{"id":1370,"date":"2021-01-29T12:37:42","date_gmt":"2021-01-29T11:37:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/?p=1370"},"modified":"2021-01-29T12:44:39","modified_gmt":"2021-01-29T11:44:39","slug":"collective-bargaining-agreements-for-self-employed-scope-of-application-eu-competition-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/collective-bargaining-agreements-for-self-employed-scope-of-application-eu-competition-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"Kolektivna pogajanja za samozaposlene – povabilo EFJ"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kolektivna pogajanja za samozaposlene – povabilo EFJ<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dragi kolegi, drage \u010dlanice iz dr\u017eav \u010dlanic EU in EFTA!<\/p>\n

Z veseljem vam sporo\u010damo, da v Evropski komisiji prihaja do premikov glede kolektivnih pogajanj za samozaposlene – podro\u010dje uporabe pravil EU o konkurenci, vpra\u0161anja, za katerega EFJ skupaj s sestrskimi sindikati iz Evropskega zdru\u017eenja za zabavo (FIM, FIA in UNI-MEI) lobira \u017ee ve\u010d let. Potreba po kolektivnih pogajanjih v imenu svobodnjakov in samozaposlenih delavcev, ne da bi jih pri tem ovirali organi za varstvo konkurence ali izdajatelji z argumentom, da ni dovoljeno niti predlagati priporo\u010denih tarif, na kar organi za varstvo konkurence gledajo kot na dolo\u010danje cen, je v okviru na\u0161e strokovne skupine za svobodne poklice in tudi \u0161ir\u0161e eno izmed na\u0161ih osrednjih vpra\u0161anj.<\/p>\n

Komisija je nedavno objavila za\u010detno oceno u\u010dinka (glej spodaj), pri tem pa posameznike in dele\u017enike vabi, naj podajo svoje mnenje. Ve\u010dino izmed doslej prejetih ve\u010d kot 90 prete\u017eno posami\u010dnih odgovorov so posredovali neodvisni prevajalci, odzvalo se je tudi Flamsko zdru\u017eenje novinarjev (glej spodaj):\u00a0 https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/info\/law\/better-regulation\/have-your-say\/initiatives\/12483-Collective-bargaining-agreements-for-self-employed-scope-of-application-EU-competition-rules<\/a><\/p>\n

Mnenja sprejemajo do 3. februarja<\/strong>!!! Bilo bi super, \u010de bi se lahko vi, va\u0161 sindikat in posamezni svobodnjaki odzvali in poudarili pomanjkanje enakih delovnih pogojev za samozaposlene, nezmo\u017enost zagotoviti si zadosten zaslu\u017eek v pogojih koncentracije medijev in platform, odsotnosti kolektivnih pogajanj, netransparentnost tarif, itd. Omenite lahko izjemno nizke prejemke na\u0161ih svobodnjakov. Omeniti je treba tudi beg mo\u017eganov, ki ga spodbujajo tak\u0161ni nepo\u0161teni pogoji dela, saj si vse ve\u010d svobodnih novinarjev ne more privo\u0161\u010diti, da \u0161e naprej opravljajo svoje delo. Izpostaviti moramo potrebo po socialni za\u0161\u010diti vse bolj prekarnih svobodnjakov, ki jih je pandemija tudi najbolj prizadela! Poleg argumentov, navedenih v oceni u\u010dinka, to vpliva tudi na inovativnost in kakovost novinarskih vsebin.<\/p>\n

Komisija predlaga \u0161tiri mo\u017enosti (glej spodaj). V imenu EFJ in njegove skupine za svobodnjake menimo, da je mo\u017enost 4<\/strong>, ki je naj\u0161ir\u0161a, najbolj\u0161a ureditev prihodnje uredbe. (Uredba je pravni akt Evropske unije, ki se v vseh dr\u017eavah \u010dlanicah hkrati neposredno uveljavi z zakonsko mo\u010djo in ne zahteva soodlo\u010danja Evropskega parlamenta).<\/p>\n

Prosimo, da svoje mnenje podate tukaj<\/a>. Omejitev je 4.000 znakov (odziv EFJ je na koncu):<\/p>\n

Komisija nas je vpra\u0161ala, ali kak\u0161ni svobodnjaki delajo neposredno za platforme. \u010ce imate kak\u0161ne podatke, nam jih prosim posredujte.<\/p>\n

Spodaj je odziv EFJ na to neformalno posvetovanje (temelji na na\u0161em odzivu na isto zadevo v okviru posvetovanj o zakonu o digitalnih storitvah). Prosim, da ga prilagodite va\u0161i situaciji in, \u010de je mo\u017eno, dodate kak\u0161ne konkretne \u0161tevilke.
\n
\nMarca sledi bolj podrobna javna razprava<\/strong>, h kateri bodo vabljene vse nacionalne in evropske organizacije (socialni partnerji). Seveda smo v stiku tudi z ETUC in drugimi pano\u017enimi zvezami. Va\u0161 odziv bo ve\u010d kot dobrodo\u0161el. \u010ce bo \u0161lo vse po sre\u010di, bi lahko v enem letu pri\u0161lo do predloga uredbe.<\/p>\n

Za nas je pomembno, da se odstranijo ovire in se kolektivna pogajanja omogo\u010dijo VSEM na\u0161im \u010dlanom, hkrati pa moramo zagotoviti, da to ostane izklju\u010dno v rokah socialnih partnerjev, IN NE morebitnih (“rumenih”) organizacij, ki zastopajo svobodne poklice.<\/p>\n

Za morebitna vpra\u0161anja se obrnite name.
\nHvala in lep pozdrav,
\nRenate<\/p>\n

***********************************************************************************************************************************<\/p>\n

Collective bargaining agreements for self-employed \u2013 scope of application EU competition rules<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dear colleagues, dear affiliates from EU member states and EFTA,<\/p>\n

We are happy to announce that the European Commission is moving on the issue of\u00a0Collective bargaining agreements for self-employed \u2013 scope of application EU competition rules,\u00a0<\/strong>an\u00a0\u00a0issue the EFJ together with its sister unions from the European Entertainment Alliance (FIM, FIA and UNI-MEI) has been lobbying for years. The need for collective bargaining\u00a0on behalf\u00a0of\u00a0freelancers and self-employed workers without being hindered by competition authorities or publishers using the argument that it is not allowed to even propose fees’ recommendations, seen as prize fixing by competition authorities- has been one of our main issues within the Freelance Expert Group and beyond.<\/p>\n

The Commission recently has published an inception impact assessment (see below) and invites individuals and stakeholders to respond. From the over 90 mostly individual responses so far most come from independent translators, the Flemish Association of Journalists\u00a0 has also already responded, (see below) see:\u00a0\u00a0https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/info\/law\/better-regulation\/have-your-say\/initiatives\/12483-Collective-bargaining-agreements-for-self-employed-scope-of-application-EU-competition-rules<\/a><\/p>\n

Feedback is open till\u00a03 February!<\/strong>!! It would be great if you, your union, individual freelancers can respond and highlight the lack of equal and fair working conditions vis-a-vis self-employed, the impossibility to earn enough within the framework of media and platform concentration, lack of collective bargaining, lack of transparency of fees etc. You can mention the extremely low fees many of our freelancers receive. We shoud also mention the brain drain such unfair working conditions have on freelancers as ever more freelance journalists cannot afford continuing to work as freelance journalists. We should show the urgent need for social protection of the ever more precarious freelance workers, who are also most hit by the pandemic! It also has an effect on innovation, quality of journalism content besides the arguments mentioned by this impact assessment.<\/p>\n

The Commission proposes 4 options (see below). On behalf of the EFJ and its Freelance Group, we believe\u00a0option 4\u00a0<\/strong>with the widest scope is the best choice for a future regulation (A\u00a0regulation<\/strong>\u00a0is a legal act of the\u00a0European<\/strong>\u00a0Union that becomes immediately enforceable as law in all member states simultaneously and does not entail co-decision from the European Parliament).<\/p>\n

Please respond\u00a0here<\/a>. A maximum of 4000 characters (the EFJ submission is slightly below) :<\/p>\n

The Commission has asked us whether any freelancers are working directly for the platform economy. If you have any data, please share with us.<\/p>\n

Enclosed you’ll find the response by the EFJ to this informal consultation (it is based on our response on the same issue within the framework of the Digital Service Act consultation.) Please adapt it to your situation possibly with some figures.<\/p>\n

For information, in March there will be a more detailed public consultation in which all national and European organisations (social partners) will be invited to respond. Of course, we are also in contact with the ETUC and other industry federations. Your input is much appreciated here! If all goes well within a year there may be a proposal for a regulation<\/p>\n

For us it is important to remove the barrier and make collective negotiations possible for ALL our members, at the same time we have to make sure that this exercise solely remains in the hands of social partners and NOT any (“yellow”) organisation representing freelancers!<\/p>\n

If you have any questions do not hesitate to get back to me.
\nThanks and best wishes,
\nRenate<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Annex:
\n1. EFJ Response
\n2. example: Flemish Association of Journalists
\n3 info on impact assessment1. response by the EFJ:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
In journalism including photojournalism, cartoonism etc, self-employed professionals do not (yet) directly work for platforms or at least not to our knowledge. However, many of the problems faced by platform and gig workers apply both on-and offline vis-a-vis media companies. Many freelance journalists cannot live from their remuneration\/fees derived from their journalistic work. Though they have high skills and often very expensive equipment their remuneration is far from equal to that of staff journalists doing the same work. This leads to an unprecedented brain drain in the sector. EFJ affiliates have more and more freelance members but face the difficulty in providing services to them when it coms to defending fair remuneration and equal pay. The main problem is that competition rules dominate over employment rights and regard freelances & self-employed as undertakings and small cartels. In some EU countries dependent freelances or so-called permanent freelances’ can fall under collective agreements excluding pay (incl. Austria, Denmark, Germany, France). Like in the entertainment sector, in several EU countries competition authorities warned unions not to even recommend any minimum rates to their members referring to Article 101 of the TEU. It is high time to rectify this breach to fundamental trade union rights. And in particular in an environment where media concentration grows to an unprecedented level partly due to the monopolies of the big platforms and up to 80% of advertisement income going to them and not to media anymore. Freelance\/self-employed journalists throughout Europe with slightly different statuses\/definitions and blurring lines share the same problem from the competition authorities to be regarded as undertakings and not workers. This deprives them of labour protections which are normally achieved through collective bargaining raising quality of work and income\/fees from their (mostly dependent) labour. In a sector, which increasingly becomes freelance, this of course weakens trade unions in organising freelance workers in an ever more fragile digital ecosystem. It is important to mention that collective bargaining is the exclusive competence of social partners. In this respect, genuine social dialogue and collective bargaining should be understood as negotiations between organised, representative and recognised social partners in accordance with national laws and traditions, in order not to legitimise company (\u201cyellow\u201d) unions under the influence of employers, wage fixing practices between employers or so-called \u201ccharters for good work\u201d one-sidedly drawn up by some online-platforms. What is key here, is to find clear solutions which do not invite different interpretations of “definitions” of workers for example but very clear extended rights to all self-employed workers in line with ILO standards. There needs to be legal clarity for employers and unions and self-employed workers alike regarding their (legitimate) right to collectively bargain for self-employed workers as well as platform workers. The pandemic crisis has accelerated the need for adjusting the unfair treatment, as freelancers are the first victims of the crisis in the media sector. For all these reasons, the EFJ believes that option 4 is the best solution as the wider the scope the better it finds solutions for all different categories our increasingly fragile and blurring sector represents.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

2. Response by Flemish Association of Journalists<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Flemish Association of Journalists represents a significant number of journalists in Flanders\/Brussels. In Belgium, almost 1 out of 4 journalists works on a freelance basis. Some of them, especially journalists dealing with local news but also journalists working for digital only media & photo journalists are poorly remunerated. This gives cause for concern because poor social conditions might impact your independence as a journalist.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

At this stage, a more appropriate remuneration is a far away dream because of freelancers’ weak individual and collective bargaining position. Individually because media concentration is high in Belgium. Collectively because of legal restrictions as self-employed are considered as undertakings under compettiion law. The latter basically means no publication of (recommended) rates and no room for negotiation with sector partners about eg. minimum rates. National policy differences (in some countries partners actually have entered into collective bargaining agreements for self-employed, …) show that this is an untenable situation. It is time to put an end to legal uncertainty.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

3. extract of inception impact assessment
\n“Competition: Commission invites comments on inception impact assessment on\u00a0scope of application of EU competition law to\u00a0collective bargaining agreements for self-employed<\/strong><\/p>\n

The European Commission has published an\u00a0inception impact assessment<\/a>\u00a0as part of the process that aims at ensuring that\u00a0EU competition rules do not stand in the way of collective bargaining<\/a>\u00a0for those who need it. Digitisation is profoundly affecting the way people work, creating new opportunities also in the labour markets. Evidence shows for instance that a growing number of individuals engage in platform work. However, digitisation can also create challenges for individuals and put pressure on working conditions. These challenges are also present in certain forms of self-employment outside the platform economy. European competition rules do not apply to collective bargaining by workers but collective bargaining by self-employed considered as \u201cundertakings\u201d could be caught by competition rules.\u00a0 Whilst it is not for competition policy to address the social challenges faced by vulnerable self-employed,\u00a0EU competition rules should not be an obstacle to collective negotiations or agreements that aim at improving the working conditions of these individuals.\u00a0<\/u>In the inception impact assessment, the Commission has set out initial options to clarify that, provided that certain conditions are met, working conditions can be improved through collective agreements not only for employees but also for those self-employed who need protection, in line with EU competition rules. The Commission proposes to assess these different options through an impact assessment. The published inception impact assessment is an opportunity for the public and for all relevant stakeholders to comment on the form and scope of the initiative. Stakeholders are invited to provide input by 03\/02\/2021. A more detailed public consultation, based on a questionnaire, will take place during the first quarter of 2021.<\/p>\n

 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Neither collective negotiations\/agreements concerning trading conditions (such as prices charged) to private consumers nor unilateral price fixing would be covered by this initiative. In addition, the initiative would not introduce any obligation on any of the parties to enter into such negotiations or to conclude collective agreements: it would merely clarify that EU competition law would not stand in the way of such agreements where the parties concerned chose to enter into them.<\/p>\n

Against the baseline scenario, the Commission will consider different policy options that may be implemented through a\u00a0Council Regulation or a Commission Communication. The Commission has identified four\u00a0policy options\u00a0concerning the scope of the initiative. As mentioned above, according to Eurofound, one in four self- employed, can be seen as facing more precarious situations, with lower levels of income and job security. One way<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

6\u00a0For this competition law initiative, collective bargaining refers broadly to collective negotiations and\/or agreements aiming at improving working conditions and not to its narrower sense under labour law.
\n7\u00a0See e.g.\u00a0Independent Workers and Industrial relations in Europe\u00a0(2018);\u00a0Collective Bargaining in Times of Platform Work\u00a0(2020).<\/p>\n

2<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n

to identify these self-employed in need of protection, could therefore be to focus on those self-employed who have no employees and who rely on their own labour, as they can be expected to be in a weak position on the labour market. Therefore, re-sellers of goods would not be covered.<\/p>\n

\u00b7 \u00b7 \u00a0Option 1:\u00a0all solo self-employed providing their own labour through digital labour platforms. Under option 1, only individuals providing their own labour through platforms would have access to collective bargaining. It has been shown that some people working through platforms face significant challenges in terms of earnings and working conditions. Evidence indicates that\u00a0\u201cmost platform workers have little bargaining power\u201d and challenges in terms of working conditions seem to exist both in online and on- location platform work,8\u00a0especially in the case of low-skilled, repetitive, easily replaceable tasks. Therefore, this option would cover all people working through platforms, doing online and\/or on-location work through platforms.<\/p>\n

\u00b7 \u00b7 \u00a0Option 2:\u00a0all solo self-employed providing their own labour through digital labour platforms or to professional customers of a certain minimum size. This option is broader than option 1, because in addition to platform work it would also include traditional professions in the off-line economy, as long as they are not covered by other specific competition law provisions included in sectoral instruments.9\u00a0As mentioned in Section A above, a growing number of individuals are economically active through individual commercial service contracts (e.g. independent contractors, freelance workers), and in the last decades there has been a sharp increase of freelancers in intellectual and technical occupations in the service sector. This option includes a minimum size threshold for the counterparty with whom the self-employed may bargain collectively. The minimum size threshold would aim to prevent that the balance of negotiation power tilts against that counterparty. For the purposes of determining the minimum size of the counterparty, the use of the\u00a0definition\/thresholds of the SMEs\u00a0could be considered.<\/p>\n

\u00b7 \u00b7 \u00a0Option 3:\u00a0All solo self-employed providing their own labour through digital platforms or to professional customers of any size with the exception of regulated (and liberal) professions. Under this option, self-employed exercising regulated\/liberal professions would not be covered by the initiative. These professionals are often perceived as not being in a position of weakness. An issue to consider under this option would be the absence of a generally applicable EU definition of regulated\/liberal professions.<\/p>\n

\u00b7 \u00b7 \u00a0Option 4:\u00a0All solo self-employed providing their own labour through digital labour platforms or to professional customers of any size. Under this option, which is the widest in scope, there would be no restriction as regards the size of the counterpart in the collective bargaining\/agreement. Those counterparts would be allowed to bargain collectively too, for example across a certain sector, mirroring traditional collective bargaining. This may ensure that also small businesses could gain enough countervailing bargaining power against solo self-employed negotiating jointly. Under this option it could be further analysed whether public or semi-public professional associations that unite all professionals exercising regulated professions should be allowed to negotiate on behalf of their members. In any event, as in all options, unilateral price setting agreements are excluded.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Kolektivna pogajanja za samozaposlene – povabilo EFJ Dragi kolegi, drage \u010dlanice iz dr\u017eav \u010dlanic EU in EFTA! Z veseljem vam sporo\u010damo, da v Evropski komisiji prihaja do premikov glede kolektivnih pogajanj za samozaposlene – podro\u010dje uporabe pravil EU o konkurenci, vpra\u0161anja, za katerega EFJ skupaj s sestrskimi sindikati iz Evropskega zdru\u017eenja za zabavo (FIM, FIA in UNI-MEI) lobira \u017ee ve\u010d let. Potreba po kolektivnih pogajanjih v imenu svobodnjakov in samozaposlenih delavcev, ne da bi jih pri tem ovirali organi za varstvo konkurence ali izdajatelji z argumentom, da ni dovoljeno niti predlagati priporo\u010denih tarif, na kar organi za varstvo konkurence gledajo kot na dolo\u010danje cen, je v okviru na\u0161e strokovne skupine za svobodne poklice in tudi \u0161ir\u0161e eno izmed na\u0161ih osrednjih vpra\u0161anj. Komisija je nedavno objavila za\u010detno oceno u\u010dinka (glej spodaj), pri tem pa posameznike in dele\u017enike vabi, naj podajo svoje mnenje. Ve\u010dino izmed doslej prejetih ve\u010d kot 90 prete\u017eno posami\u010dnih odgovorov so posredovali neodvisni prevajalci, odzvalo se je tudi Flamsko zdru\u017eenje novinarjev (glej spodaj):\u00a0 https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/info\/law\/better-regulation\/have-your-say\/initiatives\/12483-Collective-bargaining-agreements-for-self-employed-scope-of-application-EU-competition-rules Mnenja sprejemajo do 3. februarja!!! Bilo bi super, \u010de bi se lahko vi, va\u0161 sindikat in posamezni svobodnjaki odzvali in poudarili pomanjkanje enakih delovnih pogojev za samozaposlene, nezmo\u017enost zagotoviti si zadosten zaslu\u017eek v pogojih koncentracije medijev in platform, odsotnosti kolektivnih pogajanj, netransparentnost tarif, itd. Omenite lahko izjemno nizke prejemke na\u0161ih svobodnjakov. Omeniti je treba tudi beg mo\u017eganov, ki ga spodbujajo tak\u0161ni nepo\u0161teni pogoji dela, saj si vse ve\u010d svobodnih novinarjev ne more privo\u0161\u010diti, da \u0161e naprej opravljajo svoje delo. Izpostaviti moramo potrebo po socialni za\u0161\u010diti vse bolj prekarnih svobodnjakov, ki jih je pandemija tudi najbolj prizadela! Poleg argumentov, navedenih v oceni u\u010dinka, to vpliva tudi na inovativnost in kakovost novinarskih vsebin. Komisija predlaga \u0161tiri mo\u017enosti (glej spodaj). V imenu EFJ in njegove skupine za svobodnjake menimo, da je mo\u017enost 4, ki je naj\u0161ir\u0161a, najbolj\u0161a ureditev prihodnje uredbe. (Uredba je pravni akt Evropske unije, ki se v vseh dr\u017eavah \u010dlanicah hkrati neposredno uveljavi z zakonsko mo\u010djo in ne zahteva soodlo\u010danja Evropskega parlamenta). Prosimo, da svoje mnenje podate tukaj. Omejitev je 4.000 znakov (odziv EFJ je na koncu): Komisija nas je vpra\u0161ala, ali kak\u0161ni svobodnjaki delajo neposredno za platforme. \u010ce imate kak\u0161ne podatke, nam jih prosim posredujte. Spodaj je odziv EFJ na to neformalno posvetovanje (temelji na na\u0161em odzivu na isto zadevo v okviru posvetovanj o zakonu o digitalnih storitvah). Prosim, da ga prilagodite va\u0161i situaciji in, \u010de je mo\u017eno, dodate kak\u0161ne konkretne \u0161tevilke. Marca sledi bolj podrobna javna razprava, h kateri bodo vabljene vse nacionalne in evropske organizacije (socialni partnerji). Seveda smo v stiku tudi z ETUC in drugimi pano\u017enimi zvezami. Va\u0161 odziv bo ve\u010d kot dobrodo\u0161el. \u010ce bo \u0161lo vse po sre\u010di, bi lahko v enem letu pri\u0161lo do predloga uredbe. Za nas je pomembno, da se odstranijo ovire in se kolektivna pogajanja omogo\u010dijo VSEM na\u0161im \u010dlanom, hkrati pa moramo zagotoviti, da to ostane izklju\u010dno v rokah socialnih partnerjev, IN NE morebitnih (“rumenih”) organizacij, ki zastopajo svobodne poklice. Za morebitna vpra\u0161anja se obrnite name. Hvala in lep pozdrav, Renate *********************************************************************************************************************************** Collective bargaining agreements for self-employed \u2013 scope of application EU competition rules Dear colleagues, dear affiliates from EU member states and EFTA, We are happy to announce that the European Commission is moving on the issue of\u00a0Collective bargaining agreements for self-employed \u2013 scope of application EU competition rules,\u00a0an\u00a0\u00a0issue the EFJ together with its sister unions from the European Entertainment Alliance (FIM, FIA and UNI-MEI) has been lobbying for years. The need for collective bargaining\u00a0on behalf\u00a0of\u00a0freelancers and self-employed workers without being hindered by competition authorities or publishers using the argument that it is not allowed to even propose fees’ recommendations, seen as prize fixing by competition authorities- has been one of our main issues within the Freelance Expert Group and beyond. The Commission recently has published an inception impact assessment (see below) and invites individuals and stakeholders to respond. From the over 90 mostly individual responses so far most come from independent translators, the Flemish Association of Journalists\u00a0 has also already responded, (see below) see:\u00a0\u00a0https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/info\/law\/better-regulation\/have-your-say\/initiatives\/12483-Collective-bargaining-agreements-for-self-employed-scope-of-application-EU-competition-rules Feedback is open till\u00a03 February!!! It would be great if you, your union, individual freelancers can respond and highlight the lack of equal and fair working conditions vis-a-vis self-employed, the impossibility to earn enough within the framework of media and platform concentration, lack of collective bargaining, lack of transparency of fees etc. You can mention the extremely low fees many of our freelancers receive. We shoud also mention the brain drain such unfair working conditions have on freelancers as ever more freelance journalists cannot afford continuing to work as freelance journalists. We should show the urgent need for social protection of the ever more precarious freelance workers, who are also most hit by the pandemic! It also has an effect on innovation, quality of journalism content besides the arguments mentioned by this impact assessment. The Commission proposes 4 options (see below). On behalf of the EFJ and its Freelance Group, we believe\u00a0option 4\u00a0with the widest scope is the best choice for a future regulation (A\u00a0regulation\u00a0is a legal act of the\u00a0European\u00a0Union that becomes immediately enforceable as law in all member states simultaneously and does not entail co-decision from the European Parliament). Please respond\u00a0here. A maximum of 4000 characters (the EFJ submission is slightly below) : The Commission has asked us whether any freelancers are working directly for the platform economy. If you have any data, please share with us. Enclosed you’ll find the response by the EFJ to this informal consultation (it is based on our response on the same issue within the framework of the Digital Service Act consultation.) Please adapt it to your situation possibly with some figures. For information, in March there will be a more detailed public consultation in which all national and European organisations (social partners) will be invited to respond. Of course, we are also in contact with the ETUC and other industry federations. Your input is much appreciated here! If all goes well within a year there may be a proposal for a regulation For us it is important to remove the barrier and make […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1370","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-novice"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1370","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1370"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1370\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1373,"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1370\/revisions\/1373"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1370"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1370"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sindikat-novinarjev.si\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1370"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}