At the close of the previous year, the Spanish presidency of the EU faced a key decision that would shape the bloc’s approach to digital platform work. Despite reaching a political agreement weeks earlier with the European Parliament, Madrid handed over to the Belgian presidency the task of advancing the directive aimed at regulating workers on digital platforms such as Glovo, Uber, and Deliveroo and ending the misclassification of workers as independent contractors. Spain encountered stiff resistance within the Council and faced a blocking minority that prevented the adoption of what was described as a European rider law. Nearly two months later, the Belgians are confronted with reality: a persistent blocking minority continues to derail the regulation.
Diplomatic sources confirmed that during a meeting of ambassadors held this Friday France voted against the proposal while Germany, Greece, and Estonia abstained. These abstentions created a blocking minority sufficient to block the first ever law of its kind, a development that makes swift approval unlikely. The Belgian presidency stated that the text has not secured a qualified majority. It is a major step forward yet the bloc now faces another round of negotiations to determine the next moves for this labor framework.
The aim of the regulation is to improve the working conditions of people who perform tasks on platforms such as Deliveroo or Glovo. The European Commission estimates that about 5.5 million of the roughly 30 million people active in platform work across the Union are misclassified as self-employed. The proposed directive would grant them rights including the minimum wage, limits on working hours, access to subsidies, and eligibility for pension benefits just like other workers. It would also introduce for the first time rules governing algorithmic management and the use of artificial intelligence in the workplace.
One observer notes that it is a very important text. An agreement reached in December balanced the more progressive stance of the European Parliament with the more conservative posture of the Council. It was expected to be difficult, yet not impossible. Now attention turns to what is feasible. European officials acknowledge that upcoming elections in June add a layer of complexity to moving the dossier forward in this parliamentary cycle. It could be possible to vote on it after the new Parliament is seated, but the outcome of the elections could change the composition and the level of support for the text.
Spain Urges Greater Ambition
Despite some discontent within the bloc over the degree of ambition in the December text, Spain was among the countries voting in favor of advancing the regulation this week. A Spanish delegation cited a sense of responsibility given that a broad majority of member states, European Parliament groups, and European trade unions support the provisional agreement. Even so, Madrid has expressed concern that several provisions in the agreed text do not fully reflect what they would expect from this directive.
Criticism focuses on the management of algorithmic processes. While the December pact incorporates algorithmic governance, the text presents a presumption of employment that is central to the directive but considered weak and not ambitious enough. Critics argue that there are no uniform criteria of employment status or a clear threshold to assess whether the platform exerts direction and control over the work. With such discretion left to national law, the concern is that a country could apply a tailored presumption that differs across member states, potentially failing to correctly classify millions of misclassified workers across the EU. In short, the current arrangement might not sufficiently address precarious work conditions.
The debate around the directive remains intense. The negotiating dynamics reflect a balancing act between protecting workers and allowing the flexibility that platform companies rely on. The path forward is uncertain as both the legislative calendar and political winds within member states will shape the outcome. It seems likely that a substantive push will be required to reconcile the differing positions before the dossier can advance to the next stage of adoption.