On June 12, 2026, the International Labor Organization (ILO) adopted, during its 114th International Labor Conference held in Geneva, the first international convention specifically addressing work on digital platforms.
ILO conventions are multilateral international treaties. Their adoption by the Conference does not, in and of itself, automatically take effect in national legal systems. In order to become binding on Brazil, the convention must also undergo the constitutional process applicable to international treaties:
- submission of the text by the Executive Branch to the National Congress;
- approval by legislative decree of the National Congress (Art. 49, I, of the Federal Constitution);
- formal ratification, with the instrument deposited with the Director-General of the ILO; and
- It shall enter into force 12 months after the registration of the first two ratifications by any country in the world (Art. 27) and, thereafter, 12 months after the registration of the ratification by each new country.
Until this process is completed, the Convention is not directly enforceable in Brazil, but it tends to function as soft law: a legitimate interpretive framework for courts, legislators, and the legal profession itself.
Although the ILO Convention is not legally binding on Brazil until it is ratified, Brazil has played an active role in the negotiations—through the Ministry of Labor and Employment and representatives of employers and workers—since the process began in 2023.
The adoption of the text by the 114th International Labor Conference on June 12, 2026, is only the first step on a longer journey.
The standard establishes global minimum standards for the protection of workers who provide services through apps and digital platforms, an issue that has taken center stage in regulatory and judicial discussions in various countries. And in Brazil, it is no different.
In Article 1, the Convention sets forth four key definitions for the application of the entire text:
| CONCEPT | DEFINITION |
| Digital Work Platform | A legal entity (or, where permitted by national law, an individual) that, through digital technologies and automated decision-making systems, organizes and/or facilitates the provision of paid services on demand, either in person or online (subparagraph “a”) |
| Digital platform worker | A person hired or engaged to provide this service in exchange for compensation, regardless of how their employment relationship is legally classified (subparagraph “b”) |
| Intermediate | An individual or legal entity that provides workers to the platform, either through a direct contract with the platform and the worker or within a subcontracting chain (subparagraph “c”) |
| Compensation or payment | Amount owed to the employee for services rendered, in accordance with national law, a collective bargaining agreement, or an employment contract; does not include reimbursement of expenses or other costs related to the work (subparagraph “d”) |
⊕Scope (Article 2)
The Convention applies to all digital work platforms and all platform workers, whether formal or informal. Specific exclusions for certain categories are permitted, but must be justified by the country concerned to the ILO, following consultation with employers and workers.
In all, the adopted text of the Convention contains 33 articles, which establish a set of minimum rights and safeguards applicable to digital platform workers, in particular:
① Fundamental rights and working conditions
The Convention guarantees freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, the elimination of forced labor and child labor, and the fight against discrimination in employment and occupation (Article 3, “b” and “d”), as well as a safe and healthy work environment, with the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases (Articles 3, “e,” and 4).
It also guarantees workers the right to refuse work that poses a serious and imminent risk to their life or health, without facing punishment for doing so, provided they notify the platform without delay (Article 5), as well as protection against violence and harassment, including those committed online or by third parties, such as customers (Article 6).
② Compensation and Social Protection
With regard to compensation, the Convention requires full payment, on time and through legal means, including electronic transfer (Article 10, §1).
When an employment relationship is recognized, compensation may not be less than the statutory or negotiated minimum wage, excluding tips (Article 10, §2, “a”), and the worker must be reimbursed for expenses and costs incurred in the performance of the service (Article 10, §2, “b”).
The regulation also ensures clear and timely information regarding amounts paid and deductions made (Article 11) and access to social security under conditions no less favorable than those of other workers with the same employment classification (Article 12).
③ Algorithmic subordination and data protection: a sensitive issue in the current debate
The Convention is the first international standard to expressly address algorithmic transparency and the right to review automated decisions. On this issue, the Convention stipulates that the platform has a duty to inform users, prior to hiring, about the use of automated systems that monitor, evaluate, or generate decisions regarding work, and the impact of these systems on working conditions (Article 13).
The Convention further provides that workers have the right to a written explanation of automated decisions that negatively affect their employment or access to employment, and to a review of such decisions, always with effective human involvement (Articles 14 and 15), in addition to the right to access, correct, and request the deletion of personal data processed by the platform (Article 16).
There is a growing debate in Brazil about algorithmic subordination and the control exercised by automated systems. These are recurring issues in the Brazilian labor courts: pricing; the assignment of rides and deliveries; reputation systems; automatic suspensions; and worker rankings.
④ Classification of employment relationships, disputes, and enforcement
Finally, the Convention requires that workers be correctly classified as to whether or not an employment relationship exists, based primarily on the facts regarding the performance of work and compensation, and not solely on the “contractual label” (Article 9).
It prohibits the suspension or deactivation of an account, or the termination of employment, on discriminatory or unlawful grounds (Article 17); requires clear information regarding the terms and conditions of employment (Article 18); and establishes that the law of the country where the work is performed shall take precedence (Article 19).
The standard guarantees specific protection for migrant workers and refugees (Article 20), access to effective dispute resolution mechanisms and adequate remedies (Article 21), monitoring and enforcement of national standards (Article 22), and treatment no less favorable than that of other workers in the same category (Article 23).
The new parameters presented above are linked to discussions currently underway in the Brazilian judiciary, particularly regarding the following matters pending before the Federal Supreme Court (STF), where the so-called “uberization” of labor is under debate; this issue, this week is at the center of the joint ruling on two cases, both assigned to Theme 1291 of general repercussion:
| PROCESS | WHAT IS UNDER DISCUSSION |
| RE 1,446,336 (Presiding Justice Edson Fachin) | Uber’s appeal against a TST decision that recognized an employment relationship with a driver. The case addresses, in light of Articles 1, IV; 5, II and XIII; and 170, IV, of the Constitution, whether ride-hailing drivers can be considered employees of the platforms |
| Rcl 64.018 (Reporting Justice Alexandre de Moraes) | Rappi’s Constitutional Appeal against decisions by the TRT-3 and the TST that recognized an employment relationship with a delivery driver, on the grounds that these decisions contradict previous rulings by the STF itself (ADPF 324, ADC 48, and Theme 590) |
🕒The resumption of trials is scheduled for June 24, 2026. Because this legal principle has broad implications, it will apply to more than 10,000 cases currently pending in the country.
In the discussions surrounding these cases, two main themes stand out that interact directly with the ILO Convention: (i) the criterion for classifying the employment relationship based on the facts of the work performed (Article 9), which is precisely at the heart of the dispute between “autonomy” and “subordination”; and (ii) the treatment of algorithmic management as a potential source of control and subordination (Articles 13–15).
The Superior Labor Court (TST) has historically issued rulings recognizing an employment relationship, especially when elements of subordination, personal involvement, and control over the provision of services are identified. This is directly consistent with Article 9 of the Convention, which provides that workers should be classified primarily based on the facts surrounding the provision of services and not solely on the contractual designation adopted by the platform.
Although it does not yet have immediate binding effect in Brazil, the ILO text could become a relevant interpretive reference for this debate; conversely, the outcome of the Brazilian court case is likely to be viewed internationally as one of the first major “tests” of this new regulatory paradigm.
At the same time, two legislative proposals are currently under consideration in the National Congress—independently of the ILO Convention—that aim to regulate exactly the same issue and are likely to align with the international text as they move forward:
PLP 12/2024: establishes the category of “platform-based self-employed worker” for drivers of private passenger transportation services;
PLP 152/25: currently under discussion in a special committee of the Chamber of Deputies, with public hearings on the operations of transportation and delivery platforms.
From now on, the following developments warrant monitoring: the outcome of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) ruling, scheduled for June 24, 2026 (Case No. 1291), whose established legal principle will be binding throughout the country; the progress of PLP 12/2024 and PLP 152/25 in the National Congress; any decision by the Brazilian government to submit the ILO Convention to the National Congress for ratification; and the consolidation of practices regarding algorithmic transparency and the protection of workers’ personal data.
The adoption of the Convention on Decent Work in the Platform Economy represents an international regulatory milestone, and while it does not impose a single model for the legal framework governing app workers, the convention establishes global guidelines on social protection, algorithmic transparency, safety, privacy, and access to justice.
Its content has the potential to influence the evolution of Brazilian law and contribute to the debates currently being held by the STF, the TST, and the Legislative Branch regarding the future of work in the digital economy.
Our Labour team at Araújo e Policastro Advogados is available for any questions or clarifications you may have.