英国和意大利对平台工作的监管:政治、法律和政治经济学

IF 0.8 Q3 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR
Alessio Bertolini
{"title":"英国和意大利对平台工作的监管:政治、法律和政治经济学","authors":"Alessio Bertolini","doi":"10.54648/ijcl2024005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The advent of the platform economy gives rise to an important challenge for existing systems of labour law across the world. Different countries are reacting to this common challenge with various legislative measures, ranging from accommodation to re-regulation. This paper analyses the policy response to the spread of platform work in the UK and Italy, countries with quite different labour law frameworks as well as contrasting political and regulatory institutions. These two countries have responded differently to the advent of the platform economy. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, the paper draws on theories from political science and comparative political economy to explain the different regulatory outcomes observed. Specifically, it is argued that policy and legislative outcomes can be explained by the relative power of political actors and interest groups which are shaped, in turn, by the national system of political parties and the existing industrial relations frameworks.\nPlatform or Gig Economy, Platform Work, Law and Political Economy, Power Resources","PeriodicalId":44213,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulating Platform Work in the UK and Italy: Politics, Law and Political Economy\",\"authors\":\"Alessio Bertolini\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/ijcl2024005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The advent of the platform economy gives rise to an important challenge for existing systems of labour law across the world. Different countries are reacting to this common challenge with various legislative measures, ranging from accommodation to re-regulation. This paper analyses the policy response to the spread of platform work in the UK and Italy, countries with quite different labour law frameworks as well as contrasting political and regulatory institutions. These two countries have responded differently to the advent of the platform economy. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, the paper draws on theories from political science and comparative political economy to explain the different regulatory outcomes observed. Specifically, it is argued that policy and legislative outcomes can be explained by the relative power of political actors and interest groups which are shaped, in turn, by the national system of political parties and the existing industrial relations frameworks.\\nPlatform or Gig Economy, Platform Work, Law and Political Economy, Power Resources\",\"PeriodicalId\":44213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2024005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ijcl2024005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

平台经济的出现给全球现行劳动法体系带来了重大挑战。面对这一共同挑战,不同国家采取了从通融到重新监管等各种立法措施。本文分析了英国和意大利对平台工作蔓延的政策反应,这两个国家的劳动法框架以及政治和监管机构截然不同。这两个国家对平台经济的出现做出了不同的回应。本文采用跨学科方法,借鉴政治学和比较政治经济学的理论来解释所观察到的不同监管结果。具体而言,本文认为,政策和立法结果可以用政治行为者和利益集团的相对权力来解释,而国家政党制度和现有的劳资关系框架反过来又决定了政治行为者和利益集团的相对权力。平台经济或吉格经济、平台工作、法律与政治经济学、权力资源
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulating Platform Work in the UK and Italy: Politics, Law and Political Economy
The advent of the platform economy gives rise to an important challenge for existing systems of labour law across the world. Different countries are reacting to this common challenge with various legislative measures, ranging from accommodation to re-regulation. This paper analyses the policy response to the spread of platform work in the UK and Italy, countries with quite different labour law frameworks as well as contrasting political and regulatory institutions. These two countries have responded differently to the advent of the platform economy. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, the paper draws on theories from political science and comparative political economy to explain the different regulatory outcomes observed. Specifically, it is argued that policy and legislative outcomes can be explained by the relative power of political actors and interest groups which are shaped, in turn, by the national system of political parties and the existing industrial relations frameworks. Platform or Gig Economy, Platform Work, Law and Political Economy, Power Resources
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Published four times a year, the International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations is an essential source of information and analysis for labour lawyers, academics, judges, policymakers and others. The Journal publishes original articles in the domains of labour law (broadly understood) and industrial relations. Articles cover comparative and international (or regional) analysis of topical issues, major developments and innovative practices, as well as discussions of theoretical and methodological approaches. The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review process. A distinguished editorial team, with the support of an International Advisory Board of eminent scholars from around the world, ensures a continuing high standard of scientific research dealing with a range of important issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信