平台众包从业者的法律身份认定及权益保障路径  

Legal Status Identification and Rights Protection Pathways for Platform Crowdsourcing Workers

作　　者：吴勇 WU Yong

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学法学院,江苏省南京市210023 [2]南京师范大学中国法治现代化研究院,江苏省南京市210097

出　　处：《南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学)》2025年第1期76-85,159,共11页Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目(24YJC820050)。

摘　　要：从法教义学角度来说,劳动者以从属性为根本特征,平台众包从业者不负持续接单的劳动义务,即便通过激励机制也难以形成与劳动义务拘束程度相当的强制。因此,此类群体不具备从属性,并非劳动法意义上的劳动者。在比较法上,德国类雇员的“经济从属性”和“社会保护需求”界定标准模糊,且自身赋权有限,若以此为参照设立第三类劳动者,并不能有效契合我国复杂多元的平台众包用工实践,难以纾解从业者权益保障缺失之问题。因此,应坚守从属性劳动和独立性劳动二分原则,将平台众包从业者定位为民事劳务提供者。在此基础上,将部分劳动权利拓展适用于此类群体,并加强对平台算法管理的监管,逐步构建全面有效的从业者权益保障机制。From a doctrinal legal perspective,subordination is the fundamental characteristic of a laborer.Platform crowdsourcing workers,however,do not bear an obligation to continuously accept tasks,and even when platforms use incentive mechanisms,the level of coercion does not reach the degree of a binding labor obligation.As a result,these workers lack the necessary subordination and do not qualify as laborers under labor law.In comparative law,Germany's concept of quasi-employees relies on economic dependence and social protection needs,but these criteria remain vague and offer limited empowerment.Using this as a reference to establish a third category of workers may not effectively align with the diverse and complex employment structures in China's platform economy,nor adequately resolve the lack of labor protections for crowdsourcing workers.Therefore,this study advocates for maintaining the binary distinction between subordinate labor and independent work,classifying platform crowdsourcing workers as civil service providers.On this basis,the following protections should be implemented:Expanding certain labor rights to apply to this group;strengthening oversight of platform algorithmic management;and gradually building a comprehensive and effective rights protection system for platform crowdsourcing laborers.

关 键 词：劳动者 类雇员 民事关系 劳动权利 算法管理 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]