Recent developments in a few countries, such as Italy, have opened an emerging bridge between platform work and criminal law. Debates traditionally focused on whether the conditions faced by platform workers, such as in logistics, click work and delivery, approach what some scholars describe as ‘modern slavery'. While empirical research has long characterised these conditions as exploitation, it has mainly relied on economic and sociological understandings of the term. Legal scholarship, in contrast, has largely concentrated on labour law and data protection, examining whether platform workers qualify as employees and whether algorithmic management practices comply with data‑protection standards. Criminal law, however, has remained a comparatively overlooked field within this debate. Yet criminal law becomes relevant when working conditions reach a threshold of severity that may justify its intervention. At the international level, the International Labour Organization has long advocated for the eradication of forced labour, although the Forced Labour Convention 1930 does not impose its criminalisation. More broadly, the offence of human trafficking benefits from substantial global recognition due to the wide ratification of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (2000), alongside several regional instruments. This presentation examines whether the anti‑trafficking framework could offer additional protections to platform workers and highlights the challenges in applying this framework to a highly diverse and rapidly evolving labour context. It draws on international and regional standards, selected European national examples, and extensive criminological literature on human trafficking. Insights from longstanding debates and recurrent limitations within the anti‑trafficking field provide a useful lens for anticipating the obstacles that may arise when extending these norms to platform work. Three questions guide the presentation. First, what rights and benefits would arise if platform workers were formally recognised as victims of human trafficking? The discussion considers both general rights afforded to victims of crime and the specific entitlements associated with trafficking, such as the reflection period and the right to a residence permit. Second, what barriers impede the identification of platform workers as trafficked persons? The presentation explores the persistent difficulty experienced by law enforcement authorities in recognising new forms of exploitation, the issue of lack of self-identification, and assesses how labour inspectorates and trade unions may help overcome these challenges. Third, can platform work meaningfully fall within the legal definition of human trafficking? Here, the presentation contrasts social‑scientific understandings of ‘exploitation' with the more stringent legal thresholds and interrogates the significance of employment status in determining whether platform work qualifies as trafficking. Ultimately, this contribution aims to stimulate a multidisciplinary conversation on the potential and the limits of criminal law, particularly anti‑trafficking frameworks, in addressing severe labour abuses within platform economies.
Subject :
:
Abstract
Comment
:
Good luck with the intensive organisational work!
Topics
:
Working conditions, occupational safety and health of workers in the human-in-the-loop
Topics
:
Legal frameworks, regulatory initiatives, and institutional responses
Keywords
:
Exploitation ; human trafficking ; modern slavery ; victim identification ; victim rights
