The zero hour contract in platform work. Should we ban it or embrace it?

The aim of the paper is to analyze the zero-hour contract in the context of platform work; specifically, the risks and opportunities of this type of provision of services. In the context of the sharing economy and gig-economy, there have emerged multiple App-based companies that have significantly altered the way in which services are provided. Companies like Uber, Lift, Taskrabbit, Deriveroo, Glovo or Amazon Mechanical Turk have introduced new forms of work that have altered the boundaries of Labor Law. The model of these companies is the division of their production into microtasks, the externalization of their entire production to a wide number of independent contractors through an App or webpage and the hiring of each service on-demand. As a result, new technologies have allowed these companies to avoid hiring workers and to provide their services entirely through self-employed workers. This hiring on-demand implies the use, de facto, of the zero-hour contract, as platform workers are not subject to a specific working time regime, having absolute liberty to determine, not only their schedule, but also their working time and, even, their willingness to work. In this context, the aim of the paper is to analyze the zero-hour scheme in the context of platform work. The final objective of the paper is to determine, from a lege ferenda perspective, if jurisdictions should introduce this type of contract to promote the business model used by digital platforms or, on the contrary, if they should ban it.