骑手、主播劳动权益如何保护？警惕平台故意“去劳动关系”

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai First Intermediate People's Court has released a white paper on labor rights protection for new employment forms, highlighting the increasing number of labor dispute cases involving gig economy workers, particularly delivery riders and live-streaming hosts [1] Group 1: Labor Dispute Trends - From January 1, 2022, to October 31, 2025, the number of second-instance labor dispute cases related to new employment forms has shown a slight annual increase, with delivery riders making up 32% of the cases [1] - More than half of these cases involve requests for confirmation of labor relationships and claims for wage differences, overtime pay, and compensation for unused annual leave [1] Group 2: Challenges in Confirming Labor Relationships - The confirmation of labor relationships is a significant challenge for gig economy workers seeking to protect their rights, as it is a prerequisite for legal protection under labor laws [2] - In a case involving a delivery rider, the court initially found insufficient evidence to establish a labor relationship despite the rider's claims of management by the company [2][3] - The court later recognized the labor relationship based on the company's management practices, emphasizing that the essence of labor management should be the focus rather than the superficial aspects of flexible work arrangements [3] Group 3: Employer Strategies to Avoid Labor Relationships - Some employers design contracts to avoid establishing labor relationships, often requiring gig workers to register as individual business owners while still exerting significant control over their work [4][5] - The complexity of identifying the actual employer is exacerbated by the opaque nature of algorithms used for wage calculations, which are typically controlled by the platform companies [5] Group 4: Case Studies Involving Delivery Riders - In a case involving a delivery worker, the court had to navigate through multiple related companies to identify the true employer, ultimately determining that a formal agreement was merely a means to evade labor responsibilities [6][7] - The court concluded that the substantial control exercised by the company over the worker's tasks indicated a labor relationship despite the formal contractual arrangements [7] Group 5: Issues Faced by Live-Streaming Hosts - Live-streaming hosts also face challenges, particularly regarding ambiguous non-compete agreements that can lead to disputes over their obligations after leaving a company [8][9] - The court ruled in favor of a host who was not held liable for breach of contract due to unclear terms in the non-compete agreement, highlighting the need for clarity in such contracts [9]