Sudden death of a takeaway rider: The platform needs to protect the rights and interests of practitioners in accordance with the principle of reciprocity

　　■ Column

　　my country's gig economy platform is developing rapidly, and safeguarding the rights and interests of relevant practitioners cannot wait any longer.

　　The sudden death of the takeaway rider draws attention again.

On December 21, 2020, Ele.me, the meal delivery rider Han Mouwei died suddenly while delivering the order.

After the incident, Ele.me told his family that Han Mouwei received orders through hummingbird crowdsourcing and had no labor relationship with the platform. He could only give 2,000 yuan "humanitarian compensation", which caused concern.

On January 8, 2021, Ele.me issued another announcement saying: Pay tribute to the deceased Blue Knight and raise the humanitarian fund to 600,000 yuan.

While this has aroused widespread sympathy, it has once again dragged the old topic of protecting the rights and interests of gig economy workers into the field of public opinion.

　　As an innovative economic model, the current platform economy, encouraged by various favorable policies, has been able to rapidly expand in scale, and is widely distributed in various industries, attracting hundreds of millions of jobs.

But in general, the employment quality of gig economy practitioners like Han Mouwei is not high, with unstable income, low level of security, and high mobility, and the accompanying social risks are also accumulating.

Especially when encountering rights disputes, the platform will inevitably be questioned.

　　However, the current leading ideas for solving rights issues may have some kind of path dependence, that is, it is hoped that by establishing the labor relationship between the platform and the workers, the platform enterprises are encouraged to assume the responsibility of the employer in the labor law.

In this incident, similar views reappeared.

　　But this kind of thinking, first of all, there is a wide range of legal arguments. The crowdsourced labor mode of freely taking orders through the Internet is significantly different from the subordinate labor adjusted by the traditional labor law, and this employment relationship must be included in the labor law. At present, it is impossible to reach consensus in theory and judicial practice.

At the same time, the establishment of labor relations is accompanied by huge labor security costs, which are always unwilling to bear for platform companies with millions or even tens of millions of employees.

　　Discussions are still going on, but the scale of the employment population on the platform is also increasing, and social risks are also increasing day by day. This includes not only the risks of work-related injuries, illnesses, and pensions encountered by front-line workers during the labor process, but also the reduction in their income. , Lack of protection, and the risk of becoming a disadvantaged group from unemployment.

Therefore, it is time to come up with institutional policies as soon as possible.

　　In July 2020, the State Council issued the "Opinions on Supporting Multi-channel Flexible Employment", which clarified the responsibilities of Internet platform companies in the protection of labor rights, and guided Internet platform companies, affiliated companies and laborers to negotiate labor compensation, rest and vacation , Occupational safety protection and other matters, guide industry (industry, local) trade unions to negotiate with industry associations or industry enterprise representatives to formulate industry norms such as industry labor quota standards, working hours standards, rewards and punishments.

This is a major change in governance thinking.

　　In this incident, the platform initially gave 2,000 yuan "humanitarian compensation" to the family of the deceased, which was unfair in terms of simple emotions and the delivery staff's contribution to the platform.

Under the pressure of public opinion, the platform greatly increased this amount to 600,000 yuan, which is not only a certain degree of comfort for family members who have lost their loved ones, but also a manifestation of the platform's fulfillment of social responsibility.

But we hope that this is all based on institutional guarantees.

To this end, taking this incident as an opportunity, I make three suggestions.

　　First of all, the government's attitude towards the platform has evolved from freedom to moderate regulation. The platform should also protect the rights of workers based on the principle of risk-return equivalence.

It should be noted that after years of rapid development, the field of platform economy has entered an oligopoly situation, and there is enough profit margin to bear this responsibility.

This is not only a political requirement to prevent and defuse major risks and ensure social stability, but also a feasible measure to implement the central government to strengthen anti-monopoly and prevent the disorderly expansion of capital.

　　Second, the responsibility of Internet platform companies in the protection of workers' rights and interests should be systematic.

There are a large number of labor dispatch companies attached to the platform companies. The labor relationship with clear facts should be strengthened and brought into the adjustment scope of the labor law.

As for the crowdsourcing type of platform employees, it is necessary to explore and establish a legal security system that matches their labor mode, especially a social security system that is not linked to the identification of labor relations.

Prior to this, Sichuan, Zhejiang and other places have tried relevant safeguard mechanisms, and may wish to learn from them.

　　Third, the establishment of an industry collective consultation system should also become a new direction for safeguarding the labor rights and interests of the platform for flexible employment.

Under this mechanism, labor rights matters are negotiated and formulated by industry organizations, and industry norms and labor standardization systems are formed.

This will not only form a mechanism for preventing and resolving contradictions at the source, but also will greatly change the unilateralism in labor relations, enhance mutual trust between platforms and workers, promote the formation of a joint construction, co-governance and sharing pattern through consultation and democracy, and achieve a breakthrough from the rule of law to good governance .

　　The "Annual Report on China's Sharing Economy Development (2018)" pointed out that in 2017, my country's gig economy platform had approximately 7.16 million employees, an increase of 1.31 million over 2016, and accounted for 9.7% of the newly added urban employment that year.

To this day, this number will be even greater.

How to protect the rights and interests of "Han Mowei" is becoming more and more urgent.

The above three points may be the direction of future problem solving, and I hope that they can provide a way for relevant parties to learn from.

　　□Wen Xiaoyi (Dean and Professor of the School of Labor Relations and Human Resources, China Institute of Labor Relations)