The battle to determine if the Glovo algorithm (and other platforms) is a 'boss' reaches 🇪🇺

The TCI of the Audiencia Nacional refers preliminary questions to the CJEU:

• First question (Subcontracting): Can it be ruled out that a rider is an independent service provider simply because they cannot subcontract their work, if that limitation is not imposed by the digital platform, but is a mandatory prohibition under Spanish law for TRADEs?

• Second question (The algorithm as a boss): Does a worker's independence become fictitious and turn into labor subordination when, despite having theoretical freedom to reject assignments, an algorithm evaluates and penalizes those rejections by relegating them in the order of access to future work shifts, thereby conditioning their income?

• Third question (Multi-activity): If the CJEU considers that this algorithm is indeed an indication of subordination, is it compatible to consider that a rider is in "working time" at the platform's disposal when, at the same time, they are freely exercising their right to work for competing companies in the same time slots and routes without suffering any penalty?

The second is probably the most important: does a scoring algorithm turn what is on paper a self-employed contract into an employment relationship?

The CJEU will take between 18 and 24 months to respond. But the question already exists, and the scope is broader than it seems.

Many other platforms are under the scrutiny of Labor because of this labor model.

The question that the CJEU will answer in 18-24 months may affect the due diligence of any fund with a portfolio in the 'gig economy'.