Geneva, June 2026 – For millions of gig workers worldwide, the future of work shaped by artificial intelligence is already here. Algorithms set pay, assign tasks, monitor performance, and even determine whether workers can continue working. This level of control, often without the responsibilities of traditional employment, has left many workers with unstable pay, unsafe conditions, and little recourse when problems arise.
From June 1 to 12, governments are meeting at the International Labour Organization (ILO) in Geneva to negotiate the first binding global standard for platform work. The treaty under discussion would regulate jobs managed through apps and websites, including taxis, delivery, home care, cleaning, and online piecework. Central to the debate is whether companies that exercise employer-like control should be required to treat workers as employees and comply with labor protections.
Gig work today offers a preview of what happens when companies use technology to manage labor without accountability. While platforms promise flexibility and independence, workers often face poverty wages, arbitrary dismissal, and uncompensated injuries. Companies rely on software to closely monitor workers, then use contracts to deny responsibility, shifting risks onto workers while maintaining control.
The scale of this model is growing rapidly. DoorDash, operating in 30 countries, reported 38 percent revenue growth in late 2025, while Uber, active in about 70 countries, ranked ninth on Fortune’s list of fastest-growing public companies, with earnings per share rising 445 percent over three years. These companies generate value by shifting costs off their books and onto workers and society.
Human Rights Watch interviews with workers in 10 countries revealed widespread abuses. In Beirut, a 74-year-old Uber driver lost his car and income after being attacked, with no support from the company. In Gulf countries, delivery workers cycled in extreme heat, unable to refuse unsafe orders. In India, injured workers covered their own medical costs, while in the UK, some went months without income or compensation after workplace assaults.
Some governments have begun to act. Mexico extended social security and labor protections to certain full-time platform workers. In India, protests led to restrictions on 10-minute delivery promises that endangered workers. Courts in the UK, France, Spain, and Italy have recognized rights that companies sought to avoid. Yet these gains remain fragile and uneven without global standards.
The ILO argues that strong standards must start from a basic principle: if a company controls the worker, it must bear the responsibilities of an employer. This includes presumption of employment, pay for all working time, safety protections, social security, protection from arbitrary deactivation, and the right to understand and challenge algorithmic decisions.
Opponents claim stronger rules would undermine flexibility, but many workers say that flexibility is illusory. Even if they can choose when to log on, they deserve protection from poverty wages and unsafe conditions. If a business model depends on evading workers’ rights, regulation is not only justified but necessary.
The negotiations in Geneva are about more than gig platforms. They are about whether labor law can keep pace with algorithmic management and digital control. Without clear rules, software risks becoming a powerful tool for exploitation. Governments now have the chance to set global limits and ensure that workers’ rights remain central in the digital economy.
