World
The EU law on platform workers is hanging by a thread. Here's why.
Two years ago, Brussels unveiled ambitious legislation to improve the conditions of those who work for digital platforms such as Uber, Deliveroo and Glovo. Today, the law is scrambling to survive.
The Platform Workers Directive (PWD) was supposed to be a turning point in the so-called Gig Economy as millions of self-employed people who work through platforms across the bloc would be re-classified as employees and benefit from basic rights such as minimum salary, healthcare, accident insurance and paid leave.
But after going through six rounds of negotiations between the European Parliament and member states, the directive was stopped dead in its tracks, right when it was about to reach the finish line.
A meeting in late December, mere hours before Brussels grounded to a halt for the winter break, revealed a larger-than-expected group of countries opposed the draft law that had emerged from the talks.
France, Ireland, Sweden, Finland, Greece and the Baltic countries were among those making it clear they could not support the text on the table, spearheaded by the left-wing government of Spain as holder of the Council’s rotating presidency.
“When you move towards (rules) that would allow massive reclassifications, including self-employed workers who value their self-employed status, we cannot support it,” Olivier Dussopt, then-French minister of labour, said in December.
The co-legislators are expected to honour the deal hashed out in negotiations and push it forward to the final votes so the last-minute resistance, paired with its seize, sent alarm bells ringing.
Another bruising round of negotiations is now all but guaranteed, although no date has yet been selected.
The situation is particularly precarious as the June elections to the European Parliament impose a deadline for concluding interinstitutional talks by mid-February.
A question of presumption
The objections voiced by the no-go coalition all coincide in one critical point: the legal presumption of employment foreseen by the directive. This is the core pillar of the proposed law, without which the PWD would be effectively bereft of its raison d’être.
The legal presumption is the system under which a digital platform would be considered an employer, rather than just an intermediate, and the worker would be considered an employee, rather than a self-employed person.
Under the original proposal by the European Commission, the re-classification would happen if two out of five conditions are met in practice:
- The platform determines the level of remuneration or sets upper limits.
- The platform electronically oversees the performance of workers.
- The platform restricts the ability of workers to choose their working hours, refuse tasks or use subcontractors.
- The platform imposes mandatory rules of appearance, conduct and performance.
- The platform limits the ability to build a client base or to work for a competitor.
According to the Commission’s estimates, about 5.5 million of the 28 million platform workers active across the bloc are currently misclassified and would therefore fall under the legal presumption. Doing so would make them entitled to rights like minimum wage, collective bargaining, work-time limits, health insurance, sick leave, unemployment benefits and retirement pensions – on par with any other regular worker.
The re-classification could be challenged, or rebutted, by either the company or the workers themselves. The burden of proof would fall on the platform to demonstrate the relation of employer-employee does not correspond with reality.
‘Pretty delicate’
From the very start, the directive proved contentious among member states, which are traditionally protective of their labour policies and welfare systems.
Before heading into talks with the Parliament, the 27 countries agreed on a common position that made considerable alterations to the legal presumption, expanding the criteria to seven and adding a vague provision to bypass the system in certain cases.
Meanwhile, MEPs opted instead for a general presumption clause that would apply, in principle, to all platform workers. The criteria to re-classify as employees would only kick in during the rebuttal phase, making it harder for companies to circumvent the system. Lawmakers also strengthened the transparency requirements on algorithms and turned up the heat on penalties for non-compliant firms.
The gap between the Council and the Parliament slowed down the negotiations, known as trilogue, with six rounds needed to reach a deal, a particular high number.
But while MEPs cheered on the breakthrough, a rebellion erupted in the Council.
The resistance stems from the legal presumption of employment, which the trilogue reverted to the original 2/5 criteria, the balance between full-time and part-time workers, the administrative burden placed on private companies and the potential adverse effects on the digital economy as a whole.
“All in all, the issue is that the text doesn’t provide legal clarity and is not in line with the Council’s agreement,” said one diplomat from the group of countries that oppose the deal under condition of anonymity. “Protecting workers, yes, but competitiveness should remain.”
Another diplomat said the position struck in the Council was “pretty delicate” and left minimum space for concessions. “It’s difficult. It’s not an easy file,” the official noted.
From Spain to Belgium
As of today, the trilogue deal decisively falls short of the necessary qualified majority to move forward. Adding an extra twist, Germany, the bloc’s largest country, has so far kept silent, which has been interpreted as the prelude to an abstention. If Berlin sits out the vote, the path to a qualified majority becomes even steeper.
Coincidentally, some of the reluctant countries are home to some of the most prominent digital platforms in Europe: Bolt (Estonia), Wolt (Finland), Free Now and Delivery Hero (Germany). These firms, together with Glovo (Spain), Uber (US) and Deliveroo (UK), have set up industry associations in Brussels and boosted their lobbying spending to defend their corporate interests and influence the draft law.
One of these associations, Move EU, publicly celebrated the December rejection and called the directive “not fit for purpose.” The statement sharply criticised the legal presumption, arguing it would “overwhelm national courts and undo positive reforms.”
By contrast, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) said the proposed law was being “held up for no good reason” and called on the institutions to wrap up the file. “The agreement found in trilogues was far from ideal but finally brought some basic standards to the sector,” the confederation said.
The political hot potato is now in the hands of Belgium, which took over the Council’s presidency on 1 January. Belgium intends to come up with a new common position and head into a seventh round of negotiations with MEPs.
“We’re very determined to reach an agreement, but not at any price. Because, of course, we have to maintain the initial ambition” set by the Commission’s proposal, Pierre-Yves Dermagne, Belgian’s minister for the economy and labour, said last week.
“We know the timing is quite tight. We’re talking a matter of weeks, really.”
But the road ahead is ridden with obstacles. A fresh push in the Council to satisfy the demands of the blocking coalition may trigger the backlash of left-wing governments. France, in particular, is seen as adamantly opposed to the directive.
And even if the Council manages to somehow overcome the odds and overhaul its common position, there is no guarantee that MEPs will be willing to give in and water down the December deal. If the text fails to complete the trilogue phase by mid-February, the cut-off date imposed by the elections, it will be plunged into legislative limbo.
“We are now in a stalemate, with the Belgian Presidency faced with the task of reconciling such opposing positions that the outcome risks being a very weak regulation,” said Agnieszka Piasna, a senior researcher at the European Trade Union Institute (ETUI).
“If the Council doesn’t change its position, we could see a directive that sets the minimum floor so low that conditions for platform workers in some countries could actually worsen, and even obstruct the legal route – which, despite being incredibly costly and cumbersome, has so far been an effective way for workers to defend their rights.”
World
Inside the Bondi Beach Attack at a Hanukkah Event in Australia: Maps and Videos
Witness accounts and videos verified by The New York Times show how gunmen killed at least 15 people on Sunday at a Jewish celebration at Bondi Beach in Sydney in what the authorities called a terrorist attack.
Two suspects opened fire from a footbridge at hundreds of people who had gathered for a Hanukkah celebration. At one point, after one of the shooters walked down from the bridge, a bystander grabbed the gunman from behind and wrested his gun away before pointing it back at him, according to videos and witness accounts.
Police arrived and opened fire at the gunmen, videos show. One of the shooters was killed, the police said, and the other was wounded and in custody.
When the gunmen arrived, they emerged from a small silver hatchback parked by the footbridge. They fired on people nearby and killed at least two, according to a witness who tried to help the victims.
The gunmen then proceeded to the high ground of the bridge with three long guns, visible in several videos, and fired into the crowd in the park.
After about a minute, one gunman wearing white pants descended from the bridge, videos and witnesses confirmed. He continued shooting as he walked toward the crowd gathered for the Hanukkah celebration, which featured free donuts and music.
The gunman on the bridge wearing black pants kept firing. He waved away beachgoers swearing at him, telling them to go, witnesses said, as he shot at the crowd that had gathered for the holiday festival.
A man who had been sheltering between parked cars is seen in one video rushing toward the gunman with the white pants, who continued to draw nearer to the Hanukkah event. The man wrestled the rifle from him and aimed it at the gunman, who retreated to the bridge.
Shortly afterward, the police began to fire at the gunmen. In videos, they can be seen ducking to avoid incoming fire before the man in white pants appears to be hit, and collapses.
The man in black pants kept firing at the police for another minute, videos show and witnesses confirmed, shooting from both sides of the bridge before he appears to be shot as well.
“He’s down, he’s down,” a witness yelled in a video that captured most of the incident.
In the area where the Hanukkah festivities were held, several victims could be seen in witness video lying on the ground, apparently lifeless. Witnesses described a scene of sadness and sudden triage. Civilians, security guards for the Hanukkah event and lifeguards administered CPR as ambulances carried away those who had been killed and wounded.
World
US and Ukraine target 1,000-vessel ‘dark fleet’ smuggling sanctioned oil worldwide
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A 1,000-strong “dark fleet” of rogue oil tankers skirting sanctions has emerged as a new target for the U.S. and Ukraine, a senior maritime intelligence analyst claims.
Michelle Wiese Bockmann warned the aging fleet poses geopolitical risks and threats of $1 billion oil spills, with the recent U.S. seizures in Venezuela and Ukrainian drone strikes in the Black Sea marking a turning point for both nations in their efforts.
“There are about 1,000 vessels worldwide that are trading sanctioned crude tankers containing sanctioned Iranian, Venezuelan and Russian oil,” Bockmann told Fox News Digital.
“These vessels are a lifeline for these regimes, because they’re used for shipping oil to fund the war in Ukraine, and also give money to the illicit Maduro regime,” she added.
IRAN BACKS MADURO TO KEEP LATIN AMERICA FOOTHOLD AS TRUMP INCREASES PRESSURE ON VENEZUELA
U.S. seized the Skipper, a Venezuelan oil tanker. ( Planet Labs PBC/Reuters)
“This is a brand-new problem for the U.S., and now Ukraine has signaled they are going to target these vessels the same way,” she said. “There is a new strategy to deal with this dark fleet, which is the lifeline of sanctioned oil revenues, and now under attack by the U.S. and Ukraine. The strategy is all to counter what we call gray-zone aggression.”
US ESCALATION WITH MADURO HALTS DEPORTATION FLIGHTS TO VENEZUELA
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was questioned about the U.S. seizing an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela. (Planet Labs PBC/Handout via Reuters )
Recent Ukrainian naval drone strikes have disabled several tankers in the Black Sea, including the Dashan, part of Russia’s so-called shadow fleet that Ukraine says helps Moscow export oil in defiance of sanctions, according to Reuters.
“It is dangerous and could be interpreted as a form of gray-zone aggression in order to continue to keep oil revenue flowing,” Bockmann said.
“This is all a billion-dollar oil spill catastrophe waiting to happen,” she added, pointing to the environmental and navigational risks posed by poorly maintained, uninsured ships.
VENEZUELA MOBILIZES TROOPS, WEAPONS IN RESPONSE TO US WARSHIP BUILDUP IN CARIBBEAN
Footage of the Dashan tanker, purportedly part of the Russian shadow fleet hit by Ukraine. (Security Service Official/Handout via Reuters)
She said a subset of “about 350 to 400 vessels at any one time are not only sanctioned but falsely flying flags, which is dangerous,” because false registration leaves vessels stateless and uninsured, putting crews at risk.
“This is a huge issue for maritime safety, it’s a menace to the environment, and it entails crew welfare,” Bockmann said.
These vessels, she said, are typically “elderly” and used solely for sanctioned oil trades. Many also “manipulate AIS” to show they are in one place when they are actually elsewhere.
TRUMP SENDS WORLD’S MOST POWERFUL WARSHIP TO LATIN AMERICA — HISTORIC ECHOES OF REGIME CHANGE
Dashan, a tanker from Russia’s shadow fleet, transits the Bosphorus en route to the Black Sea in Istanbul. (Yoruk Isik/Reuters)
“They use false flagging, but also, spoofing and manipulating its AIS to show it’s in one place when it’s not. These vessels have also gone to fraudulent registries that don’t exist, which means they have no insurance,” she said. “Their certificates of seaworthiness are invalid, and they have relied on international maritime conventions to have what’s called the right of innocent passage so they can’t get intercepted.”
Bockmann said U.S. forces have used legal tools including Article 110 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which allows boarding of stateless vessels, to stop these ships.
“It’s my belief that they used Article 110, and they got on board that vessel, and they were absolutely entitled to remove that vessel from global trade,” she said.
VENEZUELA ACCUSES US OF ‘PIRACY’ AFTER SEIZING MASSIVE OIL TANKER
Attorney General Pam Bondi speaks during a roundtable meeting on Antifa with President Donald Trump in the State Dining Room at the White House, on Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Evan Vucci/AP)
In the Caribbean, U.S. forces recently seized the tanker Skipper, sanctioned in 2022 and found to be masking its location, under a federal warrant as part of a broader campaign to disrupt illicit oil shipping.
“The recent Venezuelan tanker was carrying 1.8 million barrels of oil uninsured, so that’s a billion-dollar maritime disaster waiting to happen,” Bockmann said.
As reported by Fox News Digital, Dec. 12 saw Attorney General Pam Bondi frame the U.S. seizure of a Venezuelan crude tanker as a sanctions-enforcement action rooted in a federal court warrant.
Meanwhile, in the Black Sea, Ukraine targeted multiple alleged “shadow fleet” tankers with sea drones, according to Reuters.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“The three tankers that have been targeted by Ukraine are all in ballast, which means that they weren’t carrying oil,” Bockmann said.
“That was carefully chosen, and they were also falsely flagged, just like in the recent case of the three tankers attacked in Ukraine. That flag was Gambia. In the U.S. case of Skipper, the flag was Guyana,” Bockmann said.
Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.
World
Analysis: Trump’s policies set to widen EU-US innovation gap
As the curtain falls on 2025, policymakers in Brussels have yet to decisively counter the negative economic impacts of two major developments: the trade deal struck between the European Union and the United States this summer, and President Trump’s so-called “Big Beautiful Bill”, a mammoth piece of domestic legislation with global economic implications.
The EU’s slow progress toward improving relative business conditions at such a volatile moment has left investors frustrated and looking elsewhere.
According to a report published this week by the European Round Table for Industry, the leaders of the bloc’s industrial giants are “alarmed at the lack of urgency in delivering on Draghi and Letta’s bold reforms to restore the business case for investing in Europe.”
The report also points to a survey of CEOs conducted in October, which shows that only 55% expect to stick to their investment plans. Even worse, a mere 8% intend to invest more in Europe than they planned to six months prior, in contrast with the 38% who will either invest less than previously intended or have put decisions on hold.
And most tellingly, the US now attracts more investment than originally planned by 45% of respondents.
The ‘carrot-and-stick’ approach
The Trump administration’s combination of supply-side economics and protectionism has converted the necessity of avoiding US tariffs into a massive financial incentive for foreign companies and multinationals to invest in the United States directly.
The Big Beautiful Bill, which Trump signed into law in July, formalised huge tax breaks and effectively guaranteed incentives to shift investments across the Atlantic. Namely, the 100% bonus depreciation for new machinery and factories, as well as the 100% immediate expensing of domestic research and development (R&D) costs, mitigating the expenses of moving production and innovation to the US.
Companies have until 1 January 2026 to finalize their decisions and collect retroactive benefits for capital deployed in 2025, but the conditions will remain the same next year.
To compound the EU’s growing inability to compete, the heavily criticised EU-US trade deal was agreed in the same month. The agreement de-escalated the transatlantic trade war of 2025 but it levied a 15% tariff on the vast majority of the EU’s industrial exports to the US, with an exemption from duties for most US-made goods bound for the EU market.
In addition, the EU committed to spending over €640 billion in US energy, investing more than €500 billion in the US economy and buying around €35 billion worth of US-made AI chips, until the end of President Trump’s mandate. Meanwhile, the United States made no similar pledges.
As for corporations, the choice became simple: relocate investment to the US, avoid the tariff and claim massive tax deductions.
The innovation gap in numbers
The R&D siphon is the most critical threat to Europe’s future competitiveness, as the Trump administration’s new incentives pull core innovation to the US.
In the most innovative industries, such as the AI and healthcare sectors, the numbers for 2025 already demonstrate the chasm between the EU and the US.
In the first three quarters of this year, private investment flowing into US AI companies exceeded €100 billion, with the US capturing over 80% of global AI funding. In contrast, the entire EU attracted just shy of €7 billion, according to the widely read State of AI Report 2025.
This severe 15-to-1 funding deficit means the technological future is being built and scaled primarily outside the EU, something that has been recognised by the European Parliament.
Likewise, the EU is aiming to achieve 20% market share in semiconductor manufacturing by 2030, as outlined in the Chips Act, but experts say such a goal is unlikely given that Europe is among the slowest growers in the sector year-on-year.
Furthermore, the EU is even falling behind on AI adoption among young users, according to a new survey by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
As for the pharmaceutical industry, CEOs sent a stark warning to President von der Leyen back in April that “unless Europe delivers rapid, radical policy change then pharmaceutical research, development and manufacturing is increasingly likely to be directed towards the US.”
In the following weeks, fuelled by the fear of the ongoing transatlantic trade war at the time and frustration with the European regulatory scene, the third largest company in Europe by market capitalization, the Swiss-based Roche, committed over €40 billion in US investment over the next five years. Likewise, the French multinational Sanofi announced an investment of €17 billion to expand manufacturing in the US through 2030.
In July, as the Big Beautiful Bill and the EU-US trade deal were being agreed, the British-Swedish company AstraZeneca also declared investing over €40 billion in the US over the next five years, including the construction of a chronic disease research centre in the state of Virginia, the company’s largest single investment in a facility to date.
In November, the White House announced a large-scale agreement between two pharmaceutical rivals, the American manufacturer Eli Lilly, and the Danish corporation Novo Nordisk, known for pioneering the prescription drug for type 2 diabetes, Ozempic, which has also been widely used off-label for weight loss.
The two companies agreed a strategy to reduce the prices of several medications for Americans and announced new investments in the US, with Novo Nordisk committing roughly €8.5 billion to expand US manufacturing capacity. In exchange, the Danish company is expected to receive a three-year exemption from US tariffs, among other benefits.
In total, the European pharmaceutical industry has pledged more than €100 billion for US expansion in 2025 alone with multi-year commitments.
The scramble to deregulate
The pressure applied by the US is evident as this year has seen the European Commission pivot to an aggressive deregulation agenda.
In response to a request from the European Council, six simplification proposals, referred to as “omnibuses”, have been presented since February covering energy, finance, agriculture, technology, defence and chemicals.
Notably, the so-called Digital Omnibus was introduced in November, and it includes delays to provisions of the AI Act and modifications to the GDPR.
These initiatives aim to rapidly cut red tape and reduce bureaucratic costs for European businesses in an attempt to stem the outflow of talent and capital. However, the proposed measures are still facing legislative scrutiny, as well as administrative oversight and political backlash from privacy and climate advocates, among others.
It was only this week that an agreement was finally reached on the first omnibus, another sign that the EU is still far from offering the immediate financial certainty of minimising or avoiding US tariffs while benefiting from President Trump’s policies where possible.
The numbers reveal the plain economic truth: while the EU debates the fine print of deregulation, the investment in innovation is already being decisively relocated.
-
Alaska1 week agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Texas1 week agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
Washington5 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa1 week agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire
-
Miami, FL1 week agoUrban Meyer, Brady Quinn get in heated exchange during Alabama, Notre Dame, Miami CFP discussion
-
Iowa1 day agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Cleveland, OH1 week agoMan shot, killed at downtown Cleveland nightclub: EMS
-
World1 week ago
Chiefs’ offensive line woes deepen as Wanya Morris exits with knee injury against Texans