共享平台主体责权利分配的差异分析研究
A Study on the Differences in the Distribution of Responsibilities Rights and Obligations among the Entities of Sharing Platforms
摘要: 以共享型用工关系中的共享平台与服务提供者两大主体为主要研究对象,分别对共享平台方与服务提供方在共享型用工关系性质与用工关系模式、责权承担、利益分配和主体协调范围与程度等方面的差异进行分析。方差分析与LSD事后分析的结果表明:共享平台方与服务提供方对交易过程中产生的由不同主体引发法律风险和人身安全责任分配比例存在显著差异;服务提供方对交易过程中共享平台的管理协调程度评价显著高于共享平台方,共享平台方与服务提供方对共享平台的协调范围判定不存在显著差异。此外,共享平台与服务提供方对于二者在交易过程中的用工关系性质与结构判定也存在显著差异。
Abstract: Taking the sharing platform and service provider as the main research objects, this study conducts an in-depth analysis of the differences between the two parties regarding the nature and mode of the shared employment relationship, responsibility and rights bearing, interest distribution, and the scope and degree of subject coordination. The results of ANOVA and LSD post-hoc analysis indicate that the sharing platform and the service provider hold differing perspectives on the transaction process, particularly with significant differences in the allocation of legal risks and personal safety responsibilities. The service provider’s evaluation of the management and coordination role of the sharing platform during the transaction process is significantly higher than that of the sharing platform itself. Furthermore, there is no significant difference between the sharing platform and the service provider in determining the coordination scope of the sharing platform. Additionally, significant differences exist between the sharing platform and the service provider in their judgment of the nature and structure of the employment relationship during the transaction process.
文章引用:姚志. 共享平台主体责权利分配的差异分析研究[J]. 电子商务评论, 2025, 14(3): 1235-1248. https://doi.org/10.12677/ecl.2025.143819

参考文献

[1] 李梦琴, 谭建伟, 吴雄.共享经济模式下的共享型用工关系研究进展与启示[J]. 中国人力资源开发, 2018, 35(8): 105-115.
[2] 于莹. 共享经济用工关系的认定及其法律规制——以认识当前“共享经济”的语域为起点[J]. 华东政法大学学报, 2018, 21(3): 49-60.
[3] Botsman, R. and Rogers, R. (2018) What’s Mine Is Yours. Rise of Collaborative Consumption, 81, 385-394.
[4] Cohen, B. and Kietzmann, J. (2014) Ride On! Mobility Business Models for the Sharing Economy. Organization & Environment, 27, 279-296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] 叶剑波. 分享经济时代人力资源管理的挑战[J]. 中国人力资源开发, 2015(23): 6-9, 21.
[6] 刘根荣. 共享经济: 传统经济模式的颠覆者[J]. 经济学家, 2017(5): 97-104.
[7] 蒋大兴, 王首杰. 共享经济的法律规制[J]. 中国社会科学, 2017(9): 141-162.
[8] Schor, J.B., Fitzmaurice, C., Carfagna, L.B., Attwood-Charles, W. and Poteat, E.D. (2016) Paradoxes of Openness and Distinction in the Sharing Economy. Poetics, 54, 66-81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] 中国互联网协会分享经济工作委员会. 中国分享经济发展报告2016 [EB/OL].
http://www.sic.gov.cn/sic/82/568/0229/6006_pc.html, 2024-12-10.
[10] 任洲鸿, 王月霞. 共享经济下劳动关系的政治经济学分析——以滴滴司机与共享平台的劳动关系为例[J]. 当代经济研究, 2019(3): 5-12, 113.
[11] 常凯, 郑小静. 雇佣关系还是合作关系?——互联网经济中用工关系性质辨析[J]. 中国人民大学学报, 2019, 33(2): 78-88.
[12] 谢增毅. 互联网平台用工劳动关系认定[J]. 中外法学, 2018, 30(6): 1546-1569.
[13] 袁文全, 徐新鹏. 共享经济视阈下隐蔽雇佣关系的法律规制[J]. 政法论坛, 2018, 36(1): 119-130.
[14] 彭倩文, 曹大友. 是劳动关系还是劳务关系?——以滴滴出行为例解析中国情境下互联网约租车平台的雇佣关系[J]. 中国人力资源开发, 2016(2): 93-97.
[15] 盖建华. 共享经济下“类劳动者”法律主体的制度设计[J]. 改革, 2018(4): 102-109.
[16] 唐鑛, 李彦君, 徐景昀. 共享经济企业用工管理与《劳动合同法》制度创新[J]. 中国劳动, 2016(14): 41-52.
[17] 王全兴, 王茜. 我国“网约工”的劳动关系认定及权益保护[J]. 法学, 2018(4): 57-72.
[18] Das Acevedo, D. (2015) Regulating Employment Relationships in the Sharing Economy. SSRN Electronic Journal. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] Minter, K. (2017) Negotiating Labour Standards in the Gig Economy: Airtasker and Unions New South Wales. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 28, 438-454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[20] 问清泓. 共享经济下社会保险制度创新研究[J]. 社会科学研究, 2019(1): 86-98.
[21] Davies, A.R., Donald, B., Gray, M. and Knox-Hayes, J. (2017) Sharing Economies: Moving Beyond Binaries in a Digital Age. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 10, 209-230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[22] 杨海华, 易高峰. 揭榜挂帅制: 一场科研组织模式的变革——基于新制度经济学的视角[J]. 企业经济, 2025, 44(1): 68-75.
[23] 任雪杰, 梁艺馨, 赵林度. “共享+”模式下平台生态价值共创策略与激励机制[J]. 管理工程学报, 2025, 39(2): 248-261.
[24] Hong, S. and Lee, S. (2018) Adaptive Governance and Decentralization: Evidence from Regulation of the Sharing Economy in Multi-Level Governance. Government Information Quarterly, 35, 299-305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef