No abstract

No abstract

An unprecedented COVID‐19‐induced explosion in digital surveillance has reconfigured power relationships in professional settings. This article critically concentrates on the interplay between technology‐enabled intrusive monitoring and the augmentation of managerial prerogatives in physical and digital workplaces. It identifies excessive supervision as the common denominator of “essential” and “remotable” activities, besides discussing the various drawbacks faced by the two categories of workers during (and after) the pandemic. It also assesses the adequacy of the current European Union legal framework in addressing the expansion of data‐driven management. Social dialogue, workers' empowerment and digital literacy are identified as effective ways to promote organizational flexibility, well‐being and competitiveness.

Digital transformation and the reorganization of the firm have given rise to new forms of work that diverge significantly from the standard employment relationship. Advocates of digital disruption suggest that the existing legal framework cannot accommodate "innovative" working templates and business models. This article, however, argues that labour regulation can continue to facilitate innovation, presenting the employment relationship as a flexible instrument, and standard forms of employment as the means of achieving efficiencies and cost advantages. First, they allow for the full exercise of managerial prerogative and attendant internal flexibility in workforce deployment, and, second, they constitute an effective device to deliver training and develop skills.

This paper attempts to grapple with the collective dimension of the phenomenon of the digital transformation of work. In particular, it explores the relevant legal framework, as well as practical obstacles and concrete responses to the process of "platformisation" of labour. It questions why and for what collective bargaining may be a viable tool to "negotiate" the direction(s) of this paradigm shift. In particular, it focuses on institutional approaches that pursue inclusive and engaging strategies aimed at organising across labour market segments. It also discusses the extent to which trade unions are interested in the fate of non-standard workers, what strategies they follow and what tools they employ. At the same time, it maps other actions and initiatives carried out by self-organised groups. It focuses on the actors and factors which either hinder or facilitate the development of solidarity. The topic of mobilisation has been a central interest of academics in the fields of industrial relations, labour sociology and social movement studies. By adopting an empirical approach and a crossdisciplinary analytical lens, this work places itself at the crossroads of these disciplines. The paper is organised as follows. After providing an outline of the main implications of the spread of new technologies and its impacts on employment relationships, part 2 explores the legal framework regulating collective rights, by considering a number of supranational systems of regulation and discussing the potential impediments arising from a narrow interpretation of antitrust immunities and restrictions. However, practical, in addition to legal, obstacles hamper or make less attractive the exercise of fundamental freedoms for non-standard workers. Accordingly, after describing current difficulties, principal actors, key actions and success factors in a selection of European countries, part 3 assesses recent initiatives and achievements. Finally, part 4 sets out the paper's key conclusions by estimating future developments and offering policy pointers.