Lessons for the Post-COVID World of Work: Universal social protection as a driver for an inclusive…

Lessons for the Post-COVID World of Work: Universal social protection as a driver for an inclusive, resilient, and sustainable recovery

By Christina Behrendt, ILO*

Where do we stand?

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed serious gaps in social protection coverage. It became evident how many workers were not sufficiently covered by social protection in many parts of the world. Even in Europe, which generally has relatively well-developed social protection systems, many workers fell through the cracks.

At the same time, social protection mechanisms have played a very important role in countries’ policy responses to the crisis through two channels. First, countries mobilized their existing social protection systems to provide access to health care and income security. This included access to testing and treatment through the health system, paid sick leave and sickness benefits to allow workers to stay at home during periods of sickness and quarantine, partial unemployment benefits or short-time work benefits to keep workers in employment even during lockdowns, unemployment benefits to those who had lost their jobs, and social assistance to those who were at risk of falling into poverty. Those measures were essential to protect public health, jobs and incomes by supporting both workers and enterprises. Although of utter importance, automatic responses were not sufficient, especially in countries with weak social protection systems and high levels of informality. For this reason, countries embarked on a second channel of emergency responses to close coverage and adequacy gaps and provide urgently needed support to workers, including workers in the informal economy. Between March 2020 and September 2021, 209 countries adopted more than 1700 implemented or announced emergency measures to provide support for those who were not adequately protected. Depending on preexisting structures, countries mobilized additional resources through tax-financed or social insurance schemes, expanding or improving benefits, introducing new benefits and improving registration and delivery structures. Nevertheless, a lot of the measures were on-off or temporary, and many have already ended.

At this point, many countries have arrived at a crossroad. Learning from the experience of social protection policy responses during the pandemic, are they going to pursue a “high road” strategy towards universal protection systems which can guarantee adequate social protection to workers in all types of employment? Or are they pressed towards to “low-road” approach of minimalist social protection policies and fiscal consolidation?

What is at stake?

A high road to social protection would require closing coverage and adequacy gaps for those workers who are not yet adequately protected. This includes many workers in what is often referred to as “non-standard forms of work”, yet we need to unpack this term to break some of the stereotypes that keep appearing in some of the debates. Sometimes their coverage is being discussed as if everyone in those forms of work were excluded from coverage — but this certainly is not true. The picture is more nuanced in most European countries: The social protection coverage of workers on temporary contracts depends on the minimum thresholds regarding the length of their contract, according to the national legislation. While most workers on contracts that last two months or longer would be covered, there are significant challenges for casual and seasonal workers. For part-time workers, while most regular part-time workers would be covered (at least those working 20 or more hours per week), there are significant coverage and adequacy gaps for who work for few hours per week or month, or on “zero-hour” contracts, as well as for those who work for several employers, including domestic workers. For multiparty employment relationships, such as temporary agency work, their coverage depends on the national legislation and its enforcement. A significant challenge exists for dependent contractors (also referred as disguised employment) for whom the prevention of a misclassification of their employment relationships is critical. For genuinely self-employed workers, there is a wide variation of situations. While some countries provide for the coverage of self-employed workers, at least for some sectors and type of professions, other countries do not provide for adequate legal coverage and adapted modalities that take into account their contributory capacities and provide for simple and accessible administrative procedures, which has created a major challenges that have become even more apparent during the pandemic. While many countries have recognized the challenges related to coverage and adequacy gaps even before the pandemic, including through the European Pillar of Social Rights and reflected in recent G20 declarations, such efforts are even more urgent after the experience of COVID-19.

Moreover, the COVID-19 has exposed some of the broader preexisting challenges that fractured or even broke social contracts. One of those challenges is that over the last years, economic risks have been shifted to workers. There is an ongoing debate about the responsibility of enterprises towards their workers and the need to prevent a misclassification of employment relationships. Coverage gaps for some categories of workers do not only increase their individual vulnerability, but also create challenges for society as a whole. For example, recent ILO surveys of crowdworkers showed that only half of them are covered by social protection, and for many of those who were covered, this protection was related to a main job in the traditional economy, or indirectly provided through their spouse or other family members. This raises questions about a fair contribution to the financing of social protection systems by digital labour platforms at the expense of other enterprises, as to ensure adequate protection for workers, a fair competitive for enterprises, and sustainable and adequate financing for social protection systems in line with international social security standards.

It is concerning that social security is often presented as contrary to flexibility — the experience of COVID-19 has certainly proven this wrong. It is now more evident than ever that especially those workers who work in a flexible way need social security. Flexibility and social security are two sides of the same coin if we want to ensure decent work.

What needs to change?

At this crossroads, the high road to an inclusive, resilient, and sustainable recovery requires rights-based universal social protection systems that ensure that adequate and comprehensive social protection for workers in all types of employment, financed in a sustainable and equitable way based on solidarity. The roadmap for this is set out a clear way: The governments, workers and employers of the ILO’s 187 member States jointly called for universal social protection at this year’s International Labour Conference through their Global Call to action for a human-centered recovery from the COVID-19 crisis” and the more specific “Resolution and conclusions on social protection (social security)”. The ILO’s World Report on Social Protection 2020–22provides a rich evidence base to support this call to action.

Based on these documents, five policy pointers for the way ahead towards universal social protection can be singled out. First, the conference stressed the necessity of reinforcing social protection systems, so that they can adequately response to change and enable people to better navigate work and life transitions, including in the context of a just transition to environmentally sustainable societies and economies. Second, ensuring adequate social protection for workers in all types of employment requires a combination of contributory and non-contributory schemes, in particular social insurance and tax-financed benefits that allow for broad risk-sharing and solidarity, and are inclusive enough to protect workers throughout their working life. Another important point is securing legal certainty for workers and employers, ensuring the correct classification of employment relationships, preventing the informalization of employment and facilitating transitions from the informal to the formal economy. This is necessary to ensure both the adequacy and the sustainability of national social protection systems building on effective social dialogue, based on the core principles for social protection systems like solidarity, collective financing, well-balanced intergenerational fairness, and the achievement of gender equality. Last but not least, social protection does not exist in a vacuum; it is therefore essential to consider the broader policy context, including employment policies, macro-economic policies and fiscal policies. Only if this is the case, it is possible to protect all workers, promote inclusive economic growth and employment for decent work and social justice.