Response to interpellation 2024/25:734 on working conditions within the gig economy
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns working conditions and the work environment within the gig economy. L argues that all workers should have good conditions and that the Swedish model, where the parties are responsible for wage formation and conditions, must be protected 1 2 3 4. The Government has appointed an inquiry on how the EU's platform directive should be implemented to improve conditions and counter false self-employment 1 2 3. S believes that political responsibility is required to handle low wages and lack of security, which they exemplify with food delivery riders who receive very low hourly wages 5 6. S questions whether the inquiry and the directive are sufficient to guarantee good conditions across the entire labor market.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me if I intend to act to rectify the working conditions and the work environment for those who work within the areas of the gig economy where these do not function, and if a judgment regarding work environment responsibility has prompted me to make any new assessments regarding measures within the gig economy. I would like to start by thanking Eva Lindh for the interpellation.
Safe conditions shall prevail even in a changing working life. All employees in Sweden shall have good working conditions and a safe working environment, regardless of the form of the work. Technical development makes it possible to deliver services in new ways through digital tools, such as platforms, which can affect how the work is organized.
The Swedish labor market model must be protected even within the gig economy. The model implies that the parties in the labor market take primary responsibility for working conditions and are responsible for wage formation.
The Government has appointed an inquiry to investigate how the EU's so-called platform directive shall be implemented in Swedish law. The directive aims, among other things, to improve working conditions for platform work, that is, work within the so-called gig economy. The inquiry shall report its findings by December 31 this year at the latest. I look forward to reviewing the inquiry's report.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! First, I would like to be polite and say hello to Minister for Employment Johan Britz. We have not met before, so it was nice to say hello.
We are going to talk about the gig economy and its downsides. My approach in this is that it requires political responsibility from all of us to tackle this.
In the spring, the food delivery couriers working for Wolt in Norrköping went on strike. They testified about working conditions that actually do not belong in Sweden in 2025: unreasonably long workdays and incomes of around 10,000 kronor a month before tax. When costs incurred for their job, namely for car, phone, and other equipment, are deducted, it means an hourly wage of around 17 kronor for those who went on strike.
It is far below what anyone should have to accept on the Swedish labor market. We can only imagine how difficult it would be to actually live on 17 kronor an hour.
In addition to the low compensation, which is upsetting in itself, this is also a matter of the work environment, safety, and security. If one does not have work clothes, protective equipment, or reasonable conditions in traffic, it naturally affects the work environment.
The couriers have formally been considered self-employed. That is where the difficulty lies. The Minister for Employment highlights the Swedish model, which I love and think is fantastically good in very many ways. But right here, it is difficult with the Swedish model. Some companies have indeed considered the couriers to be self-employed. Who then has the responsibility for the working environment?
There has been a long legal dispute between Arbetsmiljöverket and Wolt, and in June the court established that the occupational environment responsibility lies with Wolt. The dispute over who has the primary responsibility has finally received a final ruling: Wolt has the occupational environment responsibility. The judgment is, as we usually call it, precedential. This means that other platform companies shall also be assessed based on the same principles. Wolt must now – at the latest from last Monday, September 1, I believe – have routines in place to prevent accidents and ill health, just like other employers.
Now that this has been changed and the court has reached its decision, it becomes a somewhat different situation. We no longer need to dispute whether the companies have a responsibility or not. But it also has consequences for how we should conduct ourselves in politics.
A couple of years ago, the EU Commission estimated that over 28 million people in the EU work via digital platforms, and the number is expected to rise. In Sweden, it is estimated that tens of thousands of people work in the gig economy.
The conditions are very different. Some have very low incomes, others do not. But what lies in line is that it is a bit difficult to determine who has the responsibility for the employment and the working environment.
My question to the Minister for Employment remains. Even though the Minister for Employment now refers to the fact that an investigation is underway, what does the Minister for Employment think about this? And does the Minister for Employment consider that we need to act in some way?
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! For obvious reasons, I refrain from commenting on the conditions in individual companies or reviewing judgments. I believe that Eva Lindh and I share the appreciation of the Swedish model.
The parties in the labor market have a great responsibility. The Swedish model has managed changes in the labor market previously thanks to the parties taking their responsibility. I hope and believe that the parties will continue to take that responsibility.
Eva Lindh touched upon the issue of employees. It is one of the questions that the investigation shall look into. They shall look at how a so-called presumption for establishing correct employment status shall be implemented in Swedish law. Put simply, it is about how correct employment status, that is, whether a person is an employee or not, shall be established. I truly look forward to receiving the investigation's proposals. The purpose of the regulations from the EU is to improve working conditions and counteract so-called false self-employed persons.
Eva Lindh (S)
Mr. Speaker! Now, there is a legal dispute ongoing between a company, Wolt, and Arbetsmiljöverket, so I nevertheless take the liberty of continuing to use them as an example. However, this does not mean that this only applies to Wolt. But it is very clear that here, working conditions and the work environment have not been reasonable in any way.
There are, therefore, other examples, and it does not only concern those who work for Wolt but also people in other parts of the gig economy. This then also becomes a responsibility on a larger national level. Had it only concerned a single company, Wolt, it would of course also have been very concerning and something that one must do something about. But we know that it is tough when it comes to working conditions and the work environment within the gig economy. Therefore, one must also draw conclusions in the larger perspective and not just for those who work for Wolt.
This is, therefore, a case that is clear and distinct. A fine was issued for Wolt to conduct a risk assessment of the work. But it is not just about this – that Wolt had not conducted any risk assessment of the work – but also about the fact that the company has slave wages: 17 kronor an hour! They are long workdays. They can be up to 12 hours long, and it is also problematic that the employees do not get paid for all these hours. While they wait for assignments, they receive no payment at all, even though they cannot take any other work during that time.
I have an example from the cleaning industry, where the gig economy also exists. There are cleaners who must register to work 8–17, for example, and during that time they are not allowed to take any other job. They are not paid for anything other than exactly the job that has been performed, but they are not allowed to take any other job. This causes great difficulties for them, and it also means very low wages. They are stuck in agreements that mean they have to sit and wait to get a job, but they do not get paid during that time. Sometimes they might have the bad luck of not getting paid at all during those eight hours.
I have also seen how Wolt has responded to this. It is said that no one has been forced to work in this system. I think that is a very cynical answer. Many of those who work within the gig economy have difficulty finding employment elsewhere. They are forced to take the jobs they get. To simply say that no one has forced them is very cynical. So we are not to have it in Sweden, so we are not to have it on the Swedish labor market. That is why we have the Swedish model.
We must have good conditions in the entire labor market, also when it comes to the gig economy. Now I hear that the Minister does not want to answer but refers to the investigation. But even if the Minister does not want to judge just Wolt – though now it is not just Wolt that is concerned but several other employers – I wonder: Does the Minister think that the conditions that many of those who work within the gig economy have are okay?
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! Of course, all workers in Sweden shall have the right to the protection that follows from the labor law and occupational health and safety law framework.
Eva Lindh requests the big picture. The big picture is that we now have a platform directive from the EU. We have now appointed an inquiry to find a good implementation of it. Anyone who reads the directives understands that the questions regarding working conditions and the work environment within the gig economy are not easy to investigate. It is legally complex to find a suitable balance between different interests.
It is also important in this context to safeguard companies' innovative power and competitiveness, while at the same time it must be a given that workers in Sweden have good working conditions and a good working environment. There I believe that Eva Lindh and I are in complete agreement.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! I must thank you for the fact that we are in agreement, even though I think that what we are in agreement on is at a rather high and not so concrete level, that is to say we think that everyone should have good working conditions and a good working environment.
The question is what we should do about this. The Minister for Employment says that a platform directive is on the way, that it is complex and that it is difficult to know how to implement it. But then I wonder: Does the Minister for Employment believe that it is enough for us to implement this platform directive? It is also, in some way, an assessment. It is not just about how we should implement this and whether it is complex and that there are difficulties. It is also about this: Will it have the effect that we can expect, that is, that workers within the gig economy have the same working conditions as everyone else, i.e., good working conditions and wages? Because that is what we should have on the Swedish labor market.
It is clear that there will always be difficulties in, so to speak, drawing the consequences of this. We know that it is increasing. We know that there are more. We know that this affects very many today, as it is. But there is also a risk that this increases so much that it takes over a large part of the Swedish labor market, and then we need to be prepared.
The problem is here and now. Many are having an incredibly tough time with low wages, tough conditions, and a work environment where safety is lacking. The assessments are that there will be more. I wonder therefore: Will this be enough? Do we need to do more so that we can have good working conditions across the entire Swedish labor market?
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! It is difficult to say if it will be enough. But the starting point is, as I have said I believe we are in complete agreement on, that workers in Sweden shall have good working conditions and a good working environment. In addition, the government safeguards the Swedish model, and the parties' ability to handle this type of challenge has historically proven to be very good. I am optimistic that we will find a system that ensures that any potential deviations that exist are handled in a reasonable manner.
The starting point is, as I said, that workers in Sweden shall have good working conditions and a good working environment.
With this, I would like to once again thank Eva Lindh for this interpellation.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.