United StatesUse Readable text for larger type, or zoom in on the pages.
Platform Council
A note from the chair: June 2026
Dear members,
June gave us two things we need if we are going to change a practice: a public conversation about a proposed fix, and a new issue that has passed our pattern test. Neither is the finish line. Both are evidence that the Assembly’s process is moving from individual reports toward standards that people can examine, challenge and improve.
What moved this month
On 2 June, the public consultation opened on the draft Platform Fairness Standard, RC/PL/2026/L.1. It remains open through 2 July. The draft asks platforms to provide written notice and a specific reason before suspending an account, removing a listing, holding a payout or changing a fee. It also calls for review by a person, a time limit on payout holds, and the same protections in every country where a platform operates.
That is a focused request. It does not ask a platform to guarantee that every decision will be the one a seller wants. It asks that a business be told what happened, why it happened, how to seek review, and when money being held will be released or reconsidered. Members have been clear that a process is not fair if it exists in one country but disappears in another.
On 23 June, the Cashflow Council certified that CF-001 met the five-part pattern test: Volume, Frequency, Consistency, Spread and Corroboration. That is a finding about the pattern in the reports, not a judgment against any one company. The next step is to prepare a draft fix for public consultation. On 27 June, the Secretariat marked Micro-, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Day with a statement recognizing the businesses whose reports and daily work give this Assembly its purpose.
The numbers
As of today, Reseated has 1,000 members in 49 countries. Members have filed 2,756 reports from 50 countries. The difference between those country counts matters: people may report from a place where they are not members, and our evidence should reflect where experiences occur, not only where our membership has reached.
The Platform Council has 308 members in 45 countries and 1,406 reports from 50 countries. The median amount at stake in those reports is approximately US$4,102. The reports include 608 situations involving funds held and 798 involving an account suspension. In the last 30 days, 291 Platform reports were filed. The most frequently reported countries include the United States, Brazil, Mexico, Germany, France, the Philippines, the United Kingdom and Spain.
Across the seven councils, the report totals are: Platform, 1,406; Cashflow, 747; Fair Play, 231; Trade, 140; Red Tape, 121; Resilience, 58; and Team, 53. These are reports, not a count of businesses harmed or a verdict on any organization. One business may face more than one problem, and a report can describe a complicated situation. We use the pattern test precisely because a pile of reports alone is not enough to justify a standard.
One member’s experience
The account below is a composite drawn from the kinds of experiences reported to the Platform Council; details have been changed so it does not identify a member. A small seller notices that a payout has not arrived. The account dashboard says the payment is under review, but gives no clear reason and no date for another update. The seller contacts support, explains that the money is needed for an upcoming supplier payment, and receives a general response rather than a person who can review the case. The account remains usable, but the cash is not. The seller’s immediate question is not abstract: what should I tell the supplier, and when can I expect an answer?
A report like that does not tell us, by itself, whether a hold was justified. It does show why a notice, a specific explanation, a human review and a time limit matter together. A reason without a way to challenge it is not enough. A review without a deadline can leave a business waiting indefinitely. And a payout hold can cause damage even when the underlying account remains open.
What we are learning
First, the impact is often operational before it is visible in a headline: a business must make decisions about suppliers, wages and bills while trying to understand what has happened. Second, consistent process matters across borders. A small business should not have to guess which protections apply based on the country where its account was opened. Third, members are asking for practical safeguards, not special treatment.
Our work sits within a broader reality. The United Nations estimates that MSMEs account for about 90% of businesses, 60–70% of employment and roughly half of global GDP. The ILO notes that MSMEs account for around 70% of employment worldwide and that about 80% operate in the informal economy. Those figures describe why clear, usable rules matter to livelihoods, but they do not replace the evidence members have contributed here.
The consultation is an important test of our draft, too. If a clause is unclear, if it asks for something that cannot be implemented, or if it misses a real problem, this is the moment to say so. Agreement is not measured by how many people applaud a first draft. It is measured by whether we listen carefully enough to make the final text stronger.
What comes next
The Platform Fairness Standard consultation closes on 2 July. After that, the council will review the submissions and work on a revised draft in July. Please make your comments concrete: identify the part of the draft you are addressing, describe the situation it should cover, and suggest language or a process that could work.
For Cashflow, the next public milestone is a draft resolution on 21 July. The draft will be a proposal, not a settled position. Members will have an opportunity to examine it through consultation before it can go to an Assembly ballot. The same sequence applies to every problem we take forward: reports, a five-part test, a proposed fix, public consultation, a ballot, and then letters to the leaders who have the authority to adopt it.
Thank you to Amina in Nairobi, Diego in São Paulo and Leila in Marseille for giving time to the work this month. Thank you as well to everyone who filed a report, read the draft closely, made a difficult point in a consultation, or helped another member put an experience into words. A process built on evidence depends on people being willing to share what happened—and on the rest of us treating that contribution with care.
We are still building this Assembly. We do not have every answer, and we should not pretend that a standard alone can solve every problem. But we can set out a clear expectation, test it in public, and keep track of whether the people asked to adopt it respond. That is the work ahead.
With respect,Robert NikicAdvisory Council Chair, Reseated CouncilsUnited States