10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145
The next big step in technological development is the expansion of the physical world and the emergence of virtual worlds. The technology is now reaching the right level for this to spread, so it is predicted that the virtual presence of individuals will become more common in the coming years. This will naturally bring with it the emergence of working in virtual worlds, as the virtual presence of firms can provide a clear competitive advantage. However, the question arises as to whether labour law, with its current instruments, is suitable for the legal regulation of work in the virtual world and whether this type of work can be understood at all within the framework of the classical employment relationship. The very notion of work, the contracting parties, the contract's content, the place of performance, etc., can be called into question. In this article, I will examine these issues and consider the challenges facing future legislation.
application/pdf
1561-8048
17145
1
en
Peter Sipka
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Italian Labour Law e-Journal
Categorization of Work
Potential challenges of working in a virtual space
Text.Serial.Journal
https://illej.unibo.it/
16
Theme
2023-07-20
2023-06-12
2023-07-20
2023-07-20
53-65
ILLeJ
Peter Sipka
2023/07/20
10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145
53
University of Debrecen, Faculty of Law
1561-8048
1
Categorization of Work
en
65
Potential challenges of working in a virtual space
https://illej.unibo.it/article/download/17145/16524
16
Potential challenges of working in a virtual space                                    Italian Labour Law e-Journal
Peter Sipka                                                                                  Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
sipka.peter@law.unideb.hu                                                                          ISSN 1561-8048
                                                                    https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145




        Potential challenges of working in a virtual space.
                                                     Peter Sipka*

1. Introduction. 2. What is Metaverse? 3. Working in the Metaverse. 4. Contractual aspects
of working in the Metaverse. 4.1. Who are the contracting parties – can a digital employer be
created? 4.2. How can this type of work be categorized? 4.3. How and where can the
employee perform? – Place of performance. 4.4. What is the actual content of the
performance? 5. Future legislative challenges. 6. Summary.


                                                       Abstract

    The next big step in technological development is the expansion of the physical world and the
    emergence of virtual worlds. The technology is now reaching the right level for this to spread, so
    it is predicted that the virtual presence of individuals will become more common in the coming
    years. This will naturally bring with it the emergence of working in virtual worlds, as the virtual
    presence of firms can provide a clear competitive advantage.
    However, the question arises as to whether labour law, with its current instruments, is suitable
    for the legal regulation of work in the virtual world and whether this type of work can be
    understood at all within the framework of the classical employment relationship. The very notion
    of work, the contracting parties, the contract's content, the place of performance, etc., can be
    called into question.
    In this article, I will examine these issues and consider the challenges facing future legislation.

    Keywords: Labour law; Metaverse; Categorization of Work.




1. Introduction.

    In 2022, one of the most interesting IT news was the development of Metaverse. In this
virtual space, users can be present through their virtual avatars, communicate with each
other, play games together, and possibly perform various virtual actions.
    The emergence of the platform naturally attracted the interest of labour lawyers, and
several articles were published on the labour aspects of the metaverse. Notable among these




*   University of Debrecen. This essay has been submitted to a double-blind peer review.
    Peter Sipka                                                                                 Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                       Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                              Section: Theme




are the general findings of Valerio de Stefano and his colleagues1 and the more detailed paper
by Marco Biasi.2
   Both papers highlight labour law issues along similar lines: on the one hand, they raise the
question of how exactly working in a metaverse can be interpreted or even whether it is
comparable to working on a platform. On the other hand, both authors address the problem
of the applicable law, namely, which law applies to metaverse work. In addition to the above,
the authors also point out the difficulties of enforcing collective rights and the challenges of
working time, rest periods and occupational safety.
   While there is no doubt that the problems analysed by the authors are fundamental, it is
also worth examining whether, in addition to the issues raised, the current labour law toolkit3
can be used to describe working in virtual space, whether we can detect certain shortcomings
in advance and, if so, what response can be given to them.
   To answer the questions raised, I will first present the “world” of the metaverse and its
potentials - relevant from the labour law point of view – based on the currently known data,
and then try to describe the legal relationship and examine its challenges, applying the current
labour law conceptual framework.


2. What is Metaverse?

    Meta, the Facebook social platform operator, summarised how Metaverse works in a
video produced in October 2021. It describes Metaverse as an augmented virtual reality that
gives people the experience of being together even when they are far away. Mark Zuckerberg
has described the experience as the "embodied internet ", which essentially means using
virtually crafted avatars to create a 3D representation in virtual space so detailed that it shows
eye contact, facial expressions and body language. The user thus perceives the virtual space
as very similar to the real one, where he can play sports, "go for a hike", meet other people,
or even be alone in a (virtual) location of his choice. However, the real-life experience is that
the user is not watching it all through a screen but participates in the digital space through
special devices that affect vision and hearing (and later other senses). In Metaverse, users can
choose their appearance and clothes or appear as a different being (animal, robot, etc.)
instead of a human.
    One of the unique features of Metaverse is that, like in physical reality, it will be possible
to acquire virtual property so that objects (clothes, tools, etc.) purchased in virtual space will,
according to the concept, actually belong to the user, who will be able to dispose of them,
use them without limit, transfer them to others, etc. This naturally implies that, in addition
to reality, there will also be commerce in digital space, where virtual objects, virtual services


1 De Stefano V., Aloisi A., Countouris N., The Metaverse is a labour issue, in Social Europe, 1 February 2022,
https://www.socialeurope.eu/the-metaverse-is-a-labour-issue, accessed 29 March 2023.
2 Biasi M., Il decent work e la dimensione virtuale: spunti di riflessione sulla regolazione del lavoro nel Metaverso, in Lavoro

Diritti Europa, 1, 2023.
3 Mélypataki G., Máté A.D., Riczu Z., The fundamental issues of the concept of work in the light of digitalisation, in Miskolc

Legal Review, Special Issue 1, 2022, 273.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                                 54
 Peter Sipka                                                             Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                       Section: Theme




or even virtual worlds can be bought and owned. This is therefore expected to create a whole
new segment of commerce, where the combination of physical reality and virtual space will
open up a separate area for service providers. It is likely, that this phenomenon will require
a rethinking of the current property regime, as the rules for acquiring property in virtual
space, possibly for protecting property, etc., are still to be developed (e.g. how to take
possession of a virtual object, whether it can be subject to a lien, etc.).
    The opportunities offered by virtual reality are already being used in retail, where products
can be tested and even tried out in Metaverse. In this context, a layer of employees will
naturally emerge who will be involved in this virtual commerce as traders, i.e. who will help
sell the product, answer questions, etc.
    In addition to 'traditional' commerce, Metaverse offers the possibility to travel in space
and in 'time', so you can visit the Uffizi Gallery in Florence and walk around a city in the
Renaissance. This service will require virtual guides who will guide us in the same way as
their traditional counterparts. However, both examples show that the worker will do their
work in virtual space rather than in physical reality.
    This is important from a labour law perspective because a dedicated virtual workspace is
already under development at Metaverse. This platform is expected to revolutionise or
significantly change remote working, as in the workplace built here. However, employees are
not physically together; they work virtually side by side or even together, which allows them
to achieve and maintain a collaborative experience without the need to travel and without
the loneliness of the home office. Metaverse will also function as a working platform in the
future, where workers will work alone or together. As I mentioned, this working experience
is very different from the current video-conferencing experience in front of a computer,
where the user is present in the digital space through his virtual presence device and therefore
perceived by the other workers as a virtual reality, with his gestures and movements.


3. Working in the Metaverse.

   Based on the knowledge available so far, the users of Metaverse can be divided into several
groups: on the one hand, there may be people who use Metaverse occasionally or
permanently as a simple work interface, i.e., similar to today's Teams or other online
interfaces, they treat the virtual space as a tool for working, with the user experience being
much more lifelike, as explained above. (semi-online employees)
   These persons do not necessarily need to be treated as persons with a special legal status
since their work is essentially not different from "traditional" forms of employment: the
contract is between the employee and the employer within a framework that can be described
in traditional terms, and the only atypical feature is that the place of performance is not
wholly or partly in a physical space but in a virtual one. Nevertheless, according to our current




https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                         55
    Peter Sipka                                                                   Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                         Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                Section: Theme




knowledge, it can be considered "traditional"4 in terms of the main framework of the legal
relationship, even if the specific nature of the employment relationship may present
particular issues (e.g. working hours) as a heightened legal risk. Therefore, these legal
relationships cannot be considered platform work in the classical sense but rather similar to
when employees perform their work on a digital interface (e.g. a company's internal system).
    Another group can be those people whose place of work is located at a specific point in
virtual space, for example, in a virtual commercial unit. (online-employees) These people no
longer use the Metaverse as a mere workspace (in addition to their physical work) but as a
permanent virtual workspace where they perform their activities in the environment created
there, but which is also present in physical space (e.g. selling a piece of clothing or another
object). In these cases, we are still talking about a legal relationship being established between
the employee and an employer that exists in the physical space, only the place of work is not
in the physical reality but in the virtual world, and the actual work activity must be carried
out there. In this case, one of the main elements of the employment contract, the subject
matter of the service, i.e. the scope of the work, must be defined by the parties in such a way
as to reflect this particular form of performance. Therefore, this form of work can already
be considered atypical in a certain sense, but the basic elements are not new since the
contracting parties (mainly) exist in the “offline world”. In, in such a case, the current
instruments of labour law can still describe the legal situation since a specific definition of
the place of performance must be made.
    Thirdly, sooner or later, some companies (or other types of entities) will exist exclusively
in virtual space (maybe even without classical, official registration) and provide jobs and
payments to people working solely in the virtual space. (virtual workers) In this case, it is
now unknown how an 'agreement' between such an e-employer existing exclusively in virtual
space and a virtual worker (who is an avatar of a human being) can be interpreted as a
contract, especially if it is very similar in nature or specific content to an employment
contract. It remains to be seen shortly how the law will develop as to whether entities existing
exclusively in the metaverse will be granted the status of 'legal person', i.e. whether they can
have rights and obligations in virtual space, and if so, whether they can be interpreted as e-
employers.
    In the first two categories (semi-online employees and online employees), the contracting
parties can be understood within the legal framework as we know it today. The difference
between the two categories is determined by the place and manner of work, but in the third
case (virtual workers), we are already faced with a situation where one party cannot be an
employer as we understand it today. Still, it can be assumed that shortly these entities will
acquire some form of legal personality.
    For these individuals, applying labour law rules may be questionable: the nature of the
work is such that traditional forms of work are unlikely to be acceptable. Still, the emerging


4 In my view, the notion of "traditional or typical employment relationship" cannot be maintained in the long
term for the current categories of workers (full-time, general working time, indefinite working hours, etc.),
because in the near future they will become commonplace due to the emergence of a large number of other
forms of employment (e.g. casual work, or even platform-based work).

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                  56
    Peter Sipka                                                                       Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                             Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                    Section: Theme




framework for platform work5 may provide an appropriate regulatory environment. This will
be analysed further below.
    In what follows, I will examine the essential elements of the contract and whether the
current development of labour law is sufficient for the existing framework or whether further
legal development is needed to keep up with the technology. In the course of the analysis, I
will also make use of the Platform Work Directive, which has not yet been adopted but is
already available in draft form, the content of which I will take as given in its current form
since the legislative objective can be read in its essential elements from the text of the draft.


4. Contractual aspects of working in the Metaverse.
4.1 Who are the contracting parties – can a digital employer be created?

    According to our current knowledge and the concept published so far by the developers,
the introduction of Metaverse will not break up the classical employment contract
relationships. Accordingly, even if someone works in a virtual space, the essential duality of
labour law, namely the contractual presence of the employer and the employee, does not
change since, in this case, the contract is still intended to regulate the situation where the
employee works for the employer, and the employer manages the employee’s work within
the framework of the contract. In this context, the creator and operator of the virtual space
itself do not, in principle, become a party to the contract but, at most, only provides the
environment in which the work is carried out (similar to the owner of an office building who
rents out the property used as a workplace). Therefore, it seems unrealistic in the short term
for Metaverse to become an employer in the mainstream forms of employment or, at most,
a provider of the digital workplace.
    In the longer term, however, the question may also arise as to whether companies
operating in virtual space (but obviously registered in the real physical world), which operate
exclusively in the virtual world, can be considered employers in the Metaverse. In other
words, could the removal of spatial boundaries lead to a duplication of the world of work,
splitting it into work in digital and physical reality only? After all, if the creators of the
Metaverse set out to create a world like ours today, where the basic rules of society apply in
the same way, where digital property rights exist, etc., then it is only natural that sooner or
later, the working of this space will also emerge. If this happens, is it necessary to develop
separate labour law rules, or can any form of employment be managed with the proper and
flexible application of the current tools?
    Similarly, virtual world operators can act as employers. Indeed, it is not inconceivable that
companies or organisations operating virtual worlds could define themselves as employers
in virtual employment contracts and pay either a virtual salary (which is undoubtedly a
consideration under the principle of digital property rights) or a traditional salary for work in
a virtual space.


5See e.g., European Commission, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving
working conditions in platform work, 9 December 2021, COM(2021)762 final.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                      57
    Peter Sipka                                                                      Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                            Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                   Section: Theme




4.2 How can this type of work be categorized?

    Whatever the direction of technological development is, our current understanding is that
working in the digital space does not fundamentally change the structure of work, there is
no doubt that the concept of work will change, and the obligation of cooperation6 may
become more critical. To answer the question of the classification as platform work, it is
necessary to go back to the definition in the Platform Work Directive (proposal), which
states that "platform work" means work organised through a digital work platform and
carried out by an individual in the EU based on a contractual relationship between the digital
work platform and the individual, regardless of whether there is a contractual relationship
between the individual and the recipient of the service.7 At first sight, the definition may
seem to suggest that platform-based work is very similar to metaverse work. Still, if we look
at the other definitions in the Directive proposal, we have to conclude that the legislation
does not apply to this form of work.

   The definition of a "digital work platform" includes any natural or legal person providing
a commercial service that meets all of the following requirements:
   (a) is provided at least in part by electronic means, such as a website or mobile application,
       at a distance;
   (b) provided at the request of the recipient of the service;
   (c) include, as a necessary and essential element, the organisation of work carried out by
individuals, whether online or at a specific location.
   From the definition, two conditions are not met in the case of Metaverse: on the one
hand, based on our current knowledge, it seems that the company operating the digital space
provides the platform to users free of charge (although there are already initiatives to develop
certain paid services), i.e. it does not primarily offer a commercial service to users but
generates its revenue in other ways (typically from advertisers). But on the other hand, the
requirement that the platform organises the work of individuals still needs to be met since,
as we have already seen, the platform itself does not necessarily appear as an employer but
only provides the digital environment for the employer and the employee.
   As a result, persons working in Metaverse cannot be considered platform-based workers
and will not be covered by the Directive proposal8 even after its adoption. It may be
questionable whether the principles and detailed rules in the Directive can be extended to
Metaverse employment law in the future, but if so, this will require a further legislative
process.




6 Lőrincz G., Some Issues of the Performance of the Employment Contract, in MunkaJog, 3, 2020, 11.
7 European Commission, nt. (5), Article 2, co.1, point 2.
8 European Commission, nt. (5), Article 1, co.3. This Directive applies to digital platforms for the organisation

of platform-based work in the Union, regardless of their location and the law otherwise applicable.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                     58
    Peter Sipka                                                                            Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                  Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                         Section: Theme




4.3 How and where can the employee perform? – Place of performance.

    According to the current (domestic) legal literature, the place of performance is a concept
distinct from the contractual workplace: while the idea of the contractual workplace refers
to the space where the employee is typically required to perform the work under the
employment contract, the place of performance refers to the "concrete place of de facto
performance".9 It can be assumed, however, that the place of performance in the Metaverse
will not be a geographically defined area but one (or more) virtual worlds where the employee
typically performs the tasks of his job (e.g. as a virtual tour guide or a salesperson in a virtual
shop whose target group is in a different continent) In this case, it is essential to see the
difference from the previous example. In this example, it is not the case that the employee is
generating content on a specific digital platform (like a content provider or blogger in the
traditional sense), but rather that the employee is performing their job duties in a virtual
space. Therefore, it is questionable whether the place of performance will be where the
employee actually sits or whether the virtual space itself will be given the notion of the place
of performance.10 A further question arises as to whether, if the employee does not appear
in the virtual space or at another point in the virtual space, this may constitute a breach of
contract concerning the place of performance and whether it is sanctionable.
    It is not disputed that this scheme is very similar to the telework framework; however,
due to the specificities of the digital platform, it is not entirely identical. According to the
definition of the European Framework Agreement on Telework,11 telework is understood as
a concept of work organisation and work performance whereby a worker is employed under
a contract of employment/employment relationship using ICT and where work that could
be carried out at the employer's premises is regularly performed away from the employer's
premises.
    It follows from the definition and the principle of voluntariness based on it that, in
principle, the parties can decide either in the employment contract or during the employment
relationship to apply the rules on telework.12 However, in the situation described in the
example above, it can be seen that the company or service provider acting as the employer
does not necessarily have an established place of work, i.e. the work cannot be carried out at
the employer's premises, and voluntariness is not an option.




9 See Bankó Z., Berke G., Kiss G., Commentary on the Labour Code, Wolters Kluwer, Budapest, 2017, 201; as
quoted in Pál L., The definition of the contractual workplace - the "home office" and telework, in Munkajog, 2, 2018, 58.
10 Kárpáti C., "Home office" nowadays - The phenomenon of working from home and the problems of its widespread spread in

labour law, in Munkajog, 2, 2022, 27.
11 European Trade Union Confederation, Framework Agreement on Telework, 16 July 2002, available at

https://resourcecentre.etuc.org/sites/default/files/2020-
09/Telework%202002_Framework%20Agreement%20-%20EN.pdf, accessed 27 March 2023.
12 Tóth L., Liability issues during telework: to what extent is the employer liable?, in Employment Law, 3, 2021, 35.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                           59
 Peter Sipka                                                                       Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                          Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                 Section: Theme




4.4. What is the actual content of the performance?

    In the traditional (offline) employment contract, the object of the performance was (and
still is), in most cases, the activity that created a change (result) in the physical space; yet,
there are, of course, also forms of work where the work itself is merely intellectual, regardless
of the outcome. With the advent of the digital age, the forms of work have changed
somewhat since it is not arguable that activity in the digital space can also be considered
work. However, the question arises as to whether the presence or manifestations of a
person's digital representation (avatar) in digital space can be considered personal work and
to what extent a declaration can be considered legal. In this context, we can no longer rely
either on the general framework of the employer-employee contractual relationship or the
basic rules of any employment law since, in virtual space, the rules are not dictated by the
legislator (and not even by the employer). Given the fact that the company operating the
platform, it may be questionable how secure the authentication of the person in question is,
i.e. to what extent can the avatar be considered the same as the specific employee? If the aim
is to ensure that the acts performed by the avatar of a given person are legally valid, it is
essential to regulate the security conditions for using the platform and to ensure that the legal
declarations can be traced and preserved (within the framework of the data protection rules
in force, of course).
    Identity verification will therefore be an essential prerequisite for virtual work: users
(workers) will have to go through a specific identity verification process, similar to the one
they go through in the real world, to have their actions in virtual space legally linked to them.
This may involve using personal identification documents or biometrics such as fingerprints
or facial recognition scanners. Multi-factor authentication is already an available technology,
which may include using passwords, biometrics or security tokens to ensure that only
authorised users can access their accounts. In the future, so-called blockchain-based
identification systems will become more widespread, where the identity of users is stored in
a separate file to allow user data storage.


5. Future legislative challenges.

    The discussion so far suggests that, even if the whole labour law framework does not
change with the advent of the Metaverse, there are likely some points where the legislation
will be adapted or modified to keep pace with technological developments. As we have
already seen, in some cases (e.g. place or manner of performance), interpretation of the law
will be necessary, but this does not necessarily require actual legislation, as either practice or
case law will deal with possible conflicts. An example of this is the issue of the measurement
of working time, which can be dealt with under the current rules, but the question is whether
the regulations on on-call and standby duty might be clarified. The recent case law shows
that "as a general rule, the on-call time during which the worker can plan his personal and social activities,
regarding the reasonable time allowed for taking up work, does not constitute 'working time' within the
meaning of Directive 2003/88. By contrast, a period of availability during which the time allowed to the

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                   60
     Peter Sipka                                                                        Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                               Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                      Section: Theme




worker to take up work is limited to a few minutes must, in principle, be regarded in its entirety as 'working
time' within the meaning of that directive, since in the latter case the worker is in practice significantly deterred
from planning any leisure activity, even of short duration”.13 In the judgment, the court points out
that, even if it does not necessarily constitute working time if it imposes only a low-intensity
burden on the worker, i.e. does not significantly restrict him from attending to his private
affairs, the employer must nevertheless assess this circumstance as a psychosocial risk.14
Consequently, the employer must consider these rules when scheduling work in a virtual
space.
   In other cases, legislative clarifications will probably be needed, and I mention the most
important of these below.
   As already explained, it can be assumed that with the development of Metaverse, a whole
new area of work is emerging, working in virtual space. Its specificities may require
developing employment contracts tailored explicitly to virtual work to protect workers’ rights
in the virtual world. These could clarify the issues of working time, rest periods, how legal
declarations are made and their validity, how and the scope of the right to give instructions,
and the form and content of communication between the parties. A precursor to the latter
issue could be, for example, the eIDAS Regulation15 which defines and thus standardises
digital signatures within the EU, which can be used to increase legal certainty. It is
conceivable that, as this becomes more widespread, solutions will also appear in the world
of work, making the conclusion of contracts and communication between the parties
completely paperless, thus ensuring that the parties' contractual intentions are expressed
electronically.
   In addition to the form and content of the contract, the issue of health and safety
standards in the virtual workplace will certainly arise: working in a virtual space represents a
new and different psychosocial burden for workers, which needs to be addressed, as the
various working arrangements alone cannot result in a lower level of protection.16 It is also
essential to prevent the health consequences of participation in virtual space, such as eye
strain, motion sickness and other health problems associated with the prolonged use of VR
(Virtual Reality) or AR (Augmented Reality) technology. Although the devices through which
we will work/exist in the Metaverse are not yet fully developed, their safety will be governed
by OHS rules, so presumably, integrating these devices into work activities will necessarily
entail an OHS assessment. From an employment law perspective, it may be of interest if, for
example, a worker suffers a psychological impact or stress within the Metaverse that may
give rise to compensation. If this happens, it is legitimate to ask to what extent the Metaverse,
or the designer of the particular environment, may be liable for the damage caused to the
worker in lieu of or in addition to the employer. Are joint and several liabilities conceivable
in such a case, or will the general rule that the employer is primarily liable (and generally


13 CJEU, C-344/19, D.J. v Radiotelevizija Slovenija, 9 March 2021, paragraph 48.
14 Ibidem, paragraphs 65 and 66.
15 Regulation (EU) no. 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic

identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive
1999/93/EC.
16 Tóth L., nt. (12), 42.



https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                        61
     Peter Sipka                                                                        Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                               Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                      Section: Theme




without regard to fault) for damages arising out of the employment relationship also apply
here?17
    The issue of equal treatment can come into focus from several angles: on the one hand,
it is natural that the anti-discrimination rules generally applicable in employment law should
apply equally to work in virtual spaces.18 This places a more serious obligation on the
employer to examine the virtual working environment and the work process from this point
of view but also requires the operator of the virtual space to draw up its rules with due regard
to the requirements of equal treatment. On the other hand, given that the basis for
discrimination law is some protected characteristic, the question may arise whether a
characteristic not visible in the virtual space (e.g. skin colour, disability) could be the basis
for such an employee claim. To take this line of thought further, if a person's avatar has a
characteristic that the actual user does not (e.g. different skin colour), should the protected
characteristic be considered in relation to the avatar or the real user? Could discrimination
be based on the attribute of the avatar?
    This question leads us to consider whether a digital projection of a person can have
independent characteristics or must necessarily have that individual’s characteristics. Of
course, in certain simple cases (e.g. in games or in stake-free conversations), some platforms
allow us to take any form (be a robot, animal or anything else). But if we want to ascertain
legal security for the legal statements in the digital space (as in the case of digital signatures),
it is in the inherent interest of the security of legal transactions that the avatar follows the
characteristics of its natural owner, i.e. the same gender, appearance, etc.
    If the legislator follows this logic, the discrimination issues are simplified since the
protected characteristic of the avatar is the same as the protected characteristic of the owner.
    However, if, in the virtual space, anybody can always choose their own form (also when
making a legal statement), the question of what the protected characteristic should be may
legitimately arise. It is possible that the e-employer has never met the e-worker in physical
reality, has never seen them and therefore does not know their (protected) characteristics. In
this case, it might be obvious to handle the person (or his avatar) on the basis of the
characteristics he knows, but it also raises the possibility that, for example, a white man in
real life might be discriminated against because his avatar is a black woman. In this area,
future legislation will need to proceed with increased caution to develop the appropriate
protected characteristic.
    In addition to the above, the absorptive capacity of technological progress may raise the
question of how older workers (who are more complex or slower to adapt to new
technologies) can participate in the Metaverse labour market. Can an employer be expected
to enforce age equality in such situations unconditionally? To prevent this, virtual workers
should have access to education and training programmes that prepare them for virtual work
and help them develop new skills. These programmes should be accessible to all virtual
workers, regardless of their background or previous experience. This is primarily an

17 Kártyás G., Liability for Occupational Safety and Health in EU and Hungarian Law, in Miskolc Legal Review, Special
Issue 1, 2022, 198.
18 In this article, we will only briefly refer to discrimination, as my colleague Ildikó Rácz analyses this issue in

more detail in her paper

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                        62
     Peter Sipka                                                                           Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                                  Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                                         Section: Theme




expectation for employers, but this will only be achieved uniformly with public influence, so
there is a case for regulating the issue, at least at the Member State level.
    In addition to older workers, disabled virtual workers should have equal access to the
technology and tools they need to do their jobs. In this context, virtual companies and
platform providers should ensure that their virtual platforms are accessible to all users,
regardless of their physical abilities.
    It can be assumed from the previous that discrimination (and harassment) legislation will
change somewhat, and new norms will emerge to deal with discrimination and harassment
in the virtual world. These may cover issues such as cyberbullying, online hate speech and
other forms of discriminatory behaviour in the virtual world.19 As the duty is addressed to
employers and virtual world operators, it is presumably incumbent on them to develop and
enforce anti-discrimination policies to ensure that virtual workers are not subject to
discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion or other protected
characteristics.
    Another issue closely linked to equal treatment is the issue of fair pay and benefits. It is
already clear from the above that in the very near future working in Metaverse does not
create an entirely new legal relationship, which is completely different from the one that has
existed until now. If a fully virtual legal relationship between an e-employer and an individual
can be established in the future, it will be up to future legislation to work out how the
discriminatory features will be determined. In general, virtual workers should also be paid
fairly for their work, regardless of their residence or background. In this respect, the legislator
must ensure that virtual workers who work for virtual companies can access benefits such as
health care, pension savings schemes, and paid time off. The existing regulatory framework
in the EU seems to address this issue, so the framework is in place. However, in the context
of the principle of equal pay for work of equal value, the question arises as to whether, in the
virtual space, the characteristics of a person (including their gender) can be determined at
will, to which part shall be protected: the real or the virtual?
    The authors mentioned in the introduction have already pointed out that the
enforceability of collective labour law in Metaverse is likely a serious problem. How can
workers in virtual space be enabled to form a union and bargain collectively for better
working conditions, wages and benefits?20 The question is what counts as working conditions
when the performance occurs in an environment that does not exist in reality: do we include
only the physical assets or the virtual environment in the working conditions? The task for
the future is to develop new forms of virtual collective bargaining to enable employees to
negotiate with employers in the virtual world.
    Last but not least, the problem of virtual jurisdiction naturally arises. As mentioned, this
issue seems to be settled in employment relationships. Still, the question of jurisdiction is, in
fact, more complex since, in addition to the employer-employee relationship, there is
necessarily (and constantly) the presence of the provider of the virtual world. Therefore in

19 Hungler S., Social Integration through Framework Agreements through Autonomous Social Dialogue, in Magyar Jog, 12,
2020, 721.
20 See e.g., Jakab N., Everything is upside down - Or the old-new approach to employment and protection, in Miskolc Legal

Review, 4, 2022, 55.

https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                           63
 Peter Sipka                                                          Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                             Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                    Section: Theme




the long term, it is not out of the question to develop a set of rules that also regulate the
liability of the provider. Based on what we know now, we can see that there is a legal
relationship between the employer and the employee. Both parties are users of the virtual
space, which means that the contractual terms dictated by the provider will prevail in their
relationship with the service provider. This is true even if the employee does not appear as
an independent user but logs in through the employer. In these arrangements, it may be
questionable to what extent the general terms and conditions used by the service provider
can be regarded as a rule governing the employment relationship and whether a breach of
these terms and conditions also constitutes a breach of an obligation arising from the
employment relationship. Therefore, new legal instruments will likely be needed to regulate
the virtual division of labour. New international treaties or agreements must be developed to
address jurisdictional issues and protect workers' rights in the virtual world.


6. Summary.

    In this study, I have explored the forms and possible challenges of working in the
Metaverse, primarily to examine whether labour law with its current instruments is suitable
to deal with this expectedly rapidly expanding and relatively new form of employment or
whether additional rules may need to be adopted and applied. During the analysis, I also
looked at the identity of the parties to the contract, its content and form, and the problems
encountered in its performance. The overall conclusion is that the existing instruments of
labour law are more or less adequate to deal with the new technology and that the advent of
Metaverse is not expected to change the legal structure completely. Nevertheless, there are
several areas where the expectations already placed on employers mean that they will have
an increased burden in introducing new technology, as they will have to design the
framework of work in such a way as to ensure that employees are protected. Furthermore, it
is not yet possible to predict whether the traditional concepts of employment law (place of
performance, availability, making and effect of a declaration) will remain unchanged in form
and content for persons working exclusively in the metaverse or whether they will change
because of the particular form of employment.
    The requirement of equal treatment is expected to be enriched with new concepts. The
presence, appearance and possible violations in virtual space will be examined and
incorporated into the current rules, although obvious, but not automatic. Case law is
expected to develop the solution in this area.
    In conclusion, humanity has experienced several industrial-technological leaps in its
development, which changes have inevitably followed in legal norms. The emergence of
Metaverse is part of this series so that labour law will also react to technological changes,
hopefully maintaining the progress made so far.




https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                      64
 Peter Sipka                                                                    Italian Labour Law e-Journal
                                                                                       Issue 1, Vol. 16 (2023)
                                                                                              Section: Theme




                                               Bibliography

Bankó Z., Berke G., Kiss G., Commentary on the Labour Code, Wolters Kluwer, Budapest, 2017;
Biasi M., Il decent work e la dimensione virtuale: spunti di riflessione sulla regolazione del lavoro nel
Metaverso, in Lavoro Diritti Europa, 1, 2023;
De Stefano V., Aloisi A., Countouris N., The Metaverse is a labour issue, in Social Europe, 1
February 2022;
European Trade Union Confederation, Framework Agreement on Telework, 16 July 2002;
Hungler S., Social Integration through Framework Agreements through Autonomous Social Dialogue, in
Magyar Jog, 12, 2020;
Jakab N., Everything is upside down - Or the old-new approach to employment and protection, in Miskolc
Legal Review, 4, 2022;
Kárpáti C., "Home office" nowadays - The phenomenon of working from home and the problems of its
widespread spread in labour law, in Munkajog, 2, 2022;
Kártyás G., Liability for Occupational Safety and Health in EU and Hungarian Law, in Miskolc Legal
Review, Special Issue 1, 2022;
Lőrincz G., Some Issues of the Performance of the Employment Contract, in MunkaJog, 3, 2020;
Mélypataki G., Máté A.D., Riczu Z., The fundamental issues of the concept of work in the light of
digitalisation, in Miskolc Legal Review, Special Issue 1, 2022;
Pál L., The definition of the contractual workplace - the "home office" and telework, in Munkajog, 2, 2018;
Tóth L., Liability issues during telework: to what extent is the employer liable?, in Employment Law, 3,
2021.




Copyright © 2023 Peter Sipka. This article is released under a Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License




https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1561-8048/17145                                                                65
