众包型网约工的就业形式高度灵活，不仅可以自由选择上线接单的时间，还可以同时在多个平台接单，按照平台的要求完成订单后即可从平台获得报酬。因此，众包型网约工是市场中的平等民事主体，应当享有与平台自由交易的权利，同时，众包型网约工是灵活就业人员，应当平等地享有健康权、生存权等基本权利，这意味着其应当享有与其职业风险相匹配的意外伤害保障以及社会保障。

考察众包型网约工权益保障的现状，可以发现因为众包型网约工的从属性显著减弱，与平台间的关系趋于平等，所以他们不在劳动法的保护范围内，但可以运用民法实现权利救济，且他们一般参加居民社会保险。

但是，众包型网约工的权益保障仍然面临着一些问题。首先，平台容易滥用其交易上优势地位。民法规范中的法律行为效力规范和格式条款相关规范虽然可以维护交易公平，但在众包型网约工规模较大的情况下，债的相对性特征将使维权过程十分繁琐。其次，众包型网约工的意外伤害保障不足。虽然他们可以通过主张保险责任和侵权责任的方式实现权利救济，但在过错责任的原则下其自身仍需承担很大的风险。最后，众包型网约工的社会保险待遇水平较低。

The employment form of crowd-sourced net contract workers is highly flexible. Not only can they freely choose the time to take orders online, but they can also take orders on multiple platforms at the same time. After completing the orders according to the requirements of the platforms, they can get paid from the platforms. Therefore, crowd-sourced net contract workers are equal civil subjects in the market and should enjoy the right to freely trade with the platforms. At the same time, crowd-sourced net contract workers are flexible employees and should equally enjoy basic rights such as the right to health and the right to life, which means that they should enjoy accidental injury protection and social security that match their occupational risks.

Examining the status quo of the protection of rights and interests of crowd-sourced net contract workers, it can be found that because the subordination of crowd-sourced net contract workers has been significantly weakened and the relationships between crowd-sourced net contract workers and platforms tend to be equal, they are not within the protection scope of employment law, but they can use civil law to achieve rights relief. And they generally participate in resident social insurance.

However, there are still some problems in the protection of the rights and interests of crowd-sourced net contract workers. First, platforms are prone to abuse their trading dominance. Although the relevant norms of validity of legal acts and standard clauses in civil law norms can maintain fair transactions, in the case of a large number of crowd-sourced net contract workers, the relative nature of debt will make the process of rights protection very cumbersome. Secondly, the accidental injury protection of crowd-sourced net contract workers is insufficient. Although they can achieve rights relief by claiming insurance liability and tort liability, they still have to bear a great risk under the principle of fault liability. Finally, the social security benefits of crowd-sourced net contract workers are relatively low.

In order to solve the problems faced by the protection of the rights and interests of crowd-sourced net contract workers, first of all, they should be prudently included in the scope of employment law protection and a third category of workers should be added prudently also. Secondly, the abuse of the platform’s dominant position in the transaction should be regulated in an anti-monopoly manner. Thirdly, a compulsory insurance system should be established to provide accidental injury protection that matches the occupational risks of crowd-sourced net contract workers. Finally, improve the level of social insurance benefits for crowd-sourced net contract workers, and enhance the fairness of social security while reducing their payment pressure.