Committee on Employment and Social Affairs Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
EMPL European Parliament
Follow its sittingsLi Andersson
And during his visit, he met with a wide range of stakeholders and representatives. So I will give the floor to Mr. Petrov, to report back on the outcomes of this mission for the next three minutes, please. The floor is yours.
Hristo Petrov
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll speak in Bulgarian.
Thank you very much. I would like to start by thanking our Greek hosts, and I'd also like to thank the Secretariat. This trip took place from March 30 to April 1. We wanted to see how effectively the youth guarantee was being implemented. So how this was working for young people, identifying any challenges, looking at the integration of young people, those who were not working or not studying.
We had a meeting in the Greek parliament, and we spoke with a committee that was working on the youth guarantee. We talked about the European aspects of the youth guarantee, and we learned that they didn't really have sufficient resources. Our Greek colleagues talked about the need for reforms, were important, and they needed to strengthen ties with employers as well. They talked about levels of unemployment as well, and there had been an improvement since 2017. So, there's more efforts to help those unemployed who are not registered.
As I said, we also talked with young people, and we see that there have been some improvements on the labor market, but there are still problems. There's an issue with data collection. So, it can be quite fragmented in the way that data is gathered. There are different authorities which are involved. It's not always the same authorities that are gathering the data.
So we discussed this matter of youth unemployment with various politicians in the parliament, and they didn't have much history in specifically working on these areas. And young people felt it was necessary to have more volunteer work available as well. So as I said, there was some progress, and I am pleased that we were able to make this journey. Thank you very much.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. And I'm sure the trip also provided valuable report or information for the preparation of the report. So thank you for the report. And now we move on to the votes. And as you know, today, we'll be voting on the draft reports and the decision to enter into inter-institutional negotiations regarding the sixth provision of the CMRD6 directive.
Please note that speech-to-text service will be suspended during the voting session and will resume at the beginning of the next item, which is the ICM. And I will first announce the nonempel members replacing full or substitute members, and I have Mrs. Moratti replaced by Mr. Dimayo from the EPP. No other replacements.
Good. Then we are ready to start the vote. Compromise Amendment one, those in favor? Those against, abstentions adopted. Compromise Amendment 13, those in favor?
Those against, abstentions adopted. Compromise Amendment 11, those in favor? Those against, abstentions adopted. Compromise Amendment two, those in favor? Those against?
Abstentions are adopted. Amendment 92, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions? We're going to check this one.
I open the vote. I close the vote, and it is rejected. Okay. And next, we have Amendment 93 with an oral amendment. Is there anyone opposed to the oral amendment?
If not, then we can vote on Amendment 93 with the oral amendment. Those in favor? Those against? Abstentions? I think it is rejected, but we're going to check it to be sure.
I open the vote.
I close the vote.
Li Andersson
And it is rejected. Compromise Amendment nine, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions? Adopted.
Amendment 97, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions? We're going to check this one as well. I open the vote for Amendment 97.
I close the vote. Adopted.
Compromise Amendment five, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions? Adopted. Compromise Amendment four, those in favor?
Those against? Abstentions are adopted. Amendment 108, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions, I'll check this one as well.
I opened a vote for 108.
I closed the vote. Adopted.
Compromise Amendment six, those in favor? Those against abstentions adopted. Compromise Amendment seven, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions are adopted.
Compromise Amendment three, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions adopted. Compromise Amendment eight, those in favor? Those against, abstentions adopted.
Compromise Amendment 12, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions? Adopted. Amendment 44, those in favor?
Those against? Abstentions? I'm checking this. I open the vote for Amendment 44.
Did we lose? I closed the vote.
Rejected. Amendment 50, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions ? Let's check this one to be sure.
I opened a vote on 50.
Li Andersson
I close the vote. Adopted.
Amendment number seven. Those in favor? Those against? Abstentions. I'm going to check this one, amendment 7.
I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted.
Compromise Amendment 10, those in favor? Those against? Abstentions are adopted. And Amendment 76, those in favor? Those against?
Abstentions are adopted. And final vote is a roll-call vote. I open the vote.
I close the vote.
Li Andersson
And it is adopted. And then we vote on the mandate, a decision to enter into inter-institutional negotiations. Also, by roll call, I open the vote.
I close the vote.
Li Andersson
And it is adopted. Thank you very much.
This is a sound test for the speech-to-text service.
Okay, colleagues. Can I please ask you to take your seats, as we are about to start? Okay, colleagues. Can I please ask you to take your seats, and to continue discussions outside the room if needed? Dear members of National Parliaments and of the European Parliament, dear mister, minister Mushotas, dear missus Gehleng, and dear guest speakers, mister Cockburn and mister Simos, and dear colleagues, it is a great pleasure for me to open this inter parliamentary committee meeting and welcome all of you from across the EU and also from Norway to us here in Brussels.
I am very happy that we are able to have this exchange as part of the parliamentary AI days, which also include other committee events on this very important topic. Today, we will reflect on how digitalization and automation, including artificial intelligence, reshape the world of work. We will reflect on what tools we have and what more we can do as legislators in order to make sure that the use of new technologies in the workplace not only respects current standards, but also improves the situation of workers in the union, and remains ethically grounded. So I'm looking forward to hearing a lot of good ideas today on how to make this happen. As you know, we have quite a full agenda for today.
We will start with an opening session with mister Musutas representing the Cyprus presidency of the council, and missus Gehlen from the European Commission. Then we will go on with our two working sessions featuring experts, MEPs, and members of national parliaments, during which we will hold two separate rounds of discussion. We are going to speak about the Platform Work Directive and the European Parliament's calls for EU initiatives on algorithmic management and psychosocial risks, and also about relevant national tools, legislative and others, social partners initiatives, and the role of consultation and collective bargaining, among others. As you know, a background note was circulated along with the invite to this event to set the scene for our discussions today. It contains links to useful documents, as well as questions we thought from the committee side would be interesting to discuss today.
The note is also available online as part of the documents for this meeting. From my side, I will try to ensure that as many participants as possible can express their views during the two working sessions, and that we can hold a meaningful debate. But without further ado, I'm very happy to welcome Mr. here. Marinos Musutas, Minister of Labor and Social Insurance, representing the Cyprus presidency of the Council. It's very good to welcome you back to the AMPO Committee once again.
We know that the Cyprus presidency is very interested and also very active regarding the issues we are about to discuss here today. And I was also very happy to participate in the inter-parliamentary conference organized in January on the challenges of AI in different areas of policymaking, including employment policy. So, in a way, we are continuing and deepening that discussion. And I'm very happy, Minister, that you managed to find time to join us here today. So we will start with the opening remarks from Minister Musutas for the next 10 minutes.
Please, the floor is yours.
Marinos Moushouttas
Good morning, everybody. Thank you, Lea Anderson. I am going to speak in the Greek language. So.
Chairman or President of the committee, my friend Lee Anderson, my dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for the invitation to come here to be with you today. And it's a great honor, and I'm very happy that I can contribute to this important discussion that's going to follow. The accelerated transformation of work in the digital era is at the heart of the social and economic future of the human being. AI and the new technologies that appear reform the job, the marketplace for the jobs, and we have to examine again how we can protect the workers, how we can adopt anthropocentric policies, have the human being at the center, and we have to negotiate to renew our engagement for the security and the health and the prosperity of the workers. The ILO recalls that the fears for loss of many jobs very often are overstressed.
The reality is more complicated. The ILO feels that only 2.3% of the jobs are in danger from the full automatization. However, many areas in the administration are changing concerning the duties they have, instead of vanishing. So many jobs change. So the influence of AI is not restricted only to replacing jobs, but concerns the radical change of the way in which millions of people are working every day.
At the same time, AI creates important opportunities for productivity, innovation, and economic growth. At the same time, however, it introduces new dangers. So we have the fear of losing a job, psychological pressure, the loss of control, worries about privacy, isolation, and problems in sleeping are recorded more and more in people who are working in environments that change very radically and become digital. These trends show that we need to assure that this technological progress is accompanied by very strong strategies of prevention of the versus psychological and social dangers. The elements we have from digital activity show that excessive connectivity outside the working hours and very frequent meetings on the Internet increase anxiety and stress very much. This underlines the importance of cultivating a positive mentality for security and health.
We need more job satisfaction, and we have to promote a more healthy balance between work and personal life through more sustainable digital practices. In this framework, it's necessary to have an approach with the human being at its center in the implementation of AI. AI should support human possibilities and not replace human activities. And the workers should participate actively in developing AI. This needs clear communication, management that's transparent, and inclusive policies, which assure that all people who are working independent of their age, of the sex, or their basis can benefit from this change that is brought about by artificial intelligence. The lifelong learning, the upgrading of skills, and specialization should be supported at the same time with various directions given for roles and responsibilities in environments of high risk such as human surveillance and accountability.
These should be at the center of accountability and human responsibility. We should underline that in the framework of security and health at the job place, we have a basis for action. The employers should assure that the workers are well trained and they know about the use of systems of AI related to the duties, including their moral extensions and consequences. And the risk we have to address and to prevent risk. And we should take into account all the risks arising from digitalization and the new forms of jobs.
In this framework, the directive for working people on platforms is a definitive positive step in order to address the challenges related to the new forms of work. With improving the working conditions for workers on platforms, with supporting transparency in the management of algorithms, and assuring the good categorization of the various jobs, all these can contribute to protecting the rights and the prosperity of workers in the digital economy. The efficient implementation of these things will be definitive, so the technological progress could go hand in hand with social justice in the wider frame. We have to increase the skills of the workers in the future, and this would be a priority of the presidency, the Cyprus presidency. On March 9, the ESCO Council promoted non legislative initiatives which have as the aim to increase the coordination between economic and working policies and to promote skills for qualitative jobs.
Tools show that the guarantee youth guarantee and the report for work and the recommendations for human capital contribute in supporting training and upskilling, assuring that nobody stays behind in this double transition. At the same time, the agreement for the revision of the European Fund for Adaptation to Globalization is one of the first under the presidency of Cyprus, increasing the possibility of the EU to be able to react to economic and technological redistributions. It assures a faster and more efficient support of people who are working or workers who are in danger of losing their jobs, facilitating their reintegration in the job market or the transition and finding new roles they can play. The Cyprus presidency stressed particularly the consequences of AI on the quality of jobs and on the rights of workers. In the EBSCO Council, the ministers discussed the various ways in which AI can support the qualitative jobs and the rights of workers based on an opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee concerning the tools for strengthening the quality of jobs, including the role of AI and the importance of the social dialogue and collective bargaining.
In order to enrich the discussion, the presidency called Mr. Christofferios Vissaridis, the Nobel laureate, to express his opinion. As he said then, the investment to wide skills, general skills, is the most efficient strategy, underlining that if we promote some needs to be covered, skills can address the various dangers in the job markets. At the same time, information and education are very crucial. Various campaigns. The U.
S. For safe job places of job 2023-2025, healthy jobs in the digital era. This initiative played an important role in showing the chances that are created, the opportunities, and the dangers concerning digitalization, including working through platforms, management through artificial intelligence, the remote and hybrid ways of working, and smart digital systems. The national contact points, including the working inspectorate of Cyprus, have transmitted these messages, including them into actions, and they activated interested parties at the national level. Continuing the efforts in this direction is something necessary.
Looking at what's going to happen in the future, we see the challenge. Up to 2030, almost 59% of the workers will need to have an updating of their skills, and many workers will continue not to have access to training concerning artificial intelligence. This demands stronger and more inclusive systems for lifelong learning supporting the constant growth at all the stages of the work life. We need targeted policies in order to address the stress created by jobs in digital environments. We have to promote limits, healthy limits in the digital area, see what the workload is in these jobs, and to assure that technology strengthens and supports and does not load more work on the workers.
We have to develop moral ethical frameworks for the use of data for transparency in algorithms and the protection of the privacy of workers. Finally, an important point that we have to recognize is the following. It's important to recognize that this transformation of jobs does not inform all workers in the same way. Different areas, sections, and demographic groups are facing different levels of danger and opportunities. Our policies have to remain inclusive and just, giving targeted support where there is the greater need and assuring that all can take and use the opportunities created by this digital era.
In these efforts, we shouldn't ignore the important role of social dialogue and our social partners. The efficient, tripartite dialogue is a tool in order to envisage the changes needed and create consensus in Cyprus. This approach is a tradition through the years. It has helped us to address challenges, to support and increase the trust between the partners, and to achieve to find balanced solutions for the economy in our society. The future of work is not predestined.
It's not formed already. It's something we form actively. If we use responsibly the AI, the AI could become a very powerful tool in order to support the security, the health, and the prosperity at work. Thank you very much.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, minister, for providing this comprehensive overview of the context and also the initiatives of the Cyprus presidency. Our next speaker is Mrs. Manuela Gren, Director of Jobs and Skills at the European Commission. We heard last month from Executive Vice President Minsato that the first stage consultation with Social Partners regarding the Quality Jobs Act has been concluded. It includes questions related to all issues that will be discussed today, namely algorithmic management and artificial intelligence at work, as well as psychosocial risks as part of occupational safety and health.
So we are very interested to hear how the commission is progressing in its work. Please, Mrs. Gelling, the floor is yours for 10 minutes.
Manuela Geleng
Thank you. It is indeed a particular pleasure to be hosted by this committee, which steered the resolution on digitalization, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic management in the workplace. As stated in its reply sent by Commissioner Šefčovič to President Metsola on March 10, the Commission has carefully assessed the related recommendations in full respect of proportionality, subsidiarity, and better lawmaking principles. It will indeed be an important contribution to our ongoing reflection on these issues. The Commission is gathering evidence on the positive and negative impacts of artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies in the world of work.
As the chair just mentioned, we are currently consulting the European social partners on the scope and content of the future Quality Jobs Act planned for adoption in quarter 4 of this year. The aim of the Quality Jobs Act is to pursue a carefully balanced approach, ensuring adequate protection of workers while supporting competitiveness and productivity, especially for small and micro-sized companies. The initiative will take account of the diversity of national systems and will allow space for social partner implementation. On this note, I would like to thank the representatives of national parliaments present here today for sharing their perspectives. As outlined in the Draghi report, a key driver of the productivity gap between the EU and the US has been the different extent of digitalization of our economies.
The commission is firmly committed to closing this gap while promoting skills and quality jobs. It is important to underline that labor productivity is only one component of overall productivity. We also need well-functioning capital markets, modern trained policies adapted to our geopolitical realities, and management approaches tailored to the demands for smart working, better work-life balance, and professional goals. Looking at artificial intelligence in the world of work, including when it's used to manage workers, that is algorithmic management, we can see impacts on both the quantity and quality of jobs. In terms of quantitative impact, existing evidence does not suggest a significant decrease in the aggregate number of jobs.
However, it's clear that certain professions will be more heavily impacted than others. We can expect a significant increase in the demand for specialised AI expertise, fundamental digital competencies, data science knowledge, and other cognitive or interdisciplinary proficiencies. People need to be accompanied in the upcoming transitions. And the Union of Skills Initiative will play a key role in helping workers thrive in AI-driven economies. When it comes to the qualitative dimension, we know that by using these technologies, companies can boost labor productivity and enhance organizational efficiency, becoming more dynamic and competitive.
These technologies can help manage the workload, provide useful real-time feedback, improve jobs and skills matching, allocate tasks more efficiently, optimize workflows, promote consistency and reduce bias and subjectivity in management decision making, provide early warnings, and in general, improve workplace health and safety, and identify areas for training that are tailored to the workers' needs. However, an improper use of these tools can lead to work intensification with impacts on health and safety, excessive surveillance, a loss of trust, increased psychosocial risks, loss of autonomy and dehumanization of workplaces, increased biases and discrimination. It is worth recalling that a 2022 survey conducted by the European Agency for Health and Safety at Work found that almost a third, 29 percent, of EU workers experienced stress, depression, or anxiety, either caused or exacerbated by their work. Ultimately, potential EU action on these matters would pursue a twofold aim: to support and enable the take-up of AI at work in line with existing efforts, and protect workers from potential risks. We are not starting from scratch here.
The Union AQI already provides significant protections and enablers for the use of digital technologies based on the human-in-control principle. This is no small part, thanks to the relentless work of this house. For example, both the Artificial Intelligence Act and the General Data Protection Regulation already established comprehensive horizontal frameworks. The Platform Work Directive is an important milestone, specifically tailored to the challenges and opportunities of platform work. Under EU labor law, workers' representatives must be informed and consulted on decisions likely to cause substantial changes in work organizational and contractual relations.
The framework directives on safety and health at work cover all occupational risks and lay down the main principles of prevention, protection against them. It applies to all sectors of activity and to all workers. However, several EU legal instruments, including the AI act and the GDPR, do not preclude the union or member states from maintaining or introducing rules which are more favorable to workers in terms of protecting their rights in respect of the use of AI systems by employers. And indeed, several member states have introduced legislation on specific aspects of algorithmic management and artificial intelligence at work, ranging from workplace personal data protection and transparency rules to equality and collective rights. In some member states and sectors, social partners have adopted and applied specific rules in collective agreements.
We must consider the effects of different national and even local approaches versus one potential rulebook at EU level. We all want European companies to grow and be successful. A well-functioning single market with clear and common rules is key to achieving that. We should remember that the absence of EU action is not necessarily beneficial for growth and competitiveness. Such EU action would focus on effective implementation and enforcement of existing EU protections for workers across all member states, providing further clarity on those protections, and, if necessary, would consider targeted complementary measures not covered by the current rules.
To close, let me thank you again and ensure you that the commission is listening very carefully to the precious input of the European Parliament, of national parliaments, of social partners, of experts, and all stakeholders. Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much, Mrs. Gehling. And we now will start with the first session, which is entitled Adapting the Digital and a Key to New Forms of Work, The Platform Work Directive and beyond. Okay. You will have to get down.
Okay. So we will thank the minister at this point. Thank you very much for being here with us. See you again in the committee. And as the title points out, we are going to talk about the opportunities and challenges of digitalization.
And this session will take a closer look at the landmark EU legislation, which is currently in the transposition phase, namely the Platform Work Directive, as was already mentioned, which bridges the EU's digital and social key. In the same spirit, the recent legislative own-initiative resolution of the European Parliament called for the EU to take initiatives for regulating algorithmic management in the workplace, drawing on the provisions of the platform work directive, but extending these to all workers in the union. Executive Vice President, Minsato, during our exchange in the frame of the structured dialogue, said that it is also the intention of the commission to bridge the current gap between the rights of workers in a platform economy and those in traditional workplaces. And this is what our committee hopes to see in the upcoming commission proposal for a Quality Jobs Act. Meanwhile, we see a multiplication of omnibus proposals, including in the digital sphere, which could also compromise workers' rights and relevant safeguards.
These are all important issues on which I hope we can all reflect together in this first working session. Before introducing our first expert speakers, I would like to briefly outline the modalities for taking the floor. On your desks, you will find speaking cards. You can use those to indicate that you wish to take the floor. Please fill out such a card and hand it to the ushers, who will be walking around here gathering the speaking cards.
This process is mostly meant for members of national parliaments present here today. For MEPs, I already have a preliminary list based on a call for speakers. If there are MEPs who are not on the list, but you wish to take the floor spontaneously, please request the floor by raising your hand, as we usually do in the committee. As to the timing, I will kindly ask you all to keep your interventions to 1.5 minutes, as shown by the clock on the display, for us to allow a maximum amount of speakers to take the floor. I will try to divide speaking time according to the following formula: two national parliamentarians followed by one MEP, and so on.
But if the need arises, we will adapt this formula during the debate. With this clarification, I pass on the floor to our distinguished speakers, starting with our keynote speaker in this panel, Mr. Nuno Mehra Simoes Takuna, who is Senior Specialist on Labour Market Institutions from the ILO. He was asked to give us a taste of the ILO's ongoing work to develop standards on decent work in the platform economy, as well as any recent findings around issues of digitalization in the workplace, notably algorithmic management. Please, mister Mehra Simos, you have the floor for the next 6 minutes.
Nuno Meira Simões da Cunha
Thank you, madam chair. Dear members of the European Parliament, members of national parliaments, allow me to start, of course, by thanking you for this invitation to discuss such a central topic, of course, for social justice and for decent work. I mean, I will just start by mentioning that when we celebrated 100 years in 2019, yes, we are quite an old organization. I mean, we got a specific mandate from our constituents through the centenary declaration to address the topics, of course, related with the impact of technology in the world of work. I mean, there were mentions of topics like platform work, data protection, the impact on data protection, and we were requested to address those topics.
This is only 7 years ago. There was no mention of AI, which shows a little bit the speed of how things are changing. And today, there's no discussion about the world of work where the topic AI is not part of. I mean, I would now start, I mean, and, of course, oh, maybe this one. Well, maybe I will not stop because of this, and yeah.
Okay. It's moving. I mean, like I said, I mean, it's changed, it's changing the way our work is taking place, where work is taking place. And especially for us, a global organization, we really see our technology impact also on the placement. And for instance, we see much more cross-border working taking place.
I mean, myself, I spent a big part of my life in Africa and more recently in Asia, and I could see that often we think that it's more in developed economies where we see this impact. But, actually, it's all around the world, sometimes even more impact on other less developed or developing economies. We see, of course, the impact in terms of digital labor platforms, and I invite you if you go in the street of a place like a capital like Bangkok where I spent a long time of my life, you would see the impact. And now the presence is much bigger, actually, than what we see in Europe. We see, of course, all we know about the impact of remote and hybrid work.
We all face this in our daily life. And, of course, the impact of AI and the use of automated systems based on algorithms. We see how it's blurring the traditional working relationships and creating more challenges for those who are legislating, for those who are deciding on the existence or not of employment relations, not an easy task as we know. And as I mentioned, of course, this also creates challenges in terms of how to regulate work when we have sometimes three parties in three different continents with completely different legislations, regulations, but also capacities to deal with this reality. Then, okay.
Okay. Thank you. I mean, there are two main points, of course. One, and I'm not gonna talk. There was already mentioned earlier the issue automation and the impact, and I'm not gonna enter it in this panel on this discussion if we have more or less on the on the impact in terms of jobs.
But the second is the impact of AI-based analytics and algorithms to replace or augment some management functions. For instance, hiring, monitoring, supervising, even training workers, as well as scheduling tasks, hours, and breaks. And both, they have implications in terms of job quantity, but today, I'm here more to talk about job quality, including respect for what in the ILO we call the fundamental principles and rights at work. Next slide, please. In recruitment, and as we mentioned, we can save, obviously, time.
We can save costs, and it can even be probably, in some cases, more effective and replace methods that may not be in the past always effective or had their own bias. They can be used for sourcing, for screening, for interviewing, or for background checks, and all these can be done today automatically. I don't know if any of you had the chance to go through an interview that takes place in this kind of new context, and I can tell you that probably it's not a nice experience for a human being to be having an interview with a machine. Bias risks, and this is, of course, I mean, it's not I'm not saying that these systems are more or less biased, but they are risks, because, of course, they will depend on the training data that is used. And sometimes, this training data will reflect existing and historical inequalities, including the underrepresentation of certain groups, which might also create new forms of bias and discrimination, therefore, having the potential impact on the reef on the fundamental rights and principles of works.
Second. Next slide, please. Systems, they also have been also deployed to manage, and this is what we often use the terminology of algorithm management. We have it can be through tracking devices on workers' computers, phones, or other machinery, but also wearable technology. Some of these, of course, have the potential to reduce, for instance, the risks in terms of occupational safety and health, the risks of accidents.
But, of course, all this technology intensively collecting data also has an impact in terms of risks, in terms of data privacy, data protection. Next slide, please. I'm gonna try to speed up to stay. I mean, I will probably move into the next slide then because I think I already covered this one. And, basically, the main message in the ILO, of course, and in the house of social dialogue of typhoonist globally, of course, we believe that it's not.
And even when we were earlier mentioning the estimates of the ILO in terms of the impact of AI in jobs, I mean, the main message is that we don't really know because it will depend on the decisions that we will take. How are we going to regulate? How are we going to define our policies? Then a critical element for us is, of course, the role of social dialogue, even more in such a new topic, even more important to listen to the position of businesses, the position of, of course, workers, and to allow that these systems and their design, their deployment take into account the views of those who are more directly affected by it. Then the message is, of course, the importance of having robust social dialogue in all the stages of the technology design process, from development to deployment.
Then very quickly, next slide, on the standard setting is the first time the ILO is discussing a standard, a normative, a new normative instrument at global level that focus on the future of work because it was based on a normative gap analysis, and our members decided that there were some gaps in terms of our existing international standards, basically, in terms of cross border relations, algorithm management, and some of the protections, labor protections that are limited to those in employment relationship, and that is the background of the discussion. I mean, the first discussion was last June. Extremely difficult discussion. I imagine if you have 27 members, and I can assume the challenges. Imagine when you have more than eight, a 180, and with very different perspectives, different knowledge, different expertise, different also capacity to implement.
And, of course, this impacts the way they look also at how international standards should be formulated. But we are hopeful that in the end we have a tripartite basis, which means we have employers and workers also in our discussions. And but we are we hope that our second discussion in June will be successful, we will have a new instrument. In terms, it's quite a principle based. We don't enter the level of details, of course, of national or even European instruments.
But, what we have new in terms of algorithms is basically focus on access to information, transparency, respect for fundamental principles and rights at work, and access to human review. This is what we have in the draft. It's, of course, not up to the office to anticipate what will be the conclusions. And finally, just a last slide, just inviting you to our site if you want to know more about what we are doing and what kind of research and evidence have been produced in the house. We have a new portal where you can find this information. Thank you, and my apologies for slightly exceeding my time.
Thank you.
Li Andersson
Thank you very much. We will now delve into the topic, starting with remarks from three members of parliament and two from national parliaments, which will be a bit longer. Starting with Mr. Marc Angel, who is the Chair of the Platform Work Directive Monitoring Group, which is set up by this committee for us to be able to follow up on the transposition and implementation of the Platform Work Directive. Mr.
Angel, you have the floor for the next 4 minutes.
Marc Angel
Yes. Thank you, chair, dear colleagues, dear representatives of national parliaments, and dear experts. As we already heard today, the subject is not abstract, but already a reality reshaping our labor markets, our economies, but also our democracies. And, during the last mandate, this employment committee negotiated this landmark piece of legislation. And for the first time, we came up with specific digital rights for workers subject to algorithmic management.
And speaking of the platform work directive, which is currently being transposed in the member states. And as the Chair just mentioned, this committee set up a monitoring group to follow the implementation of the directive. And as the Chair of this group, I would like to make four important points. First point, the directive and more particularly the chapter on algorithmic management responds to a profound transformation of the labor market, the forefront of which has been the platform sector, a labor force increasingly organized, managed, and evaluated through data, algorithms, and artificial intelligence. And indeed, the directive is the first European attempt to regulate algorithmic management in a comprehensive way.
For the first time, European legislation sets clear boundaries when algorithms are used to assign tasks, monitor performance, or take decisions affecting workers. These systems cannot operate in the shadows. They must be transparent. They must be explainable and understandable. They must never process certain sensitive data.
And crucially, they must remain subject to human oversight and human review. And at the same time, we know that business models of platforms, but also other sectors of the economy, evolve fast. And also in view of the pace of technological developments and effective implementation, also for that reason, this is a challenge. The second point, we need clear rules, and they are important. Our committee has set up this monitoring group because we all know that rights on paper are not enough.
And it is also the European Parliament's role to look at how legislation we adopt is applied in practice. Member States, as we heard, have until December to adopt and transpose the rules, and we are following closely. We already know from discussions with the commission and relevant experts that several questions have been discussed with member states, including on the interpretation of the limitation of processing, the interpretation of the provisions of information, the interaction with the GDPR, and also the role of intermediaries. As you all probably know, the platform work directive relies heavily on the broader digital ecosystem and, in particular, on data protection rules and the governance of the AI systems. And speaking about the need for clear rules, we are currently worried that at the very moment that this directive needs to be transposed, the commission has come up with proposals which were not accompanied by an impact assessment, the proposal of the so-called digital omnibuses on GDPR and on the AI Act.
And we have not got clear answers yet from the commission, unfortunately, as to the risks identified by experts of blurring the interpretation or even or even weakening digital rights currently safeguarded by the GDPR or obligations incumbent on the AI system providers and deployers. Such rights and obligations, which constitute the foundation on which the platform work directive is built. We will hear a bit more on the AI Act omnibus later, and I presume where the parliament's position tries to remedy some of the most problematic provisions of the Commission's proposals. While the GDPR Omnibus is still at a very early stage in the parliamentary process, there is indeed a risk if access to data becomes more restricted. If sensitive data can be processed under broader expectations, if automatic decisions become harder to scrutinize, then transparency becomes theoretical, accountability becomes fragile, and enforcement becomes uncertain.
And then.
Marc Angel
Another risk I see is I'm running out of time. Just the last risk is that the gap between workers covered by the platform work directive and other workers, this gap will widen. And therefore, the next speaker, mister Boulay, will talk about this very important initiative report we worked on to make sure that not only
platform.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.