#Direktanstellung Jetzt

Evidence

The core claim of this campaign is verifiable: platforms control courier work while using subcontracting chains to avoid responsibility. The demand for direct employment is backed by named sources, public hearings, and documented cases.

1. Control at the top, liability pushed downward

Delivery platforms define workflows, performance pressure, and operational standards. At the same time, wage obligations and employer duties are pushed onto subcontractors and often barely identifiable "fleet partners". That split between control and responsibility is the core problem.

Sources: RBB / Tagesschau, 2 Dec 2025; Bundestag plenary protocol 21/56; Berlin plenary protocol 19/74.

2. There is documented evidence of systemic abuse

  • Unpaid wages, missing social contributions, and shell-company structures are described as recurring patterns in investigations and political debate.
  • At the public hearing in the Berlin House of Representatives on 5 March 2026, subcontracting structures were described as an enforcement problem, a legal problem, and a gateway for abuse.
  • The direct-employment demand is voiced not only by campaign activists, but also publicly by ministers, elected representatives, and labour-law voices.

Sources: Committee on Labour and Social Affairs hearing, Berlin House of Representatives, 5 Mar 2026; Statements by Karl-Josef Laumann (CDU); Statement by Cansel Kiziltepe.

3. Even minimum fair-work standards are not being met

The Fairwork report on Germany (2025) gives Uber Eats and Wolt a score of 0 out of 10 and explicitly states that the subcontractor model does not ensure fair labour standards. For this campaign, that is not a side issue; it is structural evidence that the model must be politically limited.

Source: Fairwork Germany Ratings 2025.

4. This is not only about wages, but about accountability

  • Data protection: public cases and reporting show how platforms collect detailed movement data while responsibility for violations is often fragmented.
  • Food safety: when transport, equipment, and employer duties are outsourced across several layers, effective oversight becomes harder.
  • Enforcement: when the formal employer disappears, workers are left with unpaid claims and no realistic counterparty.

Sources: netzpolitik.org background report; RBB / Tagesschau.

5. Why direct employment is the political conclusion

Direct employment would not solve every problem automatically. But it would end the central evasive move: platforms could no longer hide behind subcontractors while still controlling the work. Responsibility, control, and employer duties would again sit in the same place.

Named sources at a glance