de las prerrogativas empresariales en el lugar de trabajo físico y digital. Con la supervisión excesiva como denominador común de las actividades «esenciales» y «distanciables», se estudian los inconvenientes para ambas categorías de trabajadores durante la pandemia (y después). Se evalúa la idoneidad del marco jurídico de la Unión Europea para abordar la gestión basada en datos. El diálogo social, el empoderamiento de los trabajadores y la alfabetización digital se consideran formas eficaces de promover la flexibilidad, el bienestar y la competitividad.
Activités essentielles, télétravail et surveillance numérique: l'effet panoptique de la pandémie
(Wiley, 2022-06-07) Aloisi, Antonio; De Stefano, Valerio; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
Avec la pandémie, les pratiques de surveillance numérique ont explosé sur les lieux de travail physiques et virtuels, modifiant les rapports de force professionnels, au profit de l'employeur. Tant les travailleurs essentiels que les télétravailleurs ont fait les frais de cette évolution, qui risque de survivre à la crise. Dans ce contexte, les auteurs s'interrogent sur l'adéquation du cadre juridique européen sur la protection des données. Pour eux, le dialogue social, l'autonomisation des travailleurs et la maîtrise des techniques numériques figurent parmi les moyens à mobiliser pour améliorer la protection des travailleurs tout en promouvant la flexibilité, le bien-être et la compétitivité.
Algoritmos e inteligencia artificial en el entorno laboral
(Tirant Lo Blanch, 2024-01-25) Aloisi, Antonio; Montero Pascual, José Manuel; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
El presente libro forma parte del Curso de Derecho digital, conjunto de tres tomos que, en forma de manual, proporciona una introducción sencilla pero rigurosa a las transformaciones que la digitalización está generando en nuestro Derecho. A este tomo de introducción se suma un segundo sobre la regulación de los servicios digitales, y un tercero sobre protección de datos
An unfinished task? Matching the Platform Work Directive with the EU and international "social acquis"
(2023) Aloisi, Antonio; Rainone, Silvia; Countouris, Nicola; European Union’s Erasmus+; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
Besides straining international, regional and national employment status classification models, digital labour platforms are pioneering new strategies and approaches in terms of algorithmic management, digital surveillance, remote work and cross-border outsourcing, which are increasingly being adopted in more conventional sectors of the economy. Developments in the platform economy are thus crucial in providing a stress test for the resilience of existing labour standards, as well as providing useful input in terms of the reforms needed to ensure their suitability, the collective interest representation and mobilization aspects comprehended by rapidly changing labour markets. This paper seeks to explore the key emerging regulatory dimensions of platform work. It contextualizes the challenges associated with platform work as an expression of the consolidated features that, in the past decades, have been transforming the labour market: non-standardization and the deregulation of employment relationships. Following that, it considers the definition of the personal scope of application as a key challenge faced by essentially all attempts to regulate platform work. It does so primarily by exploring the functions and operations of a legal device known as “presumption of employment”, currently being considered by the proposed EU directive on platform work as a key tool to address the complex employment status classification questions that have surrounded the “gig economy” since its emergence. The paper then provides a conceptual cartography of the various EU regulatory instruments (both existing ones and those currently in the legislative pipeline) that will, jointly, define the legal mosaic of labour rights applicable to the heterogeneous phenomenon of platform work in the years to come.
Artificial intelligence is watching you at work: digital suveillance, employee monitoring, and regulatory issues in the EU context.
(University of Illinois Press, 2019) Aloisi, Antonio; Gramano, Elena; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
By affecting activities in both traditional and modern industries, countless invasive devices constitute a burgeoning terrain for new forms of monitoring assisted by artificial intelligence and algorithms; these range from badges to tablets, from wearables to exoskeletons, from collaborative software to virtual personal assistant, from computer networks to face recognition systems. From a legal perspective, these tools constantly collect, produce, share and combine data that may be used by the employer for all the many different reasons, thus leading to a “genetic variation” of the organizational, monitoring and disciplinary prerogative, considered as the core of the employment contract. When it comes to recruiting, managing, and vetting the workforce, AI applications can be considered as an effective combination of big data analytics and algorithmic governance. Only recently, have international, European and domestic institutions started considering how to update existing regulation in order to face these complex and far-reaching challenges. This article assesses the effects of AI application on the employment relationship, with a view to understanding how social and legal institutions act, react or adapt to a potential experience of unprecedented digital surveillance in the workplace, entrenching command-and-control relationships between management and workers. The paper is organized as follows. After describing the new arenas of workplace surveillance, we provide a comprehensive conceptualization of AI application. Section 2 explores the latest generation of digital devices, understood in their broadest definition encompassing both physical supports as well as intangible tools. In many cases, AI prevents accidents caused by human error or reduce the hazard (or even the burden) of routine and menial activities. On the other hand, these software and devices create an effective, invasive and elusive system of watchfulness increasing conformity and promoting docility. Section 3 describes how the EU has set the tone globally in the regulation of privacy and data protection. In particular, we scrutinize the new GDPR thoroughly. One concern on its effectiveness revolves around the limits on the automated decision-making processes (Art. 22). Section 4 describes how some European civil law systems deal with the regulation of surveillance of workers. The cases of France, Germany and Italy are analyzed by stressing the common elements and loopholes. Section 5 assesses some conclusions by verifying whether the current regulations are suitable to cope with the adoption of AI at work.
Automation, Augmentation, Autonomy: Labour Regulation and the Digital Transformation of Managerial Prerogatives
(Bloomsbury, 2022-11-29) Aloisi, Antonio; Gyulavári, Tamás; Menegatti, Emanuele; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
This chapter is written within the framework of the ‘Boss Ex Machina’ project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 893888. I am extremely grateful to Valerio De Stefano, Nastazja Potocka-Sionek, Silvia Rainone, the editors of this volume and my colleagues at IE University Law School for participating in an enriching discussion and providing invaluable feedback. Technologies together represent a constitutive component of modern societies, which is why their multifarious impacts have long been at the centre of scholarly and popular discourses. Understandably, their emergence has prompted both rosy expectations and justified anxieties. In addition to permeating almost all aspects of human life, digital advances are significantly altering workplace interactions and reshaping industrial processes. The world of work is arguably one of many areas in which the influence of new technology is increasingly tangible. Over the last few years, workers in all sectors have witnessed the frantic acceleration of the digital transformation, which has been further exacerbated (if not validated) by the Covid-19 pandemic necessitating the reorganisation of production methods while contributing to the widespread adoption of digital solutions intended to enable business continuity, facilitate remote working arrangements and keep people safe. Both during the most severe phases of the Covid-19 lockdowns and after the related restrictions were relaxed, the penetration of digital applications continued to reach astonishing peaks, corroborating their role as ‘privatised utilities’ for workers, employers and public institutions alike. Yet, the relevance of digital automation was prominent well before the pandemic struck. This exogenous event could, therefore, serve as a litmus test of the soundness of theories concerning human substitution, expanded managerial powers, skill displacement and efficiency enhancement....
Between risk mitigation and labour rights enforcement: Assessing the transatlantic race to govern AI-driven decision-making through a comparative lens
(SAGE Publications Ltd, 2023) De Stefano, Valerio; Aloisi, Antonio; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
In this article, we provide an overview of efforts to regulate the various phases of the artificial intelligence (AI) life cycle. In doing so, we examine whether—and, if so, to what extent—highly fragmented legal frameworks are able to provide safeguards capable of preventing the dangers that stem from AI- and algorithm-driven organisational practices. We critically analyse related developments at the European Union (EU) level, namely the General Data Protection Regulation, the draft AI Regulation, and the proposal for a Directive on improving working conditions in platform work. We also consider bills and regulations proposed or adopted in the United States and Canada via a transatlantic comparative approach, underlining analogies and variations between EU and North American attitudes towards the risk assessment and management of AI systems. We aim to answer the following questions: Is the widely adopted risk-based approach fit for purpose? Is it consistent with the actual enforcement of fundamental rights at work, such as privacy, human dignity, equality and collective rights? To answer these questions, in section 2 we unpack the various, often ambiguous, facets of the notion(s) of ‘risk’—that is, the common denominator with the EU and North American legal instruments. Here, we determine that a scalable, decentralised framework is not appropriate for ensuring the enforcement of constitutional labour-related rights. In addition to presenting the key provisions of existing schemes in the EU and North America, in section 3 we disentangle the consistencies and tensions between the frameworks that regulate AI and constrain how it must be handled in specific contexts, such as work environments and platform-orchestrated arrangements. Paradoxically, the frenzied race to regulate AI-driven decision-making could exacerbate the current legal uncertainty and pave the way for regulatory arbitrage. Such a scenario would slow technological innovation and egregiously undermine labour rights. Thus, in section 4 we advocate for the adoption of a dedicated legal instrument at the supranational level to govern technologies that manage people in workplaces. Given the high stakes involved, we conclude by stressing the salience of a multi-stakeholder AI governance framework.
Boss ex machina: employer powers in workplaces governed by algorithms and artificial intelligence
(Giappichelli, 2023-04-13) Aloisi, Antonio; lo Faro, Antonio; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
Is the existing legal framework suitable for “algorithmic bosses”? What if technology ends up disrupting the traditional limits of the legitimate managerial powers? The overarching goal of this paper is to determine whether digital automation has resulted in the augmentation of the organisational, control and disciplinary prerogatives of employers, managers and supervisors. Prior to validating the hypothesis of the magnification of powers, which gives rise to what we call boss ex machina, it is worth examining the spectacular extravagance of the contract of employment. If viewed through the lens of power, the employment relationship is structurally ambivalent because it both enables a condition of employer supremacy and tones it down through mandatory provisions, process-based restraints and collectively negotiated counterweights. This entire system of “controlling factors” is currently experiencing sustained stress. Using plain language, this paper is structured into four sections. Section 2 reflects on the apparent aims of the employment relationship by disentangling the meaning of the dominant position held by employers. Building on this, Section 3 catalogues the most widespread technologies currently invading the workplace and argues that, despite their heterogenous usages, the common denominator is the possibility of capturing and elaborating information that can be used to support managers in making executive decisions. Section 4 establishes the perils of the augmentation of managerial prerogatives through the adoption of automated decision-making. Taking a multidimensional approach, it also introduces remedies from data protection and non-discrimination law that could be read in conjunction with employment legislation to tame these rampant algorithmic bosses. Section 5 wraps up the chapter and offers some concluding remarks.
Commoditized Workers. Case Study Research on Labour Law Issues Arising from a Set of 'On-Demand/Gig Economy' Platforms
(University of Illinois Press, 2015-08-14) Aloisi, Antonio; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
In the framework of the so-called “sharing economy”, the number of on-demand companies matching labour supply and demand is on the rise. These schemes may enlarge opportunities for people willing to find a job or to top up their salaries. Despite the upsides of creating new peer marketplaces, these platforms may also be used to circumvent employment regulation, by operating informally in traditionally regulated markets. Literature showed how, by 2009, over 2 million worker accounts had been generated within these frameworks. Productivity may be fostered but, at the same time, a new version of Taylorism is disseminated (i.e. the fragmentation of labour into hyper-temporary jobs – they call them microtasks – on a virtual assembly line), strengthened by globalisation and computerisation. All these intermediaries recruit freelance or casual workers (these continue to be independent contractors even though many indicators seem to reveal a disguised employment relationship). Uncertainty and insecurity are the price for extreme flexibility. A noteworthy volume of business risk is shifted to workers, and potential costs as benefits or unemployment insurance are avoided. Minimum wages are often far from being reached. This paper will present a case study analysis of several “on-demand work” platforms, starting from the Amazon Mechanical Turk, one of the first schemes founded in 2005, which is arguably “employing humans-as-a-service”. It splits a single service in several micro “Human Intelligence Tasks” (such as tagging photographs, writing short descriptions, transcribing podcasts, processing raw data); “Turkers/Providers” (workers) are selected by “Requesters” to rapidly accomplish assignments online, are then rated according to an internal system and are finally paid (also in gaming credits) only if delivery is accepted. After having signed up and worked within some platforms, I comment upon TaskRabbit (thousands people on the service who bid to do simple manual tasks), Handy and Wonolo (personal assistance at a local level), oDesk and Freelancer (online staffing), Uber and Lyft (peer-to-peer ridesharing), Airbnb (hosting service), InnoCentive (engineering solutions), Axiom (legal research or service), BitWine (consultancy). Finally I highlight downsides and upsides of work in these platforms by studying terms of service or participation agreements to which both parties have to agree. I look into several key features such as (i) means of exchange/commodities, (ii) systems of payment, (iii) demographics, (iv) legal issues concerning status and statutory protection of workers, indicators of subordination, treatment of sickness, benefits and overtime, potential dispute resolution, and deprived “moral valence of work” and I discuss potential strategies to address these issues.
COVID-19 and the Accelerated Shift to Technology-Enabled Work from Home
(IE University, 2022) Marcus, J. Scott; Petropoulos, Georgios; Aloisi, Antonio; European Commission; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
People have been working remotely from many locations for many years, but the growth in work from home has historically tended to be slow in both the USA and the EU. Most of those who worked from home did so for only a portion, often a small portion, of their working hours. COVID-19 has given a huge impetus to working from home for those jobs that can be performed from home. Work from home can be a driver of sustainability in the context of the green and digital transition. Data on productivity effects of this shift does not offer a compelling view on whether there have been gains or losses, given the multifaceted set of elements that need to be considered and contrasted. However, many workers appreciate and benefit from the flexibility that work from home provides. At the same time, this shift has significant implications for many aspects of our lives, and it raises a number of possible concerns that may need to be addressed by public policy. There is a risk that some groups (women, young workers and those who are less technically capable of using digital technology) may suffer from decline in wages and loss of opportunities for promotion and training. There are some indications of mental health issues due in part to the inability to separate work from private life, increased work hours, and the need to deal with children who are at home, but it is difficult to disentangle aspects that are caused by work from home in general from those that are primarily related to the pandemic. By adopting a comparative approach, this research note explores these aspects and the main differences between the USA and the EU. It concludes by highlighting the key implications for public policy in terms of work-life balance, gender gaps, skill acquisition, modernisation of workflows, technology adoption, managerial culture and flexibility enhancement.
De-gigging the labour market?An analysis of the 'algorithmic management' provisions in the proposed Platform Work Directive
(IE University, 2022-07-21) Aloisi, Antonio; Potocka Sionek, Nastazja ; Aloisi, Antonio; European Commission; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
Workers are increasingly being managed by technologies. Before spreading to larger segments of the labour market, algorithmic management systems were a signature feature of platform work. The exercise of power through digital labour platforms is one cause of the precarious working conditions in this area, an issue that could soon concern a wider groupof workers in traditional economic sectors.This article elucidates the provisions regulating algorithmic management in the proposed EU Directive on improvingworking conditions in platform work, which tackles automated surveillance and automated decision-making practices. The proposed Directive mandates the disclosure of their adoption and sets out information and explanation rights regarding the categories ofactions monitored and the parameters considered. Unlike rules concerning the presumption of employment status, the provisions on algorithmic management apply to all platform workers, including genuinely self-employed persons.Before offering a reasoned overview of the legal measures envisaged in the proposed text, this article grapples with the process leading to the proposed Directive in order to reveal the background and alternatives to the current formulation. It addresses the interplay between the textand other instruments regulating the deployment of technologies for managing workers.The steps intended to hold platforms to account are remarkable, but the regulatory technique could result in partially overlapping models, thereby increasing legal uncertainty and arbitrage.
Dé-Uberiser Le Marché Du Travail? Une Analyse Des Dispositions Relatives À La Gestion Algorithmique Prévues Dans La Proposition De Directive Européenne Sur Le Travail Via Une Plateforme
(Larcier, 2025) Aloisi, Antonio; Potocka Sionek, Nastazja ; Daugareilh, Isabelle; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
[No abstract available]
Demystifying flexibility, exposing the algorithmic boss: a note on the first italian case classifying A (Food-delivery) Platform worker as an employee
(IE University, 2021-03-22) Aloisi, Antonio; European Commission; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
In November 2020, the Palermo Tribunal reinstated a Glovo rider and reclassified him as a full-time, permanent employee, to be remunerated according to the applicable sectoral collective bargaining agreement (for the service sector), on the grounds that his autonomy was merely notional, since the platform could organize the execution of work and discipline noncompliance with rigorous instructions issued through the internal booking system. The judge ordered compensation for wage differentials and reimbursement for the unpaid time the worker spent waiting for orders. This dispatch is organized as follows. After a brief introduction, Section II describes the main facts underlying the legal dispute, as presented by the claimant and ascertained by the judge. Section III is aimed at disentangling the judge’s multi-layered reasoning. It covers four main topics: (i) the legal nature of the service rendered by the platform, (ii) the complementary techniques for classifying working relationships, (iii) the emergence of an adaptable notion of subordination, and (iv) the pervasive role played by management by algorithms. Section IV summarizes the key elements of the ruling and discusses its weaknesses.
¿Des-plataformizando el mercado de trabajo? Un análisis de las disposiciones sobre “gestión algorítmica” de la propuesta de Directiva de la UE sobre el trabajo en plataformas
(Revista jurídica de trabajo, 2022-12) Aloisi, Antonio; Potocka Sionek, Nastazja; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
Los trabajadores están siendo gestionados por las tecnologías de manera creciente. Antes de extenderse a segmentos más grandes del mercado laboral, los sistemas de gestión algorítmica eran una característica distintiva del trabajo en plataformas. El ejercicio del poder a través de plataformas laborales digitales es una de las causas de las precarias condiciones de trabajo en este ámbito, una cuestión que pronto podría afectar a un grupo más amplio de trabajadores de los sectores económicos tradicionales. Este artículo aclara las disposiciones que regulan la gestión algorítmica en la propuesta de Directiva de la UE sobre la mejora de las condiciones de trabajo en las plataformas, que aborda la vigilancia automatizada y las prácticas automatizadas de toma de decisiones. La Directiva propuesta exige la divulgación de su adopción y establece derechos de información y explicación en relación con las categorías de acciones supervisadas y los parámetros considerados. Las disposiciones sobre gestión algorítmica se aplican a todos los trabajadores de plataformas, incluidos los trabajadores verdaderamente autónomos. Antes de ofrecer una visión general razonada de las medidas jurídicas previstas en el texto propuesto, este artículo aborda el proceso que condujo a la propuesta de Directiva con el fin de revelar los antecedentes y las alternativas a la formulación actual. Aborda la interacción entre el texto y otros instrumentos que regulan el despliegue de tecnologías para la gestión de los trabajadores. Los pasos destinados a hacer que las plataformas rindan cuentas son notables, pero la técnica regulatoria podría dar lugar a modelos parcialmente superpuestos, aumentando así la inseguridad jurídica y la arbitrariedad.
Deus ex Machina Boss: Managerial Powers in Workplaces Governed by Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence
(Nomos, 2023) Aloisi, Antonio; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
Is the existing legal framework capable of responding to the phenomenon of so-called "algorithmic bosses"? What will happen if technology ultimately disrupts the traditional boundaries of managerial powers that are, in principle, considered lawful? This study aims to examine the extent to which digital automation has led to the expansion of the organizational, supervisory, and disciplinary privileges already available to employers and managerial staff. Using plain language, the study is structured into four sections. Section 2 explores the purposes of the employment relationship and clarifies the notion of the authoritative position held by employers. Section 3 presents the most prevalent artificial intelligence and algorithmic technologies currently entering the workplace; it is argued in this section that, despite their diverse applications, a common denominator lies in their capacity to record and process information that may be used to support managerial staff in making executive decisions. Section 4 identifies the risks that arise when managerial privileges are expanded through the adoption of automated decision-making, as mandatory legal provisions, procedural safeguards, and compensatory mechanisms stemming from collective bargaining are subject to continuous pressure. Adopting a multidimensional approach, this section proposes remedial measures derived from data protection law and anti-discrimination regulations, which—when combined with labor law—could serve to rein in the power of algorithmic bosses. Section 5 offers some concluding observations.
Essential jobs, remote work and digital surveillance: Addressing the COVID-19 pandemic panopticon
(Wiley, 2021-06-19) Aloisi, Antonio; De Stefano, Valerio; European Union's Horizon 2020; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
An unprecedented COVID-19-induced explosion in digital surveillance has reconfigured power relationships in professional settings. This article critically concentrates on the interplay between technology-enabled intrusive monitoring and the augmentation of managerial prerogatives in physical and digital workplaces. It identifies excessive supervision as the common denominator of “essential” and “remotable” activities, besides discussing the various drawbacks faced by the two categories of workers during (and after) the pandemic. It also assesses the adequacy of the current European Union legal framework in addressing the expansion of data-driven management. Social dialogue, workers' empowerment and digital literacy are identified as effective ways to promote organizational flexibility, well-being and competitiveness.
Festina Lente': The ILO and EU Agendas on the Digital Transformation of Work
(IE University, 2020-12-01) Potocka Sionek, Nastazja ; Aloisi, Antonio; European Commission; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75
This article compares the International Labour Organization (ILO) and European Union (EU) agendas concerning the digital transformation of work, and addresses possible policy gaps and their implications for international and EU labour law. It critically reviews the current social acquis of both institutions and concentrates on the key analogies between the ILO’s Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work and some of the various regulatory initiatives taken by EU institutions in the context of the Pillar of Social Rights. The article finds that, despite the often articulated calls for urgent and original measures, both institutions’ programs present largely a prudent continuation of traditional narratives, failing to strengthen the adequacy of existing labour regulation regimes. Besides their predominantly non-binding nature, the efficacy of the most future-oriented instruments is profoundly undermined by the unreasonable exclusion of those workers who bear most of the brunt of social disparities accelerated by digitization and casualization of work. Also, the implementation of these initiatives may be jeopardized by complex governance methods and never soothed tensions between conflicting approaches and objectives. The study concludes that, although positive signs are emerging in the supranational legal order, much remains to be done to address the multifarious challenges brought about by the digital transformation.

Browsing by Author "Aloisi, Antonio"

Results Per Page

Sort Options