Digitalisation and precarious work practices in alternative economies: Work organisation and work relations in e-cab services

Abstract

The emergence of the gig economy is mostly an alternative to the core service economy, which is gradually being transformed in spatial and temporal dimensions. It is not work in the gig economy, per se, that is problematic, but the way in which it is organised or structured is creating ruptures across several dimensions. This article seeks to explore the work organisation and work relations practised in these gig economies. In particular, it provides empirical findings on work practices in e-cab services so as to highlight the growing precariousness, in both economic and social contexts, among the service providers.

Digitalised management, control and resistance in platform work: a labour process analysis

“…To do this, we develop an application of labour process theory (Braverman 1974;Edwards 1989Edwards , 1990Hyman 1987;Littler 1982;Thompson 1990). While the control-resistance duality of labour process approaches is fairly familiar in platform work research, to date there has been a significant -indeed, problematic -overemphasis of control, while platform worker resistance has been correspondingly downplayed (for instance, Gandini 2019;Howcroft and Bergvall-Kåreborn 2019;Rosenblat and Stark 2016;Shapiro 2018;Sharma 2020;Veen et al 2020;Wood et al 2018). The overemphasis of control in previous research -while in some ways understandable, given the novelty of algorithmic technology -has skewed accounts of platform work's nature and dynamics.…”

The Australian Government’s business-friendly employment response to COVID-19: A critical discourse analysis

“…• Compromised health, well-being and work-life balance (Dean and Spoehr, 2018;Sharma, 2020); • Housing insecurity (Beer et al, 2016); • Negative impacts upon family planning and social life (Anwar and Graham, 2020; Chan and Tweedie, 2015); • Reduced social mobility (Burgess et al, 2013).…”

“…This is nowhere more apparent than in the emergence of the gig economy, with its emphasis on on-demand piece work, where employers only pay for the work they need and receive (MacDonald and Giazitzoglu, 2019; Shibata, 2020; Stanford, 2017; Stewart and Stanford, 2017). Sharma (2020: 2) defines the gig economy as involving ‘short-term, unpredictable and contingent work arrangements where the market for personal services is transacted in a digital marketplace’. MacDonald and Giazitzoglu (2019: 724) note these short-term arrangements ‘are advertised by companies through online platforms with workers bidding a (wage) price to undertake the job as an independent contractor, working on a series of discrete “gigs”’.…”

“…The employment relationship is murky – with an implication that employers have a diminished responsibility towards gig workers, defining their role as facilitators of work arrangements between workers and clients, rather than as employers (Minter, 2017). Sharma (2020) highlights how gig workers are related to as independent contractors, while resembling blue-collar employees of platform companies. This relationship enables firms to limit their obligations to employees, and in turn reduce costs and enhance the flexibility and efficiency of resource use.…”

“…Furthermore, workers are monitored through ratings systems ranking workers according to clients’ reviews (Wood et al, 2019). Thus, while freedom and flexibility is promised to workers, with independent work positioned as a means for workers to reclaim their autonomy, many workers experience limited control over the prices they can charge, the work that they accept and their work schedules (Anwar and Graham, 2020; Dean and Spoehr, 2018; Goods et al, 2019; Sharma, 2020). Shibata (2020) argues that the freedom promised to independent workers is a ‘fictitious freedom’, which effectively legitimises exploitation, particularly for marginalised workers who are often compelled to engage in gig work out of necessity (MacDonald and Giazitzoglu, 2019; Shibata, 2020).…”