---
title: "The Shift in International Rules on Platform Work: ILO Convention No. 193 and the Avilés Declaration"
locale: en
category: knowledge_base
category_name: "Knowledge Base"
translation_status: reviewed
license: cc_by
author: "Injoys Editorial Team"
source_url: https://injoys.com/en/articles/ilo-convention-193-aviles-declaration-platform-work-rules
published_at: 2026-08-23T20:20:17+09:00
---

# The Shift in International Rules on Platform Work: ILO Convention No. 193 and the Avilés Declaration

> ILO Convention No. 193 is an international labor convention dedicated to platform work, while the Avilés Declaration is a regional policy commitment adopted by Spain and Latin American countries. Both documents strengthen principles on employment status, pay, occupational safety, social security, personal data, and algorithmic management, but differ in their legal effect and methods of domestic implementation.

## Key Points

- ILO Convention No. 193 is a convention that creates obligations under international law for ratifying countries, whereas the Avilés Declaration is a political and policy agreement that is not subject to ratification.
- Even if a platform labels a worker as an independent contractor in a contract, employment status should be determined based on actual direction and control and how the work is performed.
- Algorithmic decisions that affect livelihoods, such as automated job allocation, ratings, pay calculation, and account suspension, require disclosure of information, human oversight, and an appeals process.
- The adoption of the convention alone does not immediately grant the same rights to platform workers in every country; ratification, reform of domestic laws, and administrative enforcement must follow.
- The Avilés Declaration links platform regulation with informal employment, care work, the social economy, and AI policy in the labor sector.

Platform-based delivery riders, drivers, domestic and care service providers, freelancers, and online workers receive work through platforms and are controlled not only by their contractual counterparties but also by automated dispatch and evaluation systems. However, existing labor laws were designed around workplaces and traditional employer-employee relationships, and often failed to clearly define who is responsible for platform work and the scope of workers’ rights.

Convention No. 193, adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) on June 12, 2026, is the first international labor convention dedicated to addressing this gap in the platform economy. The Avilés Declaration on Labour, adopted on July 2 of the same year, is a regional policy agreement under which Spain and Latin American countries will jointly address platform work, artificial intelligence in the field of labor, care, and the social and solidarity economy.

## What Changed in 2026

As of August 23, 2026, the main developments are as follows.

| Date | Action | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| June 12, 2026 | Adoption of ILO Convention No. 193 | A global international labor standard on decent work in the platform economy was established. |
| July 2, 2026 | Adoption of the Avilés Declaration on Labour | Ibero-American countries presented a common direction on platforms, AI, care work, informal employment, and the social and solidarity economy. |
| August 4, 2026 | ILO released a related regional agenda | Regional discussions on translating the declaration into labor policy and institutional improvements became more concrete. |
| Scheduled for November 4–5, 2026 | Ibero-American Summit in Madrid | The agreement reached at the labor ministers’ level is expected to be carried forward to the summit-level agenda. The schedule and final outcome should be reconfirmed through official announcements. |

The key change is that platform work has been defined not as an exceptional issue arising from a new industry, but as a labor issue to which principles concerning remuneration, safety, social security, freedom of association, personal data, and non-discrimination must apply. At the same time, AI and algorithms are viewed not merely as work tools, but as management systems that determine working conditions.

## Differences Between ILO Convention No. 193 and the Avilés Declaration

The two documents point in the same direction, but differ in their legal nature and how they operate.

| Category | ILO Convention No. 193 | Avilés Declaration on Labour |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of document | An international labor convention that states may ratify | A political and policy declaration by Ibero-American labor ministers |
| Scope | Global international standards for the platform economy | A regional cooperation agenda centered on Spain, Portugal, and Latin America |
| Legal effect | Once ratified and in force for a country, it creates an obligation under international law to implement it | Because it is not a treaty, it requires no ratification and has no direct legal binding force |
| Main function | Establishes minimum principles required for platform work and states’ duty to protect | Shapes common policy directions, regional cooperation, and the agenda for subsequent summits |
| Domestic impact | Needs to be reflected in legislative, administrative, judicial, and collective bargaining systems | Serves as a reference framework for setting priorities for national policies and joint projects |

The adoption of the ILO Convention does not by itself automatically change the domestic law of every country. Each country must decide whether to ratify it and establish the necessary laws and enforcement systems. Whether the Convention may be applied directly in domestic courts after ratification may also vary depending on each country’s constitution and legal system.

Instead of legal binding force, the Avilés Declaration has a political coordination function. Countries can affirm a common agenda and connect it to follow-up meetings, policy plans, and technical cooperation, but individuals cannot immediately claim pay or reinstatement in court solely on the basis of the declaration.

## Scope of Platform Work Covered by the Convention

Platform work does not consist of only one type.

- **Location-based platform work:** Work performed at a specific location, such as delivery, passenger transport, cleaning, repairs, domestic services, and care
- **Online platform work:** Work performed remotely, such as translation, design, programming, data classification, and content review
- **Task-based work:** Work assigned in short units and paid on a per-task basis
- **Ongoing service work:** Work in which workers are connected to clients through a platform but provide services repeatedly over a certain period

An important aspect of the Convention is that eligibility for protection is not determined solely by the label used in a contract. Even if a platform classifies a worker as self-employed, a partner, or an independent contractor, it is necessary to examine who actually sets prices, assigns work, controls how the work is performed, and has the power to impose sanctions.

However, this does not mean that all platform workers are uniformly deemed employees. Rather, the approach is to accurately determine the existence of an employment relationship based on the actual facts and to provide necessary basic protections as platform workers even to those who are not recognized as being in an employment relationship.

## Employment Status Is Determined by the Actual Relationship, Not the Contractual Label

The most important question in platform work disputes is whether a worker is an employee or an independent business operator. The answer may affect the scope of minimum wage, working time, paid leave, workers’ compensation, dismissal protection, and social insurance coverage.

The facts that may be considered in making this determination include the following.

- Whether the platform effectively determines remuneration or fees
- Whether the worker can freely negotiate prices or terms with clients
- Whether refusing an automated assignment results in disadvantages to ratings or access to future work
- Whether the platform controls the sequence of tasks, routes, response times, or method of service
- Whether the platform can restrict account access or terminate the contract because of a low rating
- Whether the worker actually has an independent customer base and bears business risk

The Convention takes the approach of prioritizing the substance of the relationship over formal contractual language and requiring effective procedures for correcting misclassification. Each country must design specific determination criteria and legal presumptions through domestic law.

## Core Principles on Contractual Terms, Remuneration, Occupational Safety, and Social Security

### Contractual Terms and Remuneration

Platform workers should be able to understand their contractual terms before starting work. Information that directly affects income—such as how remuneration is calculated, platform fees, deductions, payment timing, and the grounds for account restrictions—must be clear.

In particular, if the total displayed on the screen differs from the amount actually paid, workers should be able to separately identify taxes, fees, insurance premiums, or other deductions. Applicable minimum remuneration standards and collective agreements must also be observed.

### Occupational Safety and Work Stoppages

Delivery and transport workers are exposed to traffic accidents and severe weather, while online workers may experience long waiting periods, repetitive tasks, and psychological strain. If an algorithm encourages rapid completion or pressures workers to accept tasks in dangerous situations, the technology’s design itself becomes an occupational safety risk.

States must therefore assess the risks of platform work and establish preventive measures. It is also important to ensure that workers are not disadvantaged solely because they avoided a serious and imminent danger.

### Social Security

When work is spread across multiple platforms and short-term contracts, it becomes difficult to identify who is responsible for paying social insurance contributions and to determine income. The Convention sets a direction for improving coverage and administrative procedures so that platform workers are not excluded from social security systems because of their form of employment.

At the domestic implementation stage, the following issues become central.

- How to aggregate income earned through multiple platforms
- In what proportions the platform, worker, or both should bear insurance contributions
- How to distinguish occupational injuries from ordinary accidents
- Which country’s system should apply to online work provided across borders

## Why Algorithmic Management Requires Human Oversight

Platform algorithms do not remain neutral recommendation tools. Automated dispatch, search visibility, rating calculations, remuneration adjustments, fraud detection, and account suspension can determine workers’ income and whether they can continue working.

| Algorithmic function | Potential impact on workers | Necessary safeguard |
|---|---|---|
| Automated dispatch | Differences in access to work and income | Information on assignment criteria and the consequences of rejection |
| Rating and ranking calculations | Reduced visibility and exclusion from bonuses | Evaluation criteria, correction of errors, and challenges to unfair evaluations |
| Dynamic remuneration calculations | Changes in remuneration for the same work | Explanation of calculation factors, fees, and deductions |
| Automated risk detection | Misidentification of legitimate activity as fraud | Human review and an opportunity to submit evidence |
| Account restriction or suspension | Immediate loss of income | Notice of reasons, an appeal process, and timely human judgment |

Transparency does not necessarily mean disclosing the entire source code. The key is to explain in a way that workers and their representatives can understand which systems significantly affect working conditions, what information is used, and what consequences the decisions produce.

Human oversight must also not be a merely formal procedure in which a person simply approves an automated decision. For the procedure to provide meaningful redress, a person with the authority to change the decision must review the worker’s explanation and relevant records.

## The Boundary Between Personal Data Protection and Workplace Surveillance

Platforms can collect large amounts of data, including location, login times, travel routes, customer ratings, messages, device information, and work-processing speed. Such data may be necessary for business operations, but it also carries the risk of being used for excessive surveillance, discriminatory inferences, or detecting union activity.

The necessary principles are as follows.

- Collect only data necessary for a legitimate purpose directly related to performing the work.
- Inform workers what data is collected, why it is collected, and with whom it is shared.
- Allow workers to access data about themselves and correct inaccurate information.
- Restrict excessive inferences and surveillance involving sensitive information or private matters.
- Examine the quality of data used in automated decisions and its potential for discrimination.
- Establish retention standards to prevent data from being stored indefinitely after contract termination.

Personal data protection and algorithmic transparency are not separate issues. If incorrect location records or customer ratings are entered into an account-suspension model, the right to correct data and the right to challenge automated decisions must operate together.

## Why Informal Employment, Care, and the Social Economy Are Addressed Together

The Avilés Declaration does not treat platform work solely as a separate issue of technology regulation. In many Latin American countries, informal work that is not adequately protected by social insurance and labor law is a major policy issue. As platforms digitize existing informal services, they may create transaction records, but they may also create a new form of informalization that shifts responsibility onto individuals.

Care and domestic services are also important points of connection. Platform-based matching for care can improve accessibility for users, but may also exacerbate low pay, irregular hours, gender disparities, and safety problems. This is why care needs to be viewed not simply as an intermediary service, but as a matter of social and labor policy.

The social and solidarity economy includes models such as cooperatives, mutual organizations, and social enterprises in which workers and local communities participate in operations. The Avilés Declaration emphasizes this area in order to diversify the ownership and decision-making structures of platforms themselves and explore alternatives for sharing the benefits of digital transformation with workers.

## Actual Rights Depend on Ratification and Incorporation into Domestic Law

Adoption of the Convention, national ratification, and domestic implementation are separate stages.

1. The Convention is adopted by the International Labour Conference.
2. Each member state submits the Convention to its competent national authorities and considers whether to ratify it.
3. Ratifying states align their laws and administrative systems with the date on which the Convention enters into force for that country.
4. The rules are enforced through labor inspection, social insurance, dispute resolution, and judicial procedures.
5. The ILO supervisory system reviews implementation by ratifying states.

Therefore, whether a worker can currently challenge an account suspension or demand social insurance coverage depends on the worker’s place of residence, place of work, contractual counterparty, the platform’s location, and the applicable country’s current law. The Convention can serve as a standard for interpreting and improving domestic rights, but it does not automatically create remedies that do not yet exist.

The Avilés Declaration likewise will not lead to direct changes in rights without follow-up legislation, budgets, and administrative plans. After the November 2026 summit, it will be necessary to examine not only whether the joint declaration is reaffirmed, but also whether a specific schedule, responsible institutions, and evaluation indicators are presented.

## Evidence and Auditability That Determine Whether the Rules Succeed

For platform regulation to work in practice, records that make it possible to reconstruct decisions are needed in addition to declarations of rights. This is a particularly important practical task when translating the Convention into domestic law and system design.

Platforms need to be designed to retain the following records for an appropriate period and make them available for review in the event of a dispute.

- The time when work was offered, accepted, or rejected, and the assignment rules applied
- Calculations of remuneration, surcharges, fees, and deductions
- Reasons for changes to ratings and account restrictions
- Key input data and model versions used in automated decisions
- The human reviewer’s judgment, whether the decision was changed, and processing time
- Safety-related reports and the actions taken in response

Without records, platforms have difficulty explaining the legitimacy of their decisions, and workers have difficulty proving errors or discrimination. Conversely, recording every action without limits may constitute excessive surveillance, so purpose limitations, access rights, retention periods, and deletion standards must be established together.

Auditability is more complex for cross-border online platforms because workers, clients, platform entities, and servers may be located in different countries. Even if the Convention provides common principles, issues involving jurisdiction, applicable law, and information exchange among supervisory authorities must be resolved further through domestic law and international cooperation.

## Issues to Monitor Going Forward

- Which countries ratify Convention No. 193 and when it enters into force for each country
- How domestic criteria for distinguishing employees from independent contractors change
- To what extent remuneration and social insurance obligations apply to all platform workers
- Whether meaningful human review procedures are introduced for account suspensions and automated dispatch
- Whether worker representatives can participate in the introduction and modification of algorithms
- How applicable law and supervisory responsibility for cross-border online work will be determined
- Whether the Avilés Declaration leads to specific regional projects after the November 2026 summit

Because the number of ratifications and country-specific entry-into-force dates may continue to change, the latest status should be checked in the ILO’s official convention and ratification records.

## FAQ

### What is ILO Convention No. 193?
It is the international labor convention concerning decent work in the platform economy, adopted by the ILO on June 12, 2026. It sets out international principles concerning platform workers' employment status, contractual terms, remuneration, occupational safety, social security, freedom of association, personal data, and algorithmic management.

### Does the Convention apply to all platform workers as soon as it is adopted?
No. Each country must ratify the Convention, and once it enters into force for that country, the country is obligated under international law to implement it. The rights that workers may directly exercise domestically vary depending on the country's laws, ratification status, and implementation mechanisms.

### If someone has entered into an independent contractor agreement with a platform, can they not be considered an employee?
It is not determined solely by the title of the contract. A key direction of the Convention is that employment status must be determined by comprehensively assessing the actual relationship of control over pricing, work allocation, how work is performed, ratings, sanctions, and account suspension.

### Does Convention No. 193 regard all platform workers as employees?
No. The Convention requires employment relationships to be accurately determined based on the actual facts rather than formal classifications. People who are not found to be in an employment relationship may still receive the basic protections needed as platform workers, but the specific scope is determined by domestic law.

### Does algorithmic transparency mean that source code must be disclosed?
It does not necessarily mean that the entire source code must be disclosed. The key is to inform workers, in an understandable manner, of the existence, main operating criteria, and anticipated effects of systems that affect their remuneration, access to work, evaluations, or account status, and to allow them to challenge significant decisions.

### If an account is automatically suspended, must a person review the decision?
The Convention's direction is that automated decisions that significantly affect a person's livelihood require meaningful human oversight and an appeals procedure. However, the laws of the relevant country and the platform contract must be reviewed to determine the specific remedies currently available and the applicable processing deadlines.

### Is the Avilés Declaration legally binding?
The Avilés Declaration is not an international treaty or an ILO convention, but a political and policy agreement among Ibero-American countries. It does not create direct legal rights, but it can help set the direction of national legislation, administrative plans, and regional cooperation.

### Why does the Avilés Declaration address care and the social economy together?
This is because platform work is linked to informal employment, unstable social security, and the undervaluation of care work. Discussing the social and solidarity economy at the same time also makes it possible to consider platform alternatives, such as cooperatives or social enterprises, in which workers participate in management and profit distribution.

### Are the ILO Convention and the EU's platform work rules the same system?
No. ILO Convention No. 193 is a global international labor standard that can be ratified, while the EU rules constitute a separate regional legal framework for EU Member States. Their geographic scope and legal procedures differ, but they share a focus on addressing the risks of employment status misclassification and algorithmic management.

### Which country's law applies when someone works online across borders?
The Convention alone does not automatically resolve all cross-border jurisdictional issues. The location where the worker performs the work, the location of the platform's legal entity, the governing law of the contract, and the relevant country's mandatory labor laws must be considered together, and specific disputes may require professional legal assessment.

## Sources

- [ILO: How Will the New Convention No. 193 Promote Decent Work in the Platform Economy?](https://www.ilo.org/es/resource/articulo/como-promovera-el-nuevo-convenio-num-193-el-trabajo-decente-en-la-economia)
- [ILO: Ibero-American Ministers Adopt New Labor Commitments](https://www.ilo.org/es/resource/noticias/las-ministras-y-ministros-iberoamericanos-adoptan-nuevos-compromisos-en)
- [SEGIB: Avilés Declaration on Work](https://segib.org/es/publicacion/declaracion-de-aviles-sobre-trabajo/)
- [La Moncloa: Conclusions of the Ibero-American Conference of Ministers of Labor](https://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/serviciosdeprensa/notasprensa/trabajo14/paginas/2026/020726-diaz-conclusiones-conferencia-iberoamerican.aspx)

## Images

![Rain-soaked delivery rider holding a phone and helmet across from an official at a labor mediation desk](https://injoys.com/rails/active_storage/blobs/proxy/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsiZGF0YSI6MTEzMjcsInB1ciI6ImJsb2JfaWQifX0=--91119c6b0d8172ca3fd9a511e72cd69a4f83e8fc/ai-5c30ebb8.webp)
![Infographic linking a platform app, workers, international documents, regulation, and labor protections](https://injoys.com/rails/active_storage/blobs/proxy/eyJfcmFpbHMiOnsiZGF0YSI6MTEzMzMsInB1ciI6ImJsb2JfaWQifX0=--19a824ae70c0a89553454941eb1a5c7889a8241e/ai-ce4797b0.webp)