Not as simple as it seems: The ILO and the personal scope of international labour standards

Abstract

This article examines the personal scope of the international labour standards of the ILO. It argues that they do not set out a universal definition of the terms “employee” or “employment relationship”. Instead, when the standards use such terms, their scope should be determined on a case‐by‐case basis and by referring to the travaux préparatoires and the opinions of the ILO supervisory bodies. This article closely analyses both the application of ILO fundamental Conventions by the supervisory bodies and the most recent ILO debates concerning the personal scope of international labour standards.

An unfinished task? Matching the Platform Work Directive with the EU and international "social acquis"

“…15 ILO (2006). On the non-uniformity of the notion of "employment relationship", see De Stefano (2021).…”

Enforceable Social Clauses in Trade Agreements with ‘Bite’? Implications of the EU–South Korea Panel of Experts Report of 20 January 2021

“…87, but also flowing from ILO constitutional guarantees (para. 148, and see De Stefano 2021). The Panel appreciated that the bilateral employment relationship required for identification as a 'worker' by the TULRAA 'would exclude self-employed workers with numerous different clients, and so-called platform workers whose tasks are delivered to them via automated means and who may be legally defined as entrepreneurs' (para.…”

Segmenting and equalizing narratives in the ILO's standard‐setting practice

“…The SER narrative focuses legal protection on working people who are officially "employed", which excludes non-commodified and informal work. We do not need to enter into a legal discussion on the distinction between "employees" and "workers" (seeDe Stefano 2021) because in international labour law the distinction has no clear contours(Ales et al 2018(Ales et al , 1397.…”