Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
We were pleased to participate in the presentation of the Fairwork Polska Report for 2025. We completely agree with the statements contained in the report, which can be summarized briefly: another year has passed, and the situation of those working for the Platforms has not changed. Employee rights in this sector are nonexistent.
However, since there was no room for a real discussion of this situation during the presentation, and generally, such a discussion is not being held anywhere, we are taking the liberty of presenting our position in this way.
Two key issues:
Firstly, the lack of a voice in the debate by the workers themselves. The presentation was attended by those working for the Platforms. Their representatives, who are active in trade unions, were also present. However, with very limited time for the debate, representatives of the Entrepreneurs’ Associations (representing the interests of the Platforms) were allowed to speak, not those mentioned in the Report – the workers. Why is this? Is it perhaps out of fear that their criticism might offend those representing the government or the Platforms? Or perhaps because they won’t speak coherently and eloquently? We hope this is simply an oversight, a lack of attention on the part of the presenters.
The second important issue. We have attended many meetings about working for Platforms. And we have noticed that the most important issue is never discussed: employee earnings. There were presentations about the importance of flexible work models and the protection of personal data stored by Platforms. The people who prepared this year’s Fairwork Report also focused on other issues, such as the lack of social security. All these issues are very important, of course. But why do we all consistently avoid discussing earnings? Is it really wise to avoid the fact that one Platform proposed 6 PLN gross per hour for a Supplier in 2024? Or perhaps our silence on this matter is consenting to this situation?
So let’s remember: we work for money, to have a living. Everything else is just a bonus. We feel like we’ve all lost sight of this simple principle.
The comments following the presentation of the Report raised several specific issues, which we’d also like to address in a few points.
1. The Pyszne.pl Platform and the Report
The Pyszne.pl Platform received the highest score in the Report. This creates the impression that this Platform offers significantly better conditions for employees. This impression is created despite the Report stating, perhaps not entirely clearly, that even Pyszne.pl fails to meet the so-called minimum FairWork conditions. To reinforce this message, we’ll add, as a reminder: Pyszne.pl still doesn’t employ any employees. It still uses an employment intermediary, thanks to which it avoids liability. It still refuses to recognize sick leave, delays payments, and employs anti-employee work arrangements. All of this can be heard from representatives of the Trade Union operating within this Platform.
2. Optimizing Employment Forms
In the debate about working for the Platforms (as well as in the Report itself), the phrase “non-standard forms of employment” is often used. For us, calling this situation this way is simply insulting. Why do we avoid calling it what it is? It’s simply exploitation. Why do we call it “tax optimization” when we know it’s simply tax avoidance? Of course, we know there’s a subtle difference, a nuance. But if we, the pro-worker community, continue to be afraid to call it what it is, we’ll never change anything. Why can government officials in Spain publicly speak about “bogus self-employment”? Why does the Italian prosecutor’s office explicitly call the situation in Delivery Platforms “labor exploitation”? Why do we, on the other hand, keep skimming the surface and playing tricks, avoiding the heart of the matter?
3. Flexibility
When we allow the other side, the representatives of the Platforms, to speak, we always hear the same thing. They repeat that many people working for the Platforms value this work for its flexibility. And that any legal regulations will eliminate this crucial quality for employees. The underlying message is: it’s the employees themselves who don’t want these regulations. Well, no! There are people who want them, who even demand them. Of course, there are those who don’t. As with anything in life, nothing is clear-cut. Therefore, we have a simple answer to the demand for maintaining flexibility. Let’s simply implement it 100%! This way, those who want to be employed under employment contracts will be able to freely decide to do so. And those who don’t want to should choose another form. Why should the law be flexible, and not employers, i.e., the Platforms? Let the Platforms be flexible in their approach to employees. But never at the expense of employee rights. And also: where does the fear that an employment contract negates flexibility come from? Why should compliance with labor law, however, be a priority? Should it also limit flexibility in working hours? An employment contract does not mean forced work of eight hours, five days a week.
4. Platform Work Directive
During the meeting presenting the Fairwork Polska 2025 Report, Agnieszka Wołoszyn, Deputy Director of the Department of Labor Law at the Ministry of Family, Labor and Social Policy, spoke about the Ministry’s plans for implementing the Directive. Once again, we heard about delays in the schedule, as well as about the pending completion of the so-called Social Dialogue at the Social Dialogue Council.
In response, we would like to raise two very important issues. Firstly, what if delaying the completion of the Dialogue is a deliberate strategy by lobbyists representing the platforms? Is the Ministry aware of the large interests at stake here? The annual revenue of one of the platforms is equal to the annual budget of the National Health Fund. Secondly, for us, the workers, every day without workers’ rights is another day of exploitation. We no longer have the strength to wait. Truly, it’s time to act, it’s time to change this world, and not wait for the consent of those who don’t like these changes.
According to Agnieszka Wołoszyn, the implementation of the Directive is being considered to introduce a procedure in which employees would have to prove they are employees of the Platforms. If such a scenario is truly being considered, nothing will change. Currently, employees can also go to court and fight for it. And it’s no coincidence that no one in Poland has yet decided to do so. After all, how can someone earning 2,000-3,000 złoty a month fight a corporation and its millions in law firm budget in court? In our opinion, the key to solving the problem is eliminating employment intermediaries. In the case of Delivery or Passenger Transport Platforms, these are so-called Fleet Partners. Their presence guarantees immunity for the Platforms. Employees have a signed contract with the Partner (and receive remuneration from them), but the Platform executes instructions and supervises their work via an algorithm. This arrangement makes it impossible to truly determine who is responsible for what; it’s unclear who is responsible for exploitation, the lack of workers’ rights, accidents, and so on. If we’re going to court to fight for our rights, who should we file a lawsuit against?
Working for platforms is exactly the same as short-term rental housing. It was supposed to be a perfect complement to the market, a fulfillment of the idea of ”sharing.” We all know what this has led to in the real estate market. And continuing to allow exploitation on platforms will lead to exactly the same thing. If one employer can foul and play unfairly in the labor market, then everyone else will soon do the same.
We realize that our position may be perceived as a pointless criticism of allies in the common fight for workers’ rights. However, we’re not writing this to burn all bridges and never work together again. No. We’re doing this precisely because we want to achieve success together. Together, we want to end the exploitation of people working for platforms. And as Socrates said: you should pay me for inciting your children against you.
Zentrale