Supreme Administrative Court outlines platform work – this is how it will affect unemployment security

Topics

• Income security
• Labour law

In May 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court (KHO) issued an important ruling concerning the employment status of food delivery drivers. According to the ruling, food delivery drivers working for a platform service were considered to be in an employment relationship rather than self-employed. On the other hand, the KHO ruled that food delivery drivers are not subject to the Working Hours Act because they have autonomy over their working hours. This means that their working hours are not predetermined, their use of working time is not monitored, and they are free to decide their own working hours.

The decision raises many topical issues related to the platform economy, changes in the labor market, and the boundaries between social security and labor law. What kind of impact will the decision have on individual workers, unemployment security, and Finnish labor law more broadly?

Why is this decision significant?

The Supreme Administrative Court found that although the couriers’ work was carried out via a digital platform and included elements normally associated with entrepreneurship, the work nevertheless had many characteristics typical of an employment relationship. On this basis, the work was considered to be performed in an employment relationship. The decision shows that traditional characteristics of an employment relationship can also be applied to new forms of work.

Existing labor legislation does not always adapt to new forms of work. Platform work operates in an area where an employee may have the independent status of an entrepreneur but is in practice dependent on the platform. The Supreme Administrative Court’s decision takes development in the direction of the content of work being decisive, regardless of its form. Legal cases such as this serve as a backdrop for the development of regulation.

The forms of work have become more diverse, but the legal categories have remained largely unchanged. We need a more comprehensive review of how employment and entrepreneurship are defined and how social security is adapted to these forms. A working group is currently working in Finland to prepare the legislative changes required by the EU Platform Directive. The purpose of the directive is to clarify the status of people working through platforms.

What impact will the decision have on unemployment security?

The decision will not automatically affect the employment status of couriers; any transition to an employment relationship will require action on the part of employers. If the work is organized as an employment relationship in the future, the rights of food delivery workers, such as earnings-related unemployment security, will be determined on the same basis as for other employees.

From the perspective of unemployment fund membership, it is important that the person is in an employment relationship and that the employer fulfills the statutory social insurance obligations. Without these conditions, there are restrictions on membership and unemployment security.

Although the Supreme Administrative Court’s decision confirms that the work in question is work performed in an employment relationship, it is problematic because the employees are not covered by the Working Hours Act. The purpose of the Working Hours Act is to safeguard employees’ rest periods and guarantee reasonable compensation for overtime and evening and Sunday work. The ruling also has implications for unemployment security.

The prerequisite for the payment of adjusted daily allowance based on part-time work is that the employer monitors working hours and the reduction in working hours can be verified. Since, according to the interpretation of the Supreme Administrative Court, the Working Hours Act does not apply to food delivery drivers, adjusted daily allowance cannot, as a rule, be paid. In exceptional circumstances, if the nature or conditions of the work are such that it can be established with a high degree of certainty that the full-time working time limit is not reached even without precise monitoring of working hours, an adjusted daily allowance may be paid. The conditions are always decided on a case-by-case basis in such situations.

What impact will the decision have on employers and platforms?

The decision may require platform companies to reassess their operating and contractual models. Some operators have already announced that they will require their contractors to have a business ID in the future. The decision shows that formal status alone is not enough – practical working arrangements also matter. It remains to be seen how platform companies will comply with the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling.

Conclusion

It is expected that similar solutions will continue to emerge in the future, especially as platform work, light entrepreneurship, and hybrid forms of employment become more common. The Supreme Administrative Court’s decision shows that clearer regulations and predictability are needed from the perspective of both employees and clients. Unemployment security is also being reformed to take account of different forms of work. A combined insurance scheme is currently being prepared with the aim of improving security in hybrid forms of work where individuals are simultaneously employed and self-employed.

Paula Virri

Head of Legal Affairs, YTK Unemployment Fund

In the blog by the Head of Legal Affairs of the YTK Unemployment Fund, current legal issues related to unemployment benefits and working life are explored. The blog invites readers to join a conversation on how complex matters can be communicated more simply and effectively. The goal is an unemployment security system that is not only fair but also understandable. The insights are based on Paula’s extensive experience in employment law. Paula has worked at YTK since 2019, and before that, she served as a lawyer at the Turku Chamber of Commerce and at a law firm.