"Much has been said and written this year, but as yet there is no clear vision for the labor market," says ZiPconomy editor-in-chief Hugo-Jan Ruts. Politicians showed little evidence of an innovative vision this year, and the level of discussion left much to be desired, he says. The 2024 zzp debate revolved mainly around repairs and restrictions, while opportunities for innovation and structural improvements were barely discussed. In conversation with Sem Overduin, of HeadFirst Group's public affairs team, Ruts critically reflects on the challenges of the past year, the political discussion and the role of journalism, but also outlines how 2025 could become a year of confrontation and perhaps much-needed change.

How do you look back on the past year, in terms of the zzp file?

2024 was in some ways disappointing. The last six months in particular have revolved almost entirely around the lifting of the enforcement moratorium. That was already on the way because the date of January 1, 2025 is getting closer, but the debate was mainly about what is no longer allowed, rather than what is still possible. During lectures and presentations I try to show that there are opportunities to take the hiring of freelancers to a higher level. Unfortunately, the market, politics and society hardly ever talk about this. Many parties act as if the measures are unexpected, while this was already known since December 2022. On the other hand, I do understand it in a way: often organizations are mainly occupied with the delusion of the day, such as filling up the occupation, making it difficult to look ahead. At the same time, politics is mostly preoccupied with headlines and a fundamental debate about the future of the labor market remains absent.

From a journalistic perspective, it was an interesting year, with many different narratives and perspectives. What particularly struck you about the coverage around the self-employed issue this year?

Above all, it was much, much. Much is being written and said about it, especially since there is a sense of ambiguity in the market. Hard interests play a role in this, of course: both political and commercial. There is also a lot of misinformation going around. Anyway, my algorithm on social media is almost entirely focused on the labor market, so then it also seems like everyone is talking about this topic.

How has ZiPconomy contributed to the demand for - and interpretation of - information on surely quite complex topics such as the end of the enforcement moratorium, compulsory disability insurance for the self-employed and the WTTA?

ZiPconomy is a niche platform. We focus mainly on clients of self-employed people and the agency world. We start from a basic level of knowledge and add depth, often in collaboration with our partners, who in turn come up with interesting insights. We then offer a platform, provided it's correct, of course. In addition, we do two things: first, the hard, factual news and the corresponding interpretation. Secondly, we want to fuel the debate about the flexible labor market by giving our partners a platform and by focusing even more on factual reporting, especially given the amount of misinformation going around.

I see you respond more and more often on LinkedIn to posts that contain incorrect information about the zzp file. Do you see yourself as an activist and controlling journalist? What role do you see yourself playing?

That is part of who I am. My personality tells me that the debate should be based on facts. If I read something that is not true, I almost feel obliged to respond. That can irritate people, but I take that for granted. I think it is very important that we start the discussion on the basis of correct facts and figures.

You are often in The Hague to follow the debates on the self-employment and labor market file. You then provide lightning-fast interpretation and coverage. What is your impression of those debates?

To be honest, I am increasingly dissatisfied with it. I found the September 5 roundtable discussion on the lifting of the enforcement moratorium interesting, but the September 12 debate on the zzp dossier was superficial. And I found the debate on labor market policy on October 23 downright disappointing. This is partly because we have a lot of new MPs on this dossier. That makes it difficult to get to the bottom of the dossiers. In the zzp-debate the real conversation was lacking, partly because the ministers Van Hijum (Social Affairs and Employment) and former state secretary Idsinga (Taxation and Fiscal Affairs) are relatively new. What I really thought was a missed opportunity is that there was no vision of the future of the labor market during the labor market debate. There is a solid package of measures on the table to reform the labor market. In my opinion, those measures are mainly repairs, but there is far too little discussion about the next step we want to take together. What role will the self-employed have in the labor market? How do we work toward a contract-neutral system? I had expected Van Hijum to take a pioneering role in this, but unfortunately this was not forthcoming.

Speaking of concrete measures, news came out on Friday, Nov. 22, that mandatory disability insurance for the self-employed (BAZ) is not feasible. The WTTA (admission system) has also been postponed for the second time this year. Why are these plans failing to get off the ground?

As a whole, it mainly points to capacity problems in the implementing agencies, and that's what I find so crazy about politics: political ambition usually starts from its own wish list instead of looking at what is possible according to those implementing agencies. There is a paradox here: the government has to solve more and more with fewer resources. The annoying thing is that if all those legislative proposals do not get off the ground, political support for all those plans may subsequently decline as well. And we must remain really critical of the usefulness, necessity and proportionality of new legislative proposals.

The so-called 'polder' plays an important role in the creation of socio-economic policy in the Netherlands. How do you view the relationship between the polder and politics with regard to the labor market and self-employed workers file?

The influence of the polder, that is something I do look at critically. Because the impression that is being created is that the polder rules. It is all very well for parties such as the SER to discuss labor market policy, but let's be honest; the polder is dominated by classical, mainly conservative, forces. They are very good at creating support and improving policy, but real innovation does not take place here. Other players are needed for that. Borstlap produced a solid report in January 2020, but the 'renewal plans' are hardly taken up by politicians and the polder. I do miss that in the polder and I find that disappointing.

You published a report this year on zzp law in international perspective. What did you want to achieve with this comparative study?

I wanted to broaden my outlook and look beyond national borders. For example, Belgium is interesting because self-employed people there have hardly any tax advantages and they pay full contributions to social security. Secondly, they have a separate law. I think those are two interesting principles. Not to adopt directly, but to think about. That law brings together labor law, entrepreneurial law and tax aspects around the specific employment relationship of the self-employed and the worker. The rules are not even very different, they are more concrete and focused. Germany is also an interesting example because they work with a categorization of self-employment based on the type of occupation. All these kinds of insights provide material for careful consideration.

What was the highlight of the zzp issue for you this year?

I don't really have one highlight, but I do have two hopeful moments. The outline agreement suggests that there will be "policies for the truly self-employed," although no one knows exactly what that means and I haven't seen much of it at this point. But anyway, it's there and hopefully that's going to take on more substance. Second, the expiration of the moratorium is important. You cannot have eight years of a law that is not enforced. Hopefully that will force all parties involved to be innovative; why am I hiring people? And under what conditions?

And a low point?

The committee debate on labor market policy in October. I did find the level of discussion and the level of questions to be a low point. It really could have been better.

What do you expect from the zzp file in 2025?

I hope that this year's hopeful signs will continue. Politically, I am somewhat less sure, as the political situation is somewhat shaky after all, and there are tensions within the coalition. I expect the first half of 2025 to be turbulent. The wishes of politicians and the policy of organizations to scale down are going to cause confrontations, because production has to continue and we are facing shortages in the labor market. So it will be a search for a new balance and we will have to compromise somewhere. There are many places in the labor market where the self-employed have become indispensable. All in all, it's going to be very interesting to follow those dynamics.

*This interview is part of a series, in which in recent weeks the Public Affairs team has interviewed several experts closely involved in issues surrounding the self-employed and the labor market. The series consists of six interviews, which will be published in the coming weeks.

Request a free consultation

Questions about this? Please contact us.

Sem Overduin
Public Policy & Affairs Manager
Sem.Overduin@headfirst.nl

Oifik Youssefi
Public Affairs Officer
Oifik.Youssefi@headfirst.nl

Maaike van Driel
Head of Legal
Maaike.vanDriel@headfirst.group

Thomas ten Veldhuijs
Senior Legal Counsel
Thomas.tenVeldhuijs@headfirst.nl