1、 XResolution of labour disputes involving new forms of employment in ChinaAuthors/Kun Huang,Yuxiang Sun September/2024ILO Working Paper 126Copyright International Labour Organization 2024This is an open access work distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License(https:/c

2、reativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).Users can reuse,share,adapt and build upon the original work,as detailed in the License.The ILO must be clearly credited as the own-er of the original work.The use of the emblem of the ILO is not permitted in connection with users work.Attribution The work must b

3、e cited as follows:Huang,K.,Sun,Y.Resolution of labour disputes involving new forms of employment in China.ILO Working Paper 126.Geneva:International Labour Office,2024.Translations In case of a translation of this work,the following disclaimer must be added along with the attribution:This translati

4、on was not created by the International Labour Organization(ILO)and should not be considered an official ILO translation.The ILO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation.Adaptations In case of an adaptation of this work,the following disclaimer must be added along with the

5、attribution:This is an adaptation of an original work by the International Labour Organization(ILO).Responsibility for the views and opinions expressed in the adaptation rests solely with the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by the ILO.This CC license does not apply to non-IL

6、O copyright materials included in this publication.If the material is attributed to a third party,the user of such material is solely responsible for clearing the rights with the right holder.Any dispute arising under this license that cannot be settled amicably shall be referred to arbitra-tion in

7、accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law(UNCITRAL).The parties shall be bound by any arbitration award rendered as a result of such arbitration as the final adjudication of such a dispute.All queries on rights and licensing should be addressed

8、 to the ILO Publishing Unit(Rights and Licensing),1211 Geneva 22,Switzerland,or by email to rightsilo.org.ISBN 9789220410639(print),ISBN 9789220410646(web PDF),ISBN 9789220410653(epub),ISBN 9789220410660(mobi),ISBN 9789220410677(html).ISSN 2708-3438(print),ISSN 2708-3446(digital)https:/doi.org/10.54

9、394/PGNW1160 The designations employed in ILO publications,which are in conformity with United Nations practice,and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the ILO concerning the legal status of any country,area or territory or of its

10、 authorities,or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers.The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles,studies and other contributions rests solely with their authors,and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the ILO of the opinions expressed in them.Reference to names

11、 of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their en-dorsement by the ILO,and any failure to mention a particular firm,commercial product or pro-cess is not a sign of disapproval.Information on ILO publications and digital products can be found at:www.ilo.org/research-and-publicat

12、ionsILO Working Papers summarize the results of ILO research in progress,and seek to stimulate discussion of a range of issues related to the world of work.Comments on this ILO Working Paper are welcome and can be sent to liqingyiilo.org.Authorization for publication:Chang-Hee Lee,Director of ILO Be

13、ijing OfficeILO Working Papers can be found at:www.ilo.org/global/publications/working-papersSuggested citation:Huang,K.,Sun,Y.2024.Resolution of labour disputes involving new forms of employment in China,ILO Working Paper 126(Geneva,ILO).https:/doi.org/10.54394/PGNW116001 ILO Working Paper 126Abstr

14、actBased on the study of arbitration and judicial cases involving new forms of employment,this working paper identifies and examines notable characteristics of disputes involving new forms of employment.This working paper found that the number of such disputes is not large com-pared to the total num

15、ber of labour disputes in China but is growing and mainly involving in-stant delivery sector.The claims concentrated on compensation for work-related injuries along with recognition of an employment relationship.Employers are difficult to identify due to mul-tiple outsourcing and digital evidence wh

16、ich are more prevalent than in other labour disputes.Combining an analysis of a number of actual cases and interviews with labour dispute arbitra-tors,the paper also found that the“reference basis”for judgments in these disputes is the Notice on the Recognition of Employment Relationships(issued by

17、the former Ministry of Labour and Social Security,Document No.laoshefa 2005 12,hereafter referred to as the Notice 12).Furthermore,the key consideration when determining the existence of employment relation-ships centres around ascertaining the actual reality of subordination,while algorithms,instan

18、t messaging tools and the use of labour intermediaries constitute a new type of labour manage-ment practices(or new set of tools)of platform companies in China.This report analyses some typical“methods”used by some platform companies to avoid employment relationships and the corresponding efforts to

19、“reveal”the reality of employment relationships in the course of examin-ing and determining the disputes.Examining and unearthing inconsistencies between the“em-ployment facts”and the semblance of the contract or agreement,as well as the existence of ef-fective management running through layers of s

20、ubcontracting and false self-employment,were the central tasks of labour dispute resolution practitioners in most of the disputes.The problem of evidence in the handling of cases involving new forms of employment is also discussed.The report examines the problems that may arise in the implementation

21、 of the Guiding Opinion on Protecting the Labour Rights and Interests of Workers in New Forms of Employment.It also ex-plores possible measures to respond effectively to the difficulties and challenges and presents suggestions regarding dispute resolution procedures,judgment rules for classifying th

22、e employ-ment status of the worker,and rules for the distribution of burden of proof.About the authorsKun Huang is the Director of the Research Office of Labour Disputes of the Chinese Academy of Labor and Social Security(CALSS).She is an Associate Professor with a doctorate in Economic Law.She has

23、nearly 20 years of research experience in the areas of labour relations and labour law and has led more than 15 policy-oriented research programme on topics that include ear-ly-stage intervention and prevention of labour conflicts,capacity building of labour inspector-ates,atypical employment,flexib

24、le working hours,enforcement and interpretation of labour contract law,legislation of basic labour standards,responsible labour practices in global supply chain,good practices of collective negotiation in China and other relevant issues.She has pub-lished extensively,including China Labour Law(as co

25、-author with Wang Quanxing),a national teaching material for law schools.02 ILO Working Paper 126Sun Yuxiang is the Deputy Director and Associate Researcher of the Research Office of Labour Disputes of the CALSS.Her current research focuses primarily on labour dispute mediation and arbitration,labou

26、r relations in private enterprises,and labour clauses in free trade agreements.03 ILO Working Paper 126Abstract 01About the authors 01Acronyms 07 X 1 Research background 08Research questions 08Research contents and methods 09 X 2 Trend and features of labour disputes in new forms of employment 11Fea

27、tures of disputes involving platform work 11The cases represents a small proportion of all kinds of disputes 11Increasing number of cases 12Growing convergence on dispute issues 13Most cases occur in the takeaway delivery sector 14Identifying the real employer:the veiled presence of platform compani

28、es 15Handling cases of labour disputes involving new forms of employment 16 X 3 The legal basis for assessing employment status in cases involving new forms of employment 18Document No.12 as an effective legal basis for assessing employment status 18The legal status and main contents of Document No.

29、12 18Different views on the applicability of Document No.12 19Dispute settlement proceedings:assessing employment status on the basis of the recogni-tion of a subordination relationship 22Elements of new types of labour management 24Control through algorithms 24Offline cooperating entities 26Instant

30、 messaging tools:A vital component of the work process 27The typical patterns of disguised employment relationships and related dispute proceedings 28Using contracts other than employment contracts:Inconsistency between the facts of employ-ment and the contract 28Multiple layers of“subcontracting”an

31、d the extensive networks of“cooperating”companies:Who is the employer and responsible for what?30False self-employment 33Table of contents04 ILO Working Paper 126 X 4 Evidence for the resolution of labour disputes in new forms of employment 35 X 5 Possible impacts of the implementation of the Guidin

32、g Opinion 37The legal effect of the Guiding Opinion and its limitations 37The main contents of the Guiding Opinion 38The positive implications of the Guiding Opinion on employment practice 38The impact of the Guiding Opinion of disputes involving new forms of employment 39Reaffirmation of rights and

33、 interests may trigger an increase in rights disputes 39The definition of not fully conforming to the situation of establishing an employment rela-tionship and the criteria for establishment of employment facts are not clear.40Lacking clarity on remedies for the rights of workers working in arrangem

34、ents not fully con-forming to the situation of establishing an employment relationship 41 X 6 Suggestions 44Making mediation and arbitration accessible for labour disputes of all types of work 44Primacy of facts:the central principle in assessing employment status 45Setting rules for burden of proof

35、 allocation 47Annex 1:Labour dispute between Tang Ruiting and Beijing Yisheng Health Technology Co.,Ltd.49Annex 2:Interview outline 54References 55Acknowledgement 5705 ILO Working Paper 126List of TablesTable 1.Claims requiring determination of the existence of an employment relationship ac-counted

36、for about 50 per cent of all cases involving new forms of employment 13Table 2.Main contents of Document No.12 1906 ILO Working Paper 126List of BoxesBox 1:Specific requirements for the settlement of disputes and mediation and arbitration in province-level documents implementing the Guiding Opinion

37、43Box 2：Suggestions emerging from studies 4807 ILO Working Paper 126AcronymsAB5California Assembly Bill 5G u i d i n g OpinionGuiding Opinion on Protecting the Labour Rights and Interests of Workers in New Forms of EmploymentILOInternational Labour OrganizationMOHRSSMinistry of Human Resources and S

38、ocial Security of ChinaSAMRState Administration for Market Regulation of ChinaNotice 12The Notice on the Recognition of Employment Relationships(issued by the former Ministry of Labour and Social Security of China,MOHRSS Document No.12,2005)08 ILO Working Paper 126 X1 Research background Research qu

39、estions The rapid development of the platform economy in recent years has created a new wave of em-ployment opportunities,leading to a dramatic increase in the number of workers engaging in platform economy.Such workers include on-demand delivery workers,ride-hailing car drivers,truck drivers for lo

40、gistics companies and internet marketers all of whom rely on internet plat-forms for employment.In China,they are classified as New Forms of Employment.The definition of“New Forms of Employment”comes from the interpretation of the Three New Economies by the National Bureau of Statistics,which refers

41、 to the new links,new chains and new forms of activities derived from existing industries and fields relying on technological innovation and application in response to varied,diversified and personalized product or service needs.The“Three New Economies”are characterized by:internet-based business ac

42、tivities;innovation of business processes,service modes or product forms;and more flexible and efficient personal-ized services(NBS,2023).New forms of employment have given rise to new problems in the provision of labour protection with regard to the labour rights,interests and social security conce

43、rns of workers.These“prob-lems”have been brought to light by an increasing incidence of labour disputes involving plat-form workers.Dispute cases related to platform workers are proving to be challenging for the existent dispute resolution and judicial practices.The need for clear guidance in the ha

44、ndling of such cases has become increasingly urgent something that requires in-depth and extensive research and the formulation of relevant policy documents.In July 2021,the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security(MOHRSS)and eight other related competent authorities jointly issued the Guidin

45、g Opinion on Safeguarding the Labour and Social Security Rights and Interests of Workers engaged in New Forms of Employment(hereafter referred to as the Guiding Opinion).This“document”addresses the question of workers in new forms of employment linked to in-ternet platforms.The Guiding Opinion reque

46、sts that the“courts at all levels and labour dispute mediation and arbitration institutions should strengthen guidance on the handling of labour disputes,coordinate work with each other,determine the relationship between enterprises and workers according to the facts of employment,and handle cases o

47、f labour rights and interests of workers employed in new forms in accordance with the law and regulations”.The dispute resolution institutions,not to mention the platform-based enterprises and workers,responded to the Guiding Opinion with great interest.In particular,the reference in the Guiding Opi

48、nion to workers who“do not fully conform”with the situation of establishing an employment relationship became the focus of attention.It emerged that the questions regarding the crite-ria for recognizing such workers and how“rights”and“protection”would be extended to them that is,what the criteria wo

49、uld consist of and what the accompanying“rights relief channels”would be are all in need of further study and clarification.In this context,the research objectives of this study are to:understand the basic situation of arbitration and judicial cases related to new forms of em-ployment in China in re

50、cent years;summarize the methods employed by the competent authorities in-handling such cases;09 ILO Working Paper 126 identify changes in the cases after the release of the Guiding Opinion and the corresponding measures taken by the competent authorities;examine the inadequacies of substantive law

51、and procedural law in the existing legal framework in dealing with labour disputes regarding new forms of employment,as well as the challenges to the existing system in dealing with labour disputes involving new forms of employment;explore and develop suggestions regarding the measures to determine

52、the existence of an employment relationship in new forms of employment and to effectively protect workers rights and interests from the perspective of the procedures and practices of labour dispute resolution;and propose recommendations on how to regulate new forms of employment and respond to the n

53、ew challenges through improved regulatory framework and policies.Research contents and methodsBased on the above research objectives,this study examines the practice of handling labour disputes arising from new forms of employment,the methods adopted by the various labour dispute resolution institut

54、ions for handling these disputes,including but not limited to the cri-teria for determining the existence of an employment relationship and recognizing subordina-tion,the division of burden of proof,and the allocation of responsibility to the platforms and af-filiated companies.Key to this analysis

55、was the examination of judicial or arbitration decisions,supplemented by interviews with front-line dispute resolution practitioners and a review of the relevant laws and jurisprudence.The labour dispute cases involving new forms of employment in this study are mainly confined to those groups of wor

56、kers(or forms of employment)identified in the Guiding Opinion,that is,on-demand delivery workers(excluding general couriers),ride-hailing car drivers,truck drivers and internet marketers,who all rely on an internet platform for employment.The research methods of this study were based mainly on case

57、studies,supplemented by a lit-erature review,interviews and field research.In terms of case studies,typical arbitration and ju-dicial cases involving new forms of employment were selected,particularly in regard to on-de-mand delivery work and car-hailing services.Arbitration cases were mainly drawn

58、from cases identified or published by local arbitration councils;and litigation cases were mainly selected from the China Judgments Online website1.Structured interviews were conducted with 37 arbitrators and focused on two areas of concern.One was learning about the overall situation of cases perta

59、ining to new forms of employment,including the number of labour disputes,the type of employment,the difference from traditional labour dispute cases,the methods of establishing employment relationships,and the criteria and suggestions for judicial decisions regarding the cases.The other section inve

60、stigates the specific concepts and approaches that arbitrators have considered,formulated,and experimented with during their work in resolving certain cases.The interview outline is included in the annexes.For the literature review,this study examined the relevant theories on the determination of em

61、-ployment relationships,relevant cases in some countries or regions,the criteria used for the 1Since 2014,the Supreme Peoples Court has maintained a website China Judgments Online(中國裁判文書網，https:/ publish the effective judgment instruments of the peoples courts at all levels.10 ILO Working Paper 126d

62、etermination of employment relationships in judicial deliberation,and existing research find-ings of judicial cases involving new forms of employment in China.11 ILO Working Paper 126 X2 Trend and features of labour disputes in new forms of employment Disputes involving new forms of employment can,a

63、t first,be distinguished by the institution that has been invoked into action.Some cases are lodged directly with or accepted directly by the court of first instance(mostly at the“district”level)as ordinary civil cases.Such cases are usually framed as civil contract disputes and/or tort disputes.Oth

64、er cases are lodged with the“labour dispute settlement”bodies,namely“labour arbitration commissions”.These cases are framed as“labour dispute cases”,where labour dispute settlement procedures are applied.Such cases are usually requests for confirmation of the existence of an employment relationship,

65、the recovery of labour remuneration and overtime pay,and the claim for occupational injury insur-ance benefits or compensation.The following analysis examines both of these“types”of disputes arising from new forms of employment.This study examines a range of cases that are available from the open ju

66、dgment documents of courts at all levels.The two different types of institutions examine cases on the basis of existing procedures as,at present,there are no special provisions on the procedures for handling disputes related to new forms of employment.Civil disputes in new forms of employment are su

67、bject to two final trials,while“labour disputes”those that are lodged with the labour arbitration commissions in new types of employment are subject to one arbitration and two trials.2 There are no differences in handling procedures between labour dispute cases related to new forms of employment and

68、 ordinary labour dispute cases,and between civil dispute cases related to new forms of employ-ment and ordinary civil dispute cases.Features of disputes involving platform work Dispute cases that arise from platform work are characterized by the following features:The cases represents a small propor

69、tion of all kinds of disputes China has a large number of workers engaged in new forms of employment.The estimate for the total number ranges from 50 million to 84 million,depending on the source.Work in the platform economy has been a subject of wide and extensive discussion in the news media and a

70、cademic research.However,according to the research and interviews,the actual number of la-bour dispute cases arising from new forms of employment that is,those brought to the atten-tion of arbitration and courts is not large,accounting for a small proportion of the total num-ber of labour dispute ca

71、ses.Furthermore,the frequency of disputes within the“cohort”of new forms of employment is relatively low compared with that among“ordinary”workers.Within the current statistical system and in terms of the availability of data(as well as the current system 2The whole labour dispute resolution system

72、is composed of non-compulsory mediation and compulsory arbitration and if the appli-cants and/or defendants are not satisfied with the verdict issued by the labour arbitration committee,they may appeal to a grass-roots level court within the time limit prescribed by law except for some kinds of case

73、s that may be terminated in arbitration and will be accepted as civil cases in a trial system following a two-hearing approach.12 ILO Working Paper 126of documentation),it is difficult to obtain precise information on the total number and types of cases arising from new forms of employment.In terms

74、of litigation,from 2018 to 2020,preliminary statistics show that Beijing,Shanghai,and Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces closed more than 2,000 cases of civil disputes related to new forms of employment,involving takeout delivery and express delivery,at the courts of first instance.The number of close

75、d cases has been increasing annually,with disputes concentrat-ed in two major categories:infringement disputes and labour disputes(71 per cent and 29 per cent respectively).3 4 However,compared to the total number of labour dispute cases during the same period,this accounts for only a very small per

76、centage.In 2020,1.09 million labour dispute cases were accepted by labour dispute arbitration committees at all levels across the country（MOHRSS,2020）and 440,000 labour disputes were received by the peoples courts of first in-stance(Supreme Court of China,n.d.).The statistical picture is confirmed b

77、y direct practitioners,as most of the arbitrators interviewed for this study report that they have only handled one or two cases involving new forms of employment.5Increasing number of casesThe number of disputes involving new forms of employment shows a clearly increasing trend:such cases began to

78、appear in 2013 and gradually increased after 2016.Both in China and inter-nationally,new cases began to appear around 2013.The worlds first labour dispute case against platform employment was a formal lawsuit filed by a California ride-hailing driver against Uber in the California District Court in

79、August 2013,involving six claims,including Ubers theft of drivers income and misclassification of drivers as independent contract workers(Tu Wei,2021).There has been a steady increase in litigation regarding the classification of the working arrangements of platform labour around the world over the

80、past few years(ILO,2021).As of September 2021,there were 15 administrative decisions and 175 judgments issued by European countries on the classification of platforms workers.In China,the first labour dispute case of gig workers generally refers to the case of Mr.Sun and seven other persons suing th

81、e Good Chef platform.6 This case was accepted by the Beijing Chaoyang District Labour and Personnel Dispute Arbitration Commission in 2015.However,earlier in the second half of 2013,there were already a small number of labour dispute cases between driv-ers and platform companies,such as Zhuang Yansh

82、eng v.Beijing Yixin Yixing Automobile Technology Development Service;7 Wang Zheshuan v.Beijing Yixin Yixing Automobile Technology Development Service;8 Sun Youliang v.Beijing Yixin Yixing Automobile Technology Development Service.9103Research Group of Beijing No.1 Intermediate Peoples Court,“關于維護新就業

83、形態勞動者勞動保障權益的實施意見”.人民司法 2022,No.7.4Cases of infringement disputes accounted for about 71 per cent and labour dispute cases about 29 per cent.Most of the former are compensation disputes caused by traffic accidents of takeaway and express delivery vehicles,while the latter are mainly cases re-quiring

84、confirmation of an employment relationship,recovery of labour remuneration and overtime pay,and claims for industrial injury insurance benefits.5Due to the lack of a unified definition of new forms of employment,the national level number of civil court cases and arbitration cas-es related to new for

85、ms of employment was still not available at the time of finalizing this report.6See 7人訴“好廚師”非法解雇獲賠.7京石勞仲字（2013）第1520號裁決書；一審民事判決書（2013）石民初字第7471號；二審民事判決書（2014）一中民終字第6355號.8京石勞仲字（2013）第1691號裁決書；一審民事判決書（2014）石民初字第00367號；二審民事判決書（2015）一中民終字第01359號.9 Applicants of both these cases were designated drivers,

86、and in the litigation procedure,both judgments of the first instance and the second instance rejected the claims for the recognition of an employment relationship and the related remedies for non-conclusion of a written employment contract and severance payment.10京石勞仲字（2014）第712號裁決書；一審民事判決書（2014）石民初

87、字第8170號；二審民事判決書（2015）一中民終字第176號.13 ILO Working Paper 126Since 2017,the number of related cases in China has increased.Taking the second-level courts in Qingdao as an example,the number of takeaway and online car-hailing cases before 2016 was zero,while there were 16 such cases in 2016,34 in 2017 and

88、 44 in 2018.Although the pro-portion of labour disputes in new forms of employment is still small,it is evident that the num-ber of cases has been increasing.11Growing convergence on dispute issues Disputes involving new forms of employment are predominantly over claims for compensation for work-rel

89、ated injuries,requiring recognition or determination of an employment relationship.In addition to the most common claims,disputes involving other claims and issues have also started to increase.The determination(or recognition)of the existence of an employment relationship has always been the core“c

90、laim”in disputes arising from new forms of employment;moreover,this ques-tion has been the central challenge for the dispute resolution procedures and practitioners.Data show that this core claim accounts for more than half of the total claims involving new forms of employment(see Table 1 below).Int

91、erviews with practitioners reveal the challenge posed by this issue,with about 60 per cent of the arbitrators interviewed reporting that the claims they have handled called for a“preliminary”review to determine the existence of an employment relation-ship between the parties in the disputes.X Table

92、1.Claims requiring determination of the existence of an employment relationship accounted for about 50 per cent of all cases involving new forms of employmentSourceSpecific dataBeijing Chaoyang Peoples Court:Internet Platform Labour Dispute Trial White Paper(April 2018)From 2015 to April 2018,the Ch

93、aoyang Peoples Court accepted a total of 188 cases relevant to platform employment.Among these cases,115,or 61.2 per cent,were directly filed by parties seeking recognition(confirmation)of the existence of an employment relationship,and 171 cases were terminated,including 144 cases,accounting for 84

94、.2 per cent,where the existence of an employment relationship was recognized.Of the 105 related cases that were finally settled by judgment,in 37.1 per cent of the cases,it was confirmed that direct employment relationships were established or did exist between the platform and the worker.Press conf

95、erence on new forms of employment or-ganized by Beijing Third Intermediate Peoples CourtThe nature of the legal relationship between employing enterprises and employees often becomes the core focus of disputes and constitutes the central question in the trials and dif-ficulties in the deliberation.T

96、he cases in which the workers request confirmation of an em-ployment relationship are the most numerous,accounting for more than half of all disputes involving new forms of employment.White Paper on Trial of Disputes regarding New Forms of Employment in QingdaoIn regard to the claims of workers enga

97、ged in traditional employment arrangements,the request for confirmation of the existence of an employment relationship accounted for 3.77 per cent of the total number of cases,while 60.31 per cent of the claims arising from new forms of employment required determination of an employment relationship

98、.11Qingdao Intermediate Peoples Court,青島新業態用工糾紛審判白皮書,2019.14 ILO Working Paper 126Claims for the determination of an employment relationship usually do not come as“stand-alone”disputes.Rather,they are the precondition for the main cause of the claims,such as recogni-tion of work-related injuries aft

99、er a traffic accident.12 For example,the“plaintiffs”in several early cases related to e-designated driving were all injured in traffic accidents.In the past two years,significant changes in the main claims have begun to emerge:from“recognition of an employ-ment relationship+work-related injuries”to“

100、recognition of an employment relationship+other substantial claims”(such as labour remuneration and compensation,and so forth).Some of the common claims found in“ordinary employment”disputes have also begun to emerge in new forms of employment.As with traditional employment,workers bring complaints

101、related to the“failure of the employer to sign an employment contract”or the“failure to contribute to social insurance”to arbitration,following their dismissal(which leads to these“discoveries”).The frequency and complexity of claims in arbitration cases are on the rise.Numerous cases now encompass

102、multiple claims,often three or more,which can include demands for double the standard wage rate(for weekend work),back pay of wages,economic compensation,mon-etary reimbursement for untaken paid annual leave,and indemnities due to inadequate social security contributions,among others.Most cases occu

103、r in the takeaway delivery sectorThe prevalence of labour disputes related to emerging employment models is notably focused,predominantly involving sectors such as ride-hailing services,takeaway delivery,intra-city cou-rier services,and live streaming.Among these,disputes involving takeaway delivery

104、 personnel are the most common,eliciting extensive discourse.13 While the number of car-hailing platforms and the quantity of workers engaged in their service is larger,according to the Guiding Opinion on Protecting the Labour Rights and Interests of Workers in New Forms of Employment,noted in the S

105、tate Councils Regular Policy Briefing,14 the number of food delivery workers has reached 7.7 million:4.7 million workers work under Meituan,where more than 1 million workers are ac-tive on a daily basis;ele.me delivery service has a pool of more than 2 million workers.According to the statistics of

106、the online car-hailing regulatory information exchange platform,as of 31 May 2022,a total of 274 online car-hailing platforms across the country have obtained a business li-cense.The top ten platforms in terms of order volume include Ruqi,Xiangdao,T3,Xiehua,Shouqi,Cao Cao,Meituan,Wanshun,Didi and Hu

107、axiaozhu.A total of 4.392 million driving licenses have been issued for ride-hailing drivers.In the 12 months ending 31 March 2023,Didi had 19 mil-lion annual active drivers in China,according to the annual business and social responsibility re-port released by Didis official website.The number of d

108、ispute cases involving car-hailing is sig-nificantly smaller than that involving takeaway delivery.Although Didi has the largest share in Chinas ride-hailing industry,there are only about ten labour dispute lawsuits involving the Didi platform,and there has not been a single case in which a Didi dri

109、ver has been recognized as an 12In filing for arbitration or a civil court hearing,more than half of the cases make specific claim regarding the existence of an employ-ment relationship(see Table 1),while in some cases the question of the determination of the existence of an employment relation-ship

110、 arises as the arbitration/court begins to examine the claim,for example in the labour dispute between Tang Ruiting and Beijing Yisheng Health Technology Co.,Ltd.13The report issued by the Beijing Zhicheng Migrant Workers Legal Aid and Research Center collected and analyzed 1,907 cases where the jud

111、gment contained a conclusion on the issue of the existence of an employment relationship for delivery workers covering the period from April 2016 to June 2021.14See https:/ 15 ILO Working Paper 126employee by the court.15 Other leading ride-hailing platforms such as Shouqi,Cao Cao and T3 have all ex

112、perienced ride-hailing disputes and lawsuits,while their numbers exceeding those in-volving Didi.For example,there are about 50 labour dispute litigation cases involving T3 Travel.Further analysis of the reasons why the number of cases involving ride-hailing drivers is signifi-cantly lower than that

113、 of takeaway delivery workers,and the number of cases related to Didi is lower than that of other ride-hailing platforms,may present interesting insights for regulatory development.Platform-based ride-hailing services are characterized by more rigorous supervi-sion by industry authorities;the platfo

114、rms are more disposed to adopt initiatives to assume re-sponsibility and pay compensation;and the platforms(in particular Didi)are more open to sign-ing agreements with the drivers directly.Their business model relies less on services from third parties due to industry-specific constraints,which dif

115、ferentiates them notably in their sector.Another distinguishing characteristic is the variation in road accident rates and severity,along with disparate safety regulations between ride-hailing and takeaway delivery services.These unique factors in the platform ride-hailing industry could form a cruc

116、ial foundation for devising robust and effective regulatory measures to govern platform employment and safeguard the rights and interests of platform workers.Identifying the real employer:the veiled presence of platform companiesAs in conventional labour dispute cases,most of the cases involving new

117、 forms of employment are brought by workers as claimants.However,in terms of the respondents,many entities are implicated in the cases involving new forms of employment,and the legal relationship among the supposed respondents is complicated.Besides the platform companies,respondents also include st

118、affing agencies or other human resources service providers,agents,franchisees,con-tractors and other companies involved in the employment of a worker supposedly working un-der the name of the platform.Some cases may also involve Fin-tech companies,insurance com-panies and direct management personnel

119、 such as the head of the distribution site.For example,the respondents in case HD116 include a logistics company,a staffing agency,a technology com-pany and a Fin-tech company.In case HD8,workers were actually employed by an individual to transport shared bicycles.The types of specific respondents i

120、dentified in workers claims are also changing.In the ear-ly days,most cases identified the platform company as the respondent of the claims,seek-ing to secure confirmation that they were the employer party in an employment relationship.Recently,workers claims target specific other business entities

121、within the complex business arrangements that prop up the service provided by the platform company.As such,workers claims seek to confirm an employment relationship with one or some of the“intermediary”entities,such as service providers to the platform company or other enterprises involved in 15This

122、 may stem from the fact that the regulatory framework for ride-hailing platforms makes it possible for the platforms to engage workers on the basis of a civil relationship.The Interim Measures for the Management of Online Taxi Reservation Operation and Service stipulate that the company of online ta

123、xi booking platform shall sign various forms of labour contracts or agreements with drivers according to the characteristics of working hours and service frequency.This provision is seen as allowing and recognizing the civil relationship between drivers and the platform.On the other hand,the regulat

124、ory framework of ride-hailing platforms affects the contract arrangement between drivers and the platforms since the ride-hailing platform company can only carry out the relevant service after obtaining the corresponding Online Taxi Reservation Operation License and applying for an internet informat

125、ion ser-vice filing with the relevant department;the carrier responsibility is borne by the ride-hailing platform company.In the engagement of drivers for ride-hailing services,there is little involvement of third-party entities that cooperate with the platform by providing employment services.At th

126、e same time,there is no practice of guiding workers to register as self-employed persons.For example,Didi has signed service agreements directly with drivers for Didi platforms,and Didi has taken the initiative to pay compensation for traffic accidents.16Cases numbered consecutively starting with“HD

127、”refer to arbitration cases handled by the Labour and Personnel Dispute Arbitration Commission of Haidian District,Beijing.16 ILO Working Paper 126arranging the work of workers for the service provided by the platforms,including pure em-ployment service entities.The consumer-facing platform companie

128、s are increasingly retreat-ing behind the scenes and gradually disappearing from the respondents or defendants seat.Handling cases of labour disputes involving new forms of employment In addition to the unique characteristics of the cases,there are also distinct aspects concerning how labour dispute

129、 arbitration and civil litigation procedures are applied to disputes stemming from platform work.First,in terms of case acceptance(receivability),both the courts and labour dispute arbitration bodies have accepted cases brought by workers involved in new forms of employment.However,their“approach”to

130、 decision-making regarding“receivability”or the exercise of their competence over the workers claims is noteworthy.All local labour dispute settlement bodies have accepted cases lodged by workers which seek to confirm“whether an employment relationship exists”.However,for those cases where there is

131、no such argument and where the disputes are purely about“rights”,some local labour arbitration commissions have refused to accept them.The main reason given for declining to accept these cases is that the uncertainty of the relation-ship between the two parties makes it difficult to ascertain whethe

132、r it lies within the scope of labour disputes.Therefore,Shanghai courts decided that when receiving the former cases,in the first instance,the court will not require the parties to first go through the labour dispute ar-bitration procedure.Correspondingly,if the applicants can provide preliminary ev

133、idence(such as a work permit,work rules,some WeChat evidence that can preliminary prove the existence of management activities,and so forth)to prove the existence of an employment relationship,the arbitration commission may accept the case.When the two parties have only a civil agree-ment and do not

134、 have any further evidence to show the possibility of the existence of a person-al subordination relationship,the labour arbitration commission will usually suggest the appli-cant go to the court.Second,in terms of conclusions regarding the question of the existence of an employment rela-tionship,ov

135、er one third of the cases were concluded with positive confirmation on the existence of an employment relationship.However,there may be some emerging differences in the out-come for specific industries.The general trend is noted in various sources.The White Paper of Beijing Chaoyang Peoples Court sh

136、ows that 37.1 per cent of the 105 cases involving new forms of employment that were finally settled by judgment confirmed the existence of an employ-ment relationship between the platform and the workers.The Qingdao Intermediate Peoples Court White Paper shows that of the 38 applications for the con

137、firmation of the existence of an employment relationship,13 cases(34.2 per cent)were successful in finding such a relationship between the two parties.The trend points to increasing support for workers claims.In 2013,the courts of first and second incidence mostly dismissed the claims seeking confir

138、mation of the existence of an employment relationship in several cases involving e-designated driving.In general,until 2016,most court rulings did not support the workers claims for the establishment of an employment relationship.At most,the courts found the platform companies were liable in tort ca

139、ses,reflecting a more cautious protection.It was only after the“Good Chef Case”in 2017(in which the court ruled that an employment relationship existed,but only supported the claim for compensation for illegal dismissal while still maintaining a cautious approach in terms 17 ILO Working Paper 126of

140、the means of protection),that judgments supporting the establishment of employment rela-tionships began to appear.Substantial variations are still observable in the enforcement of laws and policies concerning the protection of workers rights across different arbitration commissions,particularly in d

141、isputes that center on the establishment of an employment relationship.Most arbitration commissions and courts strictly implement existing laws and policies to protect the minimum wage,overtime pay,double wage difference17,economic compensation,social insurance benefits,and so on.For example,in the

142、case of Wang Cheng v.Deppon Logistics Changshu and Haohuo Kunshan,the court supported most of the nine claims,including the establishment of an employment rela-tionship,wages,double wages,pay for the accrued untaken entitlement of annual leave,and high-temperature allowance.18 In contrast,some local

143、 courts have shown some flexibility,con-fining their rulings to employers responsibility based on the principle of“partial protection”.As a result,only basic rights and interests,such as the claims related to work-related injury insur-ance,were supported.Third,“electronic evidence”is becoming widely

144、 accepted in dispute proceedings.In traditional labour dispute cases,written employment contracts,work permits,registration forms/applica-tion forms and other recruitment records and witness testimony are mostly used as evidence to establish the existence of employment relationships.Most of the work

145、 records of workers em-ployed in new forms of employment are kept in digital apps.Various labour management actions are also executed and achieved through digital apps as well as social media or social network-ing apps,such as WeChat groups.Given this development,it is not surprising that much of th

146、e available evidence exists in electronic or digital form.Electronic evidence19 includes e-mail,SMS,QQ/WeChat chat records;microblog private messages and other instant messaging software data;blogs,microblogs and WeChat Moments;mobile phone recordings;electronic attendance sheets;electronic signatur

147、es;domain names;and other information stored in electronic media.The primary evidence in cases concerning new forms of employment typically includes WeChat chat logs and application screenshots.The admissibility of such evidence in legal proceedings varies,though it generally demonstrates a higher l

148、ikelihood of acceptance.17According to Article 82 of the Labor Contract Law of Peoples Republic of China,if an employer fails to conclude a written labor con-tract with a worker for more than one month but less than one year from the date of employment,it shall pay double monthly sala-ry)18王成訴常熟德邦物流

149、有限公司張家港金港分公司與浩火(昆山)網絡科技有限公司勞動爭議一審民事判決).19Article 14 of Several Provisions of the Supreme Peoples Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings(Revised in 2019)provide guidance in this regard.Electronic data include the following information and electronic documents:(1)information released by web pages,blog

150、s,microblogs and other network platforms;(2)communication information of mobile phone short messages,e-mails,instant messaging,communication groups and other network application services;(3)user registration information,identity authentication information,electronic transaction records,communication

151、 records,login logs and other information;(4)documents,pictures,audio,video,digital certificates,computer programs and other electronic documents;(5)other information stored,processed and transmit-ted in digital form that can prove the facts of the case.Article 15:Where a party uses audio-visual mat

152、erials as evidence,they shall provide the original carrier on which the audio-visual materials are stored.If the parties use electronic data as evidence,they shall provide the original.A copy made by the producer of electronic data that is consistent with the original,or a printout directly from the

153、 electronic data or other output media that can be displayed and identified,shall be regarded as the original of the electronic data.18 ILO Working Paper 126 X3 The legal basis for assessing employment status in cases involving new forms of employment Document No.12 as an effective legal basis for a

154、ssessing employment status Under the current system of labour laws,the establishment of an employment relationship is the prerequisite for labour rights,protection and social security.However,the Labour Law,Labour Contract Law,and other laws and regulations do not provide a clear definition of an em

155、ploy-ment relationship.The Labour Contract Law only stipulates that a written labour contract shall be concluded for the establishment of an employment relationship.The written employment contract is the primary evidence for the existence of an employment relationship.In the absence of a written emp

156、loyment contract,the determination of an employment relationship in fact in arbitration and litigation procedures is mainly based on the Notice on the Relevant Issues involv-ing Establishment of an Employment Relationship issued by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security in 2005(MOHRSS Document N

157、o.12,2005 hereafter referred to as“Document No.12”).The legal status and main contents of Document No.12Document No.12 is a ministerial regulatory document,and its legal force is weaker than that of a ministerial regulation.Administrative regulatory documents are formulated and publicly issued by ad

158、ministrative bodies or organizations authorized by laws and regulations with the function of managing public affairs(hereafter referred to as administrative bodies)in accordance with statutory powers and procedures.They constitute a body of regulatory instruments together with administrative regulat

159、ions,decisions,orders of the State Council,departmental rules and local government rules,which are applicable to the workings of administrative bodies,and to cit-izens,legal persons and others.20 Departmental rules refer to the rules formulated by ministries,commissions,the Peoples Bank of China,the

160、 Audit Office and the institutions directly affiliated to the State Council that are endowed with administrative functions,in accordance with the laws and administrative regulations,decisions and orders of the State Council,and within the limits of their authority.The contents of the various regulat

161、ory or administrative documents or rules cannot contravene or“overstep”the laws promulgated by the National Peoples Congress and its Standing Committee and the administrative regulations issued by the State Council in accord-ance with the Constitution and laws.Document No.12 was issued in 2005 mainl

162、y in response to the recognition that some employ-ers did not sign employment contracts when recruiting workers,and this made it difficult to de-termine the employment relationship between the two parties when labour disputes occurred.Document No.12 proposes three criteria for determining the existe

163、nce of an employment re-lationship in the absence of a written employment contract.It also suggests a list of practical measures that could be employed to judge and divide the burden of proof for consideration of the evidence in determining the existence of an employment relationship(see Table 2 bel

164、ow).20See https:/ ILO Working Paper 126 X Table 2.Main contents of Document No.12Employment re-lationship estab-lishedAs expressed in the documentPremiseEmployers and workers meet the subject qualifications1 stipulated by laws and regulations.Criteria for the establishment of an employment relations

165、hip:subordinationPersonal subordinationThe workplace rules formulated by the employer according to law are applicable to the employees.The worker is subject to the labour management of the employer.The worker is engaged in paid work arranged by the employer.Economic subordinationPaid workOrganizatio

166、nal/business subordinationThe work provided by the worker is an integral part of the employers business.Evidence(1)Wage payment documents or records(employee payment payroll)and records of payment of various social insurance premiums;(2)The work permit,service certificate and other documents issued

167、by the employer to the worker that can prove the workers identity;(3)Recruitment records such as Registration Form and Application Form filled in by the worker;(4)Attendance records;(5)Testimony of other workers.Division of bur-den of proofThe employer shall bear the burden of proof for Items(1),(3)

168、and(4).1The employer and the employees are required to conform to the subject qualifications of the laws and regulations,and according to the labour laws in China,employees mainly refers to those who have reached the age of 16,earn wage income as the main source of income,and have both labour right

169、ability and labour behaviour ability;and an employer proscribed by law mainly refers to the enterprises and individual economic organizations and the private non-enterprise organizations in the Peoples Republic of China as well as state organs,institutions and social organizations.In addition to req

170、uiring workers and employers to have the capacity as a subject of law,Document No.12 identifies a variety of employment relationship characteristics,including the application of rules and regulations of the employer towards the workers,the exercise of labour management by the employer over the worke

171、rs,workers dependence on paid work,and the integration of work in the business operation(the work carried out by the worker is an integral component of the business).In doing so,Document No.12 adopts the various elements of the subordination theory and the control theory that are found in labour law

172、 theory.It also reflects the mainstream view that subordination is the most important criterion for identifying an employment relation-ship.It assumes that“subordination”has three aspects:personal subordination,economic sub-ordination,and organizational/business subordination.Document No.12 prioriti

173、zes personal subordination as the main criterion in determining the existence of an employment relationship.Economic subordination is used as an auxiliary indicator.Different views on the applicability of Document No.12Many cases involving traditional forms of employment were reviewed by labour disp

174、ute set-tlement bodies and courts using Document No.12 as a basis for determining the relationship 20 ILO Working Paper 126between employers and workers.Document No.12 was also the most frequently referenced ba-sis for determining the existence of an employment relationship in the arbitration and ju

175、dicial proceedings for cases involving platform work.Two thirds of the arbitrators interviewed for this study explicitly mentioned that Document No.12 formed the basis of their judgment and more specifically,the three-aspect criteria elabourated in that document.Nevertheless,there are differing view

176、s on the applicability of Document No.12 in dealing with disputes arising from platform work.One opinion holds that the determination of the existence of an employment relationship on the basis of the provisions of Document No.12 in dispute cases involving platform work is generally solid.Some arbit

177、rators believe that this is“the safest,most reliable and most authoritative basis”.They assume that this conforms and is consistent with the identification of the characteristics of an employment relationship according to the law,which should be the most important consideration and task.21 This is a

178、lso the approach of most of the directly interested parties,whether platform companies,enterprises engaged in coopera-tion arrangements with the platforms,or workers.Many take Document No.12,and particularly its three elements,as the basis for recognizing an employment relationship in facts and reas

179、ons or defence.Typical examples of this approach are found in the first instance hearing of the case of Yunting v.Meng Jingping in Suzhou(enterprise),and the second instance hearing of the labour dispute between Mr.Du and the Taiyuan Branch of Yuncheng Xinbang Logistics Co.,Ltd.(worker).However,some

180、 judges and arbitrators,along with most experts and scholars,have identified significant challenges in applying Document No.12 to disputes involving workers in platform work.They have outlined various difficulties,including those detailed below.First,many have pointed to the requirement of“having th

181、e following situations at the same time”as too rigid.Document No.12 is seen as stipulating that only when all the elements,such as capacity as a subject of law,application of rules and regulations,labour management,paid labour and business components,are found to exist concurrently,can an employment

182、 relation-ship be recognized.This is the“all-inclusive”mode of“constitutive elements”(Wang,2016).This is very different from the practice of the key elements review found in many other countries.22 The objective of the“constitutive elements”approach is to standardize labour employment.It restricts t

183、he discretion in individual judgement by requiring strict observation of the criteria for recognition of an employment relationship.This approach serves two objectives:the first is to promote standardization of employment relationships;the second is to enable the formation of consistent judgment out

184、comes and ensure the fairness of arbitration and judicial deliberations.23 The disadvantages of this approach are obvious.First,it makes it difficult to adapt to the complex and changing manifestations of employment relationships in practice,especially in new forms of employment,where these elements

185、 of subordination often exist in different degrees or lev-els instead of in an all-or-nothing way.Well before the issuance of the Guiding Opinion in 2021-which for the first time makes formal reference to the idea of an“incomplete employment re-lationship”-there were already judgments on labour disp

186、utes that reflected this“shortcoming”.21There are also some arbitrators who believe that the cases involving new forms of employment are not treated differently from oth-er cases,the form of employment is not necessarily different,the handling method is certainly the same,and the criteria for cas-es

187、 regarding new forms of employment are consistent with other cases.22For example,the 13 considerations identified in the ILO Employment Relationship Recommendation,2006(No.198).23This was perceived to be a paramount challenge or task at a time when the whole concept and practice of“employment relati

188、on-ships”were newly taking root in China during the transition away from the socialist organization of work under the planned econo-my.The fact that specialized labour dispute resolution procedures-arbitration-was newly established may also have influenced the adoption of this approach.21 ILO Workin

189、g Paper 126The observation that recognizes not(not fully)conforming to the necessary circumstances for the establishment of a(de facto)employment relationship had already begun to appear in the judgment statements of some cases where the requests for confirmation of an employment re-lationship were

190、denied.However,the issue is,how strong or evident should the subordination relationship be to meet the requirements for the establishment of an employment relationship?The second difficulty in applying Document No.12 for the determination of the existence of an employment relationship in disputes in

191、volving new forms of employment stems from the ab-sence of a rigorous consideration of“labour management”as an indicator of an employment re-lationship.In any kind of arrangement for paid labour,it is possible to find“instruction”or“man-agement”,whether the work is carried out under the terms of an

192、employment relationship,a civil service contract or commissioned work.Merely the fact that there is some degree of labour management towards the workers carrying out the work may not necessarily mean that there is(strong)subordination in the sense set out in the labour law.24 It is necessary to asce

193、rtain wheth-er the intensity of such management or instruction has reached the level of control or domina-tion to affirm the existence of subordination and whether it constitutes personal and economic subordination.However,there is very little elabouration of the concept of“labour management”(the em

194、ployer managing the work of the worker or the relationship with the work,and so forth)in Document No.12.With the emergence of widely varying patterns of employment,especially in examining the nature of“labour management”in platform work,there is a need for a more in-depth and detailed elabouration o

195、f the concept in order to avoid a different understanding among arbitrators and judges,leading to different judgments for similar situations.The third difficulty centres around how to understand the concept of“business components”(that the work provided by a worker is an integral component of the em

196、ployers business)and how this concept is to be applied in reviewing the work carried out in platform work.Document No.12 does not provide a clear elabouration of this criterion.The determination of business components in labour disputes is not just a question about whether the platform is an inter-m

197、ediary entity or an enterprise engaged in specific service operations(which would have an effect of identifying organizational subordination),it also has implications for determining the nature of job allocation in a platform-based service.When a worker is given a task by the plat-forms“automatic”ta

198、sk assignment(or dispatch)system,is this merely a“matchmaking”activity between a request from a customer and the readiness of a worker to accept the job or is it an assignment of a work task to a worker by the platform company,similar to receiving a“work order”in a“traditional”employment arrangement

199、(personal subordination)?This will also have a bearing on how to understand the nature of the fees charged by a platform:Is the fee for an information service or the sharing of the value created by workers(economic subordination)?The issue of“business component”already features as an important consi

200、deration in disputes involving platform work.For example,in the case of Li Xiangguo v.Tongcheng Bing,the court of first instance ruled that“Tongcheng Biying Technology Company,the operating company of the Flash Delivery Platform,is not an information service company but a company engaged in the carg

201、o transportation business,and its claim that it is only obtaining intermediary fees cannot be 24According to Article 779 of the Civil Code,the contractor shall also accept the necessary supervision and inspection of the ordering party during the work,even in a contract of work where there is no labo

202、ur management at all;and Article 1193 of the Civil Code also recognizes that the ordering party has the right to instruct the contractor.See Beijing No.1 Intermediate Peoples Court Research Group,“新就業形態下平臺用工法律關系定性研究”,人民司法,No.7,2022.22 ILO Working Paper 126established”.25 In China,the Interim Measure

203、s for the Management of Ride-hailing Taxi Operations and Services,issued in 2016,makes clear that“ride-hailing taxi operations and services”includes building a service platform based on internet technology,integrating information regarding cus-tomer requests and the availability of workers,using qua

204、lified vehicles and drivers,and provid-ing non-cruise taxi reservation services.This makes clear that the work of car-hailing drivers is part of the business of online car-hailing platform-based enterprises.Thus,it does not support the claim by the platform company that it is only an“information mat

205、chmaker”,but rather it pro-vides critical guidance for the recognition of the relationship of organizational subordination be-tween the drivers and the car-hailing service platforms.Dispute settlement proceedings:assessing employment status on the basis of the recognition of a subordination relation

206、ship The discussion on the applicability of Document No.12 essentially focuses on whether the tradi-tional theory and standards(criteria,indicators)for employment relationships still have explana-tory power in the consideration of new forms of employment.An ILO working paper,“Platform Work and the E

207、mployment Relationship”(Valerio et al.,2021),which examines the rulings of na-tional courts on the nature of the employment of platform workers in a number of countries,found that some of the indicators and principles regarding the employment relationship ela-bourated in the ILO Employment Relations

208、hip Recommendation,2006(No.198)are still viewed as having substantive significance in court decisions.In China today,labour dispute arbitration and judicial proceedings still rely on the three dimensions of personal subordination,economic subordination and organizational subordination set out in Doc

209、ument No.12 to identify employ-ment relationships.For example,in the labour dispute between Tang Ruiting and Beijing Yisheng Health Technology Co.,Ltd.,26 the review process focused on identifying the three dimensions of subordination.The evidence for personal subordination was sought through the re

210、view of(1)the extent of control on the basis of work rules,(2)exercise of management,supervision and inspection of work of the worker and control of working hours,and(3)technical control of the working process.Economic subordination was investigated on the basis of provision of work equipment,determ

211、ination of work remuneration and the restriction of sources of livelihood.The existence of organization-al subordination was sought by examining the work assignment and management through a WeChat group.In this case,the arbitration and the court of first instance ruled that no employ-ment relationsh

212、ip was found between the two parties.However,the court of second instance found that such a relationship did exist between the two parties.25In many cases abroad,Uber has also claimed that it does not provide transportation services but is only a technology company.Courts in the United States and th

213、e U.S.Department of Labour often rely on the test of whether work is an integral part of the employers business in conducting a multi-factor economic reality test.However,in January 2021,the U.S.Department of Labour issued the Independent Contractor Status under the Fair Labour Standards Act rule(20

214、21 IC rule),which adjusted the question,now to read,whether the work belongs to the integrated unit of production.This had the effect of narrowing the scope of the facts to be consid-ered.It was only regarded as a non-core element with relatively low probative force.Subsequently,the 2021 IC rule was

215、 revoked.In October 2022,the U.S.Department of Labour proposed to amend the Wage and Hour Division(WHD)regulations to modify its rules for determining the classification of employees or independent contractors under the Fair Labour Standards Act(FLSA)to be more consistent with judicial precedent and

216、 the text and purpose of the FLSA Act.In the latest proposed rule,it once again reverts to the long-established practice of overall situation analysis of the economic reality test.It focuses on whether the work is integrated with the employers business and to what extent the work done is an integral

217、 part of the employers business,rather than whether it be-longs to an integrated production unit.This factor does not depend on whether an employee is an integral part of the enterprise,but on whether the function they perform is an integral part of the enterprise.This formulation favours workers to

218、 be recognized as employees when the work they do is critical,necessary or essential to the employers primary business.It recognizes the worker as an independent contractor when the work performed by the worker is not critical,necessary or related to the employers primary business.26京0101民初13884號,20

219、19;京02民終8125號，2020.23 ILO Working Paper 126The table in Annex 1 sets out in detail the acceptance of evidence,the determination of facts and the judgment conclusion.In addition to examining the above three aspects,the judge in the court of second instance also emphasized the necessity of protecting

220、labour rights and interests.The second instance judg-ment pointed out that the relationship between Yisheng Health Company and Tang Ruiting was clearly characterized by personal subordination,economic subordination and organizational sub-ordination.The relationship between the two parties was a domi

221、nant relationship in which one party controlled and managed the other party.It found that it was impossible for the two parties to establish substantive and fair rights and obligations through completely equal consultation and that it was necessary to bring Tang Ruiting into the scope of labour law

222、protection and then achieve the result of substantive equality through basic labour protection.The need to extend the protection of labour law was also cited in the judgment of the court of first instance in the Li Xiangguo case.Specifically,the court held that firstly,it was Li Xiangguos“basic righ

223、t”to obtain work-related injury insurance benefits,which needed to be realized by es-tablishing an employment relationship.Secondly,the risk cost of traffic accidents of Flash Delivery staff could not be transferred to society,and it was necessary to clarify the responsibility of en-terprises throug

224、h the recognition of an employment relationship.Thirdly,the court stated that enterprises cannot avoid the management costs associated with an employment relationship with Flash Delivery workers.27 In most cases involving claims of occupational injury compensation,it is possible to find a certain co

225、rrelation between the degree of the harms caused to the worker and the conclusion regard-ing recognition of an employment relationship.Factors such as personal injury,property dam-age,level of consequent disability,and so forth,which,by themselves,are not determinants of an employment relationship,a

226、re found to be taken into account in the courts conclusion.The rate of positive recognition of an employment relationship in cases involving occupational inju-ry is significantly higher than for cases involving claims related to labour remuneration and so-cial security disputes.A case study of takea

227、way riders by the Zhicheng Center shows that in cas-es involving platform work organized through outsourcing arrangements,the acceptance rate of occupational injury cases was 16.7 per cent higher than for cases involving work remunera-tion or social security disputes.In the self-employed model that

228、is,platform work where the individual worker is directly engaged with the platform the difference in the acceptance rate between the two types of cases was 35.9 per cent(Zhicheng Public Interestes Lawyers,2021a).In addition to the above points,the relationship of subordination has also been explored

229、 and identified in other features of work organization and execution.For example,the deliberation of employment relationships has pivoted to the information that the platform is able to obtain through and then utilize in its operations.There is growing recognition that information has be-come a very

230、 important means of production for platform companies.The platform relies on its control of relevant information and the technical means to carry out the technical control of the working process of the platform service providers.Through this use of information,the platform company establishes a domi

231、nant position in the relationship with the platform service providers(workers).See section 4 of this report for a specific analysis.27李相國與北京同城必應科技有限公司勞動爭議一審民事判決書,京0108民初53634號,2017.24 ILO Working Paper 126Elements of new types of labour management In new forms of employment,subordination has some ne

232、w manifestations.Algorithms,GPS tracking and other geographic positioning devices,ratings and complaints,and behaviour and performance scores are recognized as important tools of control and punishment.They are per-ceived as important indicators in identifying organizational and personality subordin

233、ation in ju-dicial trials in many countries.Understanding their function adds greatly to understanding the concepts and application of command,control and punishment in platform-based work.In domestic research,Takeaway Riders,Trapped in the System presents an in-depth elaboura-tion of the digital em

234、ployment relationship between takeaway system algorithms and riders.Many studies have shown that automatic monitoring and decision-making systems driven by algorithms are increasingly replacing the functions of managers in traditional employment re-lationships,such as assigning tasks,giving instruct

235、ions,evaluating the work performed,provid-ing incentives or imposing penalties.Some studies clearly emphasize that the platform formu-lates labour process rules,comprehensively supervises the labour process and determines the distribution of labour results through monopoly algorithm technology.Based

236、 on these findings,some scholars have proposed that the dependence of workers on platform companies based on algorithmic management should be recognized as algorithmic subordination.However,in existing domestic cases in China,there is no clear trend with regard to recognizing platform rules and algo

237、rithm control as a kind of labour management.In many cases,the judgment was based on a comprehensive consideration regarding whether the workers in the case have the right to refuse,whether the platform or the associated enterprises(known as“cooperation part-ners”who serve the platform in realizing

238、the final service offered by the platform)have other daily management duties,and whether there exist sectoral service standards and other factors.Control through algorithmsWhether the platform company manages the workers in the course of delivering its service is an important criterion considered in

239、 cases that call for the determination of an employment re-lationship.When an enterprise becomes relatively large in its size,scale and operation,“labour management”is often executed on the basis of a management system and work rules.However,in the case of new types of employment that is,work carrie

240、d out under various arrangements to deliver the services offered by platforms it has been contended that there are no similar rules for and regulations of the platform companies which form the basis for management of workers(those workers who actually deliver the services to the final customer).The

241、idea is that labour management,as we understand it,does not exist in platform labour.It is contended that the platforms do not directly manage the workers on a daily basis.This may reflect the existence and operation of various functional“intermediaries”that operate between the platform(enter-prise)

242、the“brand”and the”app”that provide the service to the customer and the worker to actually deliver the service to the client.In many platform services,one of the key functional intermediaries is a“human resources intermediary company”that provides human resources services to platform companies.Such i

243、ntermediaries,or“cooperation partners”,are but one of a wide range of enterprises that make the operation of platform services possible,constituting an essential component of the“business model”of platform companies.Human resources inter-mediary companies there can be many such companies providing s

244、ervices to a single platform company are regarded as the company that nominally“employs”the workers.However,most of these companies claim that management rules are defined by the platform companies and that they do not have their own unique rules and regulations.More fundamentally,it is claimed that

245、 there are no written rules and regulations for managing workers or the work they perform.The one thing that exists are platform“algorithms”that run the platform operation.Platform 25 ILO Working Paper 126operations have therefore raised a fundamental question:Is the platform algorithm executing the

246、 function of rules and regulations management,thus playing a role similar to the manage-ment rules found in“traditional”enterprises and employment forms?In new types of employment,the algorithm can be commonly understood as a series of platform rules and decision-making mechanisms that manage basic

247、operations,such as workers entry into and exit from the platform,order allocation,the piecework unit price,the share of“income”from each service delivery,the composition of remuneration and payment,working hours,eval-uation,and reward and punishment rules.In the deliberation of disputes,one view tha

248、t has been expressed is that these rules are only performance requirements and standards put forward by the platform to ensure service quality and service standards.As such,it is posited that they are not mechanisms for labour management,and their existence and operations are not sufficient indicato

249、rs to determine the existence of an employment relationship between workers and plat-forms.This view is widely adopted in the cases of online taxi bookings,partly because the Interim Measures for the Management of Online Taxi Booking Operations and Services require online taxi booking platform compa

250、nies to assume carrier responsibility and have clear requirements for their online taxi booking operations.For example,ride-hailing platform companies are required to ensure that drivers who provide services on the basis of online work assignments meet the same requirements as those who provide serv

251、ices offline.This means that the requirement that drivers should upload photos on apps every day is interpreted as ensuring compliance with the requirement for identity verification rather than attendance management.Disputes involving live-streamers also follow a similar logic,such as the number of

252、days of live-streaming and the length of live-streaming:The leave system and other requirements are regarded as contractual obligations and compliance with sect-oral management regulations.As such,these are not rec-ognized as constituting management action in the sense set out in the Labour Law.Anot

253、her view recognizes the reality of subordination embodied in these rules.In the case of Tang Ruiting detailed in Annex 1,the court emphasized the technical control of platform em-ployment and held that the platform controlled the order receiving time,end time and custom-er satisfaction of its servic

254、e through quality control management.Although court decisions in many countries tend to pay greater attention to the role of the rat-ing system as a tool of control and the basis for disciplinary action,the courts in China have not deemed the rating system and pay deduction mechanisms used by the pl

255、atforms as the exer-cise of the employers disciplinary power.Some rulings hold that the platforms customer rating system is only an incentive tool and does not constitute a disciplinary mechanism.For example,in the labour dispute between Tian Lanxia and the Beijing Branch of Didi Chuxing Technology

256、Co.,Ltd.,the labour arbitration held that the reduction of service scores by the platform for drivers refusing orders and other acts does not constitute a labour management action in the sense set forth in the Labour Law.The court of first instance held that while such platform settings were helpful

257、 to reducing the potential of poor service,because the driver could choose to switch off the order mode or log off from the app,the relationship between the platform and the driver mediated by these settings was not deemed to constitute“labour management”by the employer.In the case of Shao Xinyin v.

258、Dias(Chongqing)Logistics,28 whether an employment relationship existed between the two parties was assessed on the basis of the nature of the operation of these settings.The appeals court held that the reduction of delivery job allocations to the rider by the platform after the rider refused 28邵新銀與迪

259、亞斯（重慶)物流有限公司確認勞動關系糾紛二審民事判決書,渝01民終780號.2021.26 ILO Working Paper 126to deliver after receiving an order should be perceived as the adjustment of the riders distribu-tion ability by the algorithm rather than control of his work will.The court did not find“mana-gerial action”in this process and,based o

260、n this,concluded that there was no employment rela-tionship between the two parties.Offline cooperating entities Although the data-driven algorithm is at the centre of a platforms daily operations,the algo-rithm itself cannot meet all management needs nor completely exclude the necessity for tradi-t

261、ional labour management methods.Even if platform-based,light-asset enterprises have their own management teams(for example,Didi provides more than 1,000 employees to meet driv-ers needs),it is challenging to cover a large number of employees scattered all over the country,so they need offline organi

262、zations to provide local services such as offline training,claims settle-ment and other services.For example,since 2015,Didi has outsourced the supply and manage-ment of drivers to local management companies(or driver service companies).The services or management provided by driver service companies

263、 include training and rule instruction,over-sight of rule implementation;distribution of rice,oil,grains and other in-kind incentives offered to drivers;organizing birthday parties and other activities for drivers;distribution of epidemic prevention equipment(that became essential during the COVID-1

264、9 pandemic);and handling driver complaints.The management of drivers by external management companies ensures that the requirements of Didi can be met.Market dominance and network effects provide large platforms with tremendous power to con-trol their service providers.Whoever controls the platform

265、algorithm controls the labour process.For example,in takeout delivery,Meituan headquarters controls the collection and dispatch of orders,the charging(fee)standards for each order,the order dispatch rules,the allocation of income between the platform and workers,and all capital flows through the app

266、.Distribution companies assign work tasks to riders through the system they manage.Similarly,although Didi refers to external management companies as strategic partners,many management companies work one on one with Didi,rely entirely on the platform and are controlled by it.29 Didis monop-oly and c

267、ontrol of information ensures its effective supervision over the management company.Specifically,Didi requires these“management companies”to maintain a specific number of drivers and to record the total monthly income of drivers and their service ratings and retention rate.30 Didi conducts regular i

268、nvestigations and year-end assessments of the management companies.A management company is more like a division of Didi,delegated to exercise some of the em-ployers powers and obligations,while Didi controls the source of the business,the distribution process and revenue distribution.Similarly,Meitu

269、an has more than 1,000 distribution companies that deliver its basic business and are responsible for recruiting and managing delivery riders.29Meituans real-time intelligent distribution system Super Brain has been continuously optimized and upgraded,constantly shorten-ing delivery times.At the Arc

270、hSummit in 2019,Wang Shengyao,the senior algorithm expert of the Meituan Distribution Technology Team,introduced the basic operation of the intelligent system.The delivery path of the rider can be planned in 0.55 milliseconds,and from the second when the customer places an order,the system will deci

271、de which rider is to be assigned to take the order ac-cording to the riders path,position and direction.Orders are usually dispatched in the form of three or five orders.An order has lo-cations for picking up and delivering meals.If a rider carries five orders which involve ten locations,the system

272、will plan the optimal distribution plan based on finding a solution from“ten thousand orders to ten thousand people in 110,000 route planning possibili-ties within a second.In 2019,the average delivery time of takeout orders in the whole industry in China was reduced by ten minutes compared with thr

273、ee years previously.The shortening of delivery times is partly due to the efficiency of the system,but also shows that the control of labour is strengthening rather than weakening.30Drivers can choose the car rental company,but the driver management company is chosen by Didi for the driver.27 ILO Wo

274、rking Paper 126Instant messaging tools:A vital component of the work processCommunication has long played a key role in the management,coordination and control of an organization.In new forms of employment,instant messaging tools such as DingTalk and WeChat have been incorporated into the labour con

275、trol process as a means of organizational control(Li,2021).In addition to app screenshots,the most common evidence submitted by the parties in dis-putes involving new forms of employment is the chat records from WeChat and WeChat groups.Unlike in traditional workplaces,where meetings,discussions and

276、 mailboxes are the main com-munication mechanisms for managing workers and work processes,human resources inter-mediary companies which cooperate with platforms mainly communicate with and manage workers through instant messaging tools like WeChat.In some cases,this is supplemented by offline meetin

277、gs,as in the case of Meituan,where its delivery or management companies(who actually“hire”and manage the delivery riders)regularly hold offline morning meetings,which are more like team-building rituals.When a worker joins a certain platform,in addition to registering on the app,they also need to li

278、nk with the WeChat account of the human resources intermediary company(which is their direct management unit)and join its WeChat group.The instant messaging tool is the usual“commu-nication channel”between the delivery rider and the human resources intermediary company.If the delivery rider or drive

279、r has a below-threshold performance score or order accomplishment,or records a good performance,the intermediary company and team manager(the head of distribution stations and the team leader)will pay special attention to that worker,for example by having a short discussion with them or sending them

280、 a small red envelope reward through WeChat.Instant messaging is used as“personal”communication between the supervising unit and the individual rider.Furthermore,the WeChat group provides a virtual common space for the human resources intermediary company and workers to share information collectivel

281、y and facilitate problem solving.For example,the service company will announce Didis latest policies and requirements to drivers in the WeChat group.More importantly,this group is used as a means to cultivate a spirit of cooperation between workers and the platform.28 ILO Working Paper 126Youngmo Yo

282、onThe typical patterns of disguised employment relationships and related dispute proceedingsA survey of a wide range of relevant disputes and interviews with related stakeholders revealed three main ways through which platform companies present their relationships with workers,avoiding the establish

283、ment of an employment relationship.The three main patterns of avoid-ance or disguise of an employment relationship have given rise to corresponding dispute settlement deliberations.Using contracts other than employment contracts:Inconsistency between the facts of employment and the contractSome plat

284、form companies enter into civil or commercial contracts with the workers who provide the services that the platform offers.This assumes or designates the relationship as a commercial one,where the workers engage in self-employment rather than in an employment relationship.Such a relationship enables

285、 the platform to reduce labour costs and evade employer responsibility.In practice,most platforms and workers sign“service cooperation agreements”with standard terms,digitally on the app itself.Workers sign the agreement by checking“agree”in the regis-tration process after downloading the app.29 ILO

286、 Working Paper 126Some workers sign electronic agreements with the platform(for example,Didi signs service co-operation agreements with all its drivers directly);other workers sign written agreements(offline)with the platforms agent company.These“agreements”are rarely“employment contracts”but common

287、ly take the form of a“principal-agent agreement”,“cooperation agreement”,“contract agreement”,“contracting agreement”or“lease agreement”.Some platform companies resort to a“labour dispatch arrangement”,where workers sign em-ployment contracts with labour dispatch companies or other human resources s

288、ervice companies.Only a very small number of platform companies sign employment contracts directly with workers.These civil/commercial agreements usually contain standard clauses.They do not contain claus-es concerning labour protection and in most cases they incorporate a clear stipulation that the

289、 parties are not entering into an employment relationship and that there is no obligation on the part of“Party A”to pay social security contributions on behalf of“Party B”;or that labour laws are not applicable.The following is an example of such a non-labour contract.Didi signs service cooperation

290、agree-ments with all its drivers.The agreement states that:“The company only has an affiliated cooperative relationship with all drivers who provide on-line car-hailing services.There is no direct or indirect employment relationship,and this relation-ship is not subject to the application of the Lab

291、our Law,Labour Contract Law,Social Insurance Law and Housing Provident Fund Management Regulations and other laws and regulations.”From the procedural point of view,the platforms or their cooperating companies that mediate employment(that is,provide“employment services”)carefully craft the terms of

292、the agreement in complicated,lengthy and professional language to maximize their rights and minimize their obligations,and this is then presented as a“standard agreement”.There is virtually no room for substantive negotiations on the part of workers.Workers are left only with the choice of agree-ing

293、 or not agreeing(to work or not to work),with limited possibilities of carefully analysing the details of the clauses set out in the standard template.If a worker chooses to“disagree”,they cannot proceed to the next step of registration.For ex-ample,the service cooperation agreement of Didi states t

294、hat“if you do not agree to this agree-ment,you cannot log in to the application,receive orders or serve passengers”.No clause can be modified.Examining the reality/facts of the relationship and unearthing indicators of the employment rela-tionship between the platform and a worker who has entered in

295、to this kind of civil agreement is the main difficulty and,indeed,the focus of dispute resolution proceedings involving new forms of employment.A key principle that is being established in practice is that consideration should be given to whether there is a gap between the name and content of the ag

296、reement and the employment facts and the unequal status of the two parties upon signing of the agreement.3131See Huang Wenxu,eds,“Uber司機是否為Uber公司員工，英國勞動法庭做出判決”，人民法院報,25 November 2016,8th edition.30 ILO Working Paper 126Multiple layers of“subcontracting”and the extensive networks of“cooperating”compa

297、nies:Who is the employer and responsible for what?A new element of“new forms of employment”that is emerging is the multiplicity of“entities”featuring on the“employer”side of the relationship:What emerges is that there is no one-to-one relationship between a worker and an employer.The relationships a

298、mong the entities on the“employer side”are complicated,especially in terms of the extent of“responsibility”they bear in relation to the workers.In practice,in the context of presenting a dispute,this consti-tutes a problem for workers in identifying or designating an entity as the“plaintiff”.Who sho

299、uld the worker sue?In initiating a dispute,whether labour arbitration or litigation,many workers are not clear who should be named as the real employer,and who should be the target of the claims for liability and remedy.Firstly,the legal entity of the platform-based“company”itself is complicated.For

300、 example,work-ers know that they work in the name of Didi or Meituan,but in naming the“respondent”in their dispute claim,they quickly learn that it is not so simple,that it is difficult to designate the correct or the exact legal subject.The legal entities that exist behind the commonly known name o

301、f Didi include“Beijing Xiaoju Technology Co.,Ltd.”,“Didi Chuxing Technology Co.,Ltd.”,and“Beijing Didi Infinite Technology Development Co.,Ltd.”It is difficult for workers to understand the rela-tionships between these legal entities,especially in terms of questions regarding employment relationship

302、s with the platform.Secondly,the actual operation of a platform is made possible through a combination or layers of subcontracting,which would include logistics companies and other agents,human resourc-es service companies,payment companies and other enterprises cooperating in employment.These entit

303、ies take part in or carry out different aspects of the“management”of workers.As the“business model”evolves,it can be seen that the platform itself increasingly hides behind the myriad of contributing entities and gradually disappears.From the cases brought to the dispute resolution bodies,it is evid

304、ent that the role of the platform company in new forms of employment has changed significantly in recent years.In the early stages,in several e-designated driving cases,the platform was named directly as the respond-ent or defendant.Later,it was positioned as a co-respondent/co-defendant.More recent

305、ly,plat-forms are portrayed as a“third party”.Today,they no longer appear as any kind of party and in most cases do not need to participate in the arbitration hearing or litigation proceedings,with only their name being mentioned as a brand or context.Platform-based companies transfer employment rel

306、ationships and employment responsibilities to various“service providers”,usually“requiring”them to sign labour contracts with their drivers or delivery workers.The“service providers”stand in to assume legal responsibilities under the banner of an employment relationship.For example,the service agree

307、ment between Didi and a“labour service company”specifies the requirements Didi sets for the company:“The rights and obligations of Party A(labour service company)are stated as follows:sign a formal employment contract with the driver of Party B(labour service company).In accordance with the relevant

308、 national and local regulations and the standards and subjects determined by Party A and Party B through negotiation,Party B shall pay social insurance for Party As drivers in full and on time,and pay the drivers wages,bonuses,various benefits and other expenses in full and on time according to the

309、agreement between Party A and Party B”Meituans Delivery Service Contract clearly states that:31 ILO Working Paper 126“Party B(Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.,the labour service company)shall be li-able for all employment risks or personal injury(death,disability,medical treatment)and prop

310、-erty losses caused to any third party during the delivery service period,and Party A(Shanghai)shall be exempted from liability.”This move the transfer of responsibility in the course of the evolution of the platform labour business model,is imitated by the“collabouration enterprises”.The“service pr

311、oviders”engaged by the platform companies to shift risks and responsibilities also do not want to bear the risks and shoulder the responsibilities.Thus they have also started to replicate the practice of out-sourcing all or part of their business just as the platforms have done.For example,the dispu

312、te between Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.(service provider to Meituan)and Wang Zhijun,where the worker wanted to confirm the existence of an employment relationship,re-vealed a complicated cascading of outsourcing that created substantial uncertainty regarding who is involved in the empl

313、oyment relationship.It was revealed that Yunting(service provider to Meituan)had outsourced some of its work for Meituan to another entity.The project outsourc-ing agreement signed by the two parties reads:“If Party B(Huaian Cangwu Network Technology Co.,Ltd.)fails to sign a contract with employees

314、in accordance with the contract filing,withholds employees wages,or pays employees wages lower than the local minimum wage standard,Party A(Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.)may order it to make corrections within a time limit.If Party B fails to make corrections within the time limit,Party

315、 A shall have the right to unilaterally terminate the contract,and Party B shall compensate for any losses caused to Party A.”In the above case,the third party,Huaian Cangwu Network Technology Co.,Ltd.,even offered to request the court to confirm the establishment of an employment relationship betwe

316、en the defendant and our company.Company A is tasked with order dispatch,Company B handles insurance,Company C manages wage disbursements,Company D oversees individual income tax payments,and Companies E,F,and G supply rental vehicles.The employment relationships of workers engaged in platform work

317、are obfuscated within smaller peripheral companies through deliberately complex out-sourcing arrangements(Zhicheng Public Interestes Lawyers,2021b).The problems brought about by layers of subcontracting affect the dispute resolution proceed-ings in the following ways:Firstly,in determining whether t

318、here is an employment relationship,it is clear that the ques-tion who is the employer has a significant impact on the outcome of the case.From the prac-tical point of view of pursuing a case,it seems easier for workers to sue the human resources intermediary company rather than the platform itself i

319、n order to claim the existence of an em-ployment relationship.The labour dispute between Gao Zhiqiang and Beijing Sankuai Online Technology Co.,Ltd.and Beijing Qianbaobao Payment Technology Co.,Ltd.can be illuminating.In this case,the worker sued Beijing Sankuai and Qianbaobao,but the dispute also i

320、nvolved Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.(the agent of Meituan)and Haohuo Kunshan(a labour outsourcing plat-form).During the court hearing,the worker was asked to name which company he wanted to claim as the employer party in his employment relationship.The worker chose Beijing Sankuai Comp

321、any.The claim was eventually rejected due to insufficient evidence.However,in two similar 32 ILO Working Paper 126cases involving the same company,namely,the case of Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.v.Wang Zhijun and that of Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.v.Meng Jingping,the work

322、ers named Suzhou Yunting Network Technology Co.,Ltd.(the agent of Meituan)as the re-spondent in the claim seeking recognition of an employment relationship.In these two cases,it was deemed that there existed an employment relationship,both at the arbitration hearing and at the court of first instanc

323、e unlike in the case where the worker named Beijing Sankuai as the respondent.Secondly,after employment responsibility is transferred from the platform to the human re-sources intermediary company,the regulation and protection of workers rights becomes more difficult.When platforms sign various agre

324、ements directly with workers,government regula-tion only needs to lock in a few large platforms.However,when there are complicated layers of subcontracting,the objects of supervision are broken up into parts and the number of entities to address is multiplied.32 Moreover,the ability of human resourc

325、es intermediary companies to comply with labour obligations and to assume employer responsibilities is generally weaker than that of the platform companies themselves.In some cases,these“intermediaries”even lack the qualification for being an employer.For example,some takeaway riders stations are re

326、gistered as self-employed workers rather than as“enterprises”.Even workers and the“employment ser-vice collabouration enterprise”(that is engaged by a platform to provide“employment services”)may not have the capacity to actually fulfil its employment-related obligations.In December 2020,the Third I

327、ntermediate Peoples Court of Chongqing made 85 judgments in succession,requir-ing two delivery companies to pay delivery riders double wages,compensation for unused paid leave,and so forth.However,with registered capital of 150,000 Chinese yuan(CNY)and CNY1 million,respectively,the two companies suc

328、cessively became defaulters after the judgment and failed to comply with the judgment.Thirdly,despite the phenomenon of multiple layers of subcontracting,there are few cases where the platform companies were directly named to assume responsibility related to the employment relationship or to share t

329、he responsibility.In the context of freewheeling outsourcing or the contracting out of the different parts of the business operation,questions regarding what responsibilities a platform company should bear,and how the responsibilities between the platform company and the human resources interme-diar

330、y companies should be allocated,have become a major conundrum for dispute resolution proceedings.The judicial judgments have not been consistent.The situation may begin to change,however,with implementation of the Guiding Opinion.In the Guiding Opinion,platform companies are required to bear the cor

331、responding responsibil-ities according to law if the rights and interests of workers are damaged by human resources intermediary methods such as outsourcing.In November 2022,the Peoples Court of Chaoyang District,Beijing,held a public hearing and issued a decision regarding a dispute over the right

332、to life triggered by the sudden death of a takeaway rider on the way to deliver meals late at night.Liu Moumou,a delivery worker,died of a sudden illness in the course of delivering meals.The court found that Lius own responsibility amounted to 10 per cent,the platform companys re-sponsibility was 2

333、0 per cent based on the fact that the platform did not perform due diligence and thus stood at fault,and the responsibility of the information technology company was 70 per cent.The court ordered the takeaway platform and the information technology company to pay Lius family members more than CNY1.5 million in compensation.32In September 2021,Meituan had 1,103 external collabouration distributors,