United StatesUse Readable text for larger type, or zoom in on the pages.
Platform Council
September 2026 Chair’s Letter: The Work After the Vote
Dear members,
This month brought two different kinds of progress: one issue crossed the pattern-test threshold, and another completed a public consultation. Neither is a finish line. Both are part of the work we promised to do in the open: listen, test whether a problem is shared and consistent, draft a response, invite challenge, and then ask the Assembly to decide.
What moved
On 8 September, FP-001 passed the five-part pattern test. The Fair Play Council can now move from evidence review to consultation drafting. Passing the test does not mean that every report describes the same event, or that every proposed remedy is settled. It means the evidence met the threshold across Volume, Frequency, Consistency, Spread, and Corroboration. The next job is to make a draft precise enough to be useful and open enough to be corrected.
On 24 September, the consultation on CF-001 closed with 362 comments. Thank you to everyone who took the time to respond. Those comments are not a referendum whose result can be counted by applause. They are material for careful review: what is supported by evidence, what points to a gap in the draft, and what falls outside the question before us. The council must show its work before members are asked to vote.
The Platform Fairness Standard remains adopted, following the Assembly vote on 13 August. The seven letters transmitting it to platform CEOs were delivered between 24 and 26 August. As of today, no replies are on record. We will keep the seat tracker accurate and will not treat silence as agreement, rejection, or a promise.
The numbers as of 27 September
Reseated has 1,609 members in 49 countries. Members have filed 4,925 reports from 50 countries. The council totals are: Platform, 1,911; Cashflow, 1,286; Fair Play, 592; Trade, 437; Resilience, 275; Red Tape, 269; and Team, 155. The council figures add to the total; the difference between countries represented by members and countries represented in reports reflects the reach of the evidence, not a claim that every country has equal participation.
Within the Platform Council, 478 members are based across 48 countries, while reports have come from 50. The median amount at stake is approximately US$4,100. Reports describe 1,070 account suspensions and 841 cases involving funds held; these categories can overlap. In the last 30 days, 104 reports were filed. The council’s team-size profile is also a reminder of who bears the impact: 36% report working alone, 43% in teams of two to nine, 17% in teams of 10 to 49, and 4% in teams of 50 to 249.
These are member reports, not a census of every small business or a finding against any particular company. Their purpose is to make recurring problems visible enough to examine. Across the world, micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises make up about 90% of businesses and account for 60–70% of employment and roughly half of GDP.1 That scale makes it worth getting the process right—and makes it important not to overstate what our own evidence can prove.
One account behind the totals
One member’s anonymized report describes a two-person business whose marketplace account was suspended while its balance was held. The notice did not identify the specific activity that triggered the action. The member tried the available appeal route, but the next steps and the time to a decision were unclear. Meanwhile, the business still had ordinary bills to meet. The account is not unusual because it proves every suspension is mistaken; it matters because it shows how a lack of reasons, a
human review path, and a clear time limit can turn a platform decision into a cash-flow crisis.
That is why the Platform Fairness Standard asks for written notice, a specific reason, review by a person, and a time limit on payout holds before an account suspension, listing removal, payout hold, or fee change. It asks for those protections in every country where a platform operates. A rule that is clear in one market and absent in another is not a reliable safeguard for a small business working across borders.
What we learned
First, a large number of reports is a starting point, not the whole pattern. We need recurrence, consistency, spread, and corroboration as well as volume. Second, consultation is meaningful only if members can see what happened to their input. The close of CF-001’s consultation therefore begins a responsibility: to assess the 362 comments, explain any changes, and make the proposed text available before the ballot. Third, numbers need careful labels. A report is not necessarily a unique business, and overlapping situations should not be added together as if they were separate people.
Finally, steady participation matters more than dramatic claims. The Platform Council’s 104 reports in the last 30 days are evidence that this remains a current concern. They are also a reason to keep listening for differences by country, team size, and circumstance—not to assume one member’s experience speaks for all.
What comes next
29 September: Wave 2 CEO seats are scheduled to be proposed, extending the process to a further group of mid-sized platforms. The proposal is a step in the seat-tracking process; it is not a record of any response.
13 October–12 November: the FP-001 public consultation is scheduled to run. Members will be able to examine the draft and submit evidence and comments.
26 October–9 November: the Assembly ballot on CF-001 is scheduled. Before that vote, the council’s disposition of consultation comments must be clear enough for members to judge the text.
17 November: letters to the proposed Wave 2 CEO seats are scheduled to be sent.
We will also publish the Q3 and “First Eight Months” reports in the October reporting period. Those reports should help members see not only how much activity we have had, but where decisions stand and what remains unfinished.
My thanks to Ana in São Paulo, Malik in Nairobi, Elena in Valencia, and Jun in Osaka for the careful evidence, patient questions, and practical suggestions you have contributed. I am grateful, too, to everyone who filed a report or commented without expecting a quick or easy answer. Please keep telling us when a draft is unclear, when a category does not fit, or when a number needs a better explanation. That is how this assembly earns trust.
Warmly,
Robert NikicAdvisory Council Chair, Reseated CouncilsUnited States