디지털플랫폼 노동 종사자의 근로자성 여부

Abstract

Technology is increasingly changing the efficiencies and modalities of work. The digital era has changed employment relationships dramatically, causing a considerable degree of legal uncertainty as to which rules apply in cyberspace. Crowdsourcing aims to organise the outsourcing of tasks to a large pool of online workers(crowd) by means of an internet-based digital platform. The forms of crowdsourcing(-working) are highly diverse and poorly defined. The number of platforms and crowdworkers is large and rapidly growing although the number of registered workers per platform is inaccurate. Some processes of crowdwork involve internet-based work that is performed wholly in cyberspace. Other types of crowdwork are aided by cellphone applications (apps) or websites. They rely on technology to deploy workers to perform tasks for requesters in the real world paying for these services, with the app or platform keeping a percentage of the exchange. The Article describes the definition of crowdsourcing and its advantages and risks for the crowdsourcer and the crowdworker. The Article explores also the relationship of the crowdsourcer, platform and the crowdworker and nature of the contract between them in order to determine the legal status of the crowd. The question of employee status is important because it is a question to determine the rights and benefits owed in employment law including minimum wage, protection from discrimination, working time regulation, unfair dismissal, and worker’s compensation. Under Korean law, whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor is determined through various multi-factored tests dependent on the facts of the relationship from case law. Some of the factors for finding employee status are whether the employer may direct the way in which the work is performed, determine the hours involved, and provide the employee with direction. On the other hand, elements that lean toward independent contractor classification include high-skilled work, workers providing their own equipment, workers setting their own schedules, and workers getting paid per project, not per hour. In an alternate test, courts examine the economic realities of the relationship to determine whether the worker is exhibiting entrepreneurial activity or whether the worker is financially dependent upon the employer. The label affixed to the relationship is a factor in the outcome, but it is certainly not dispositive. A number of conditions apply that make it difficult to establish definitively that crowdworkers should be regarded as employees. For instance, workers may work for multiple platforms, and/or supply their own equipment. Overall, the employment status of crowd workers is one of a number of unresolved issues.