INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
An Oxford University study of remote gig economy work conducted on digital platforms has highlighted poor-quality working conditions with
implications for employees& well-being.
The research comes at a time when political scrutiny is increasingly falling on algorithmically
controlled platforms and their societal impacts
Policymakers are also paying greater attention to the precarious reality for workers on platforms that advertise their gig marketplaces to
new recruits with shiny claims of &flexibility& and &autonomy.
Governments in some regions are also actively reassessing employment law to
take account of technology-fueled shifts to work and working patterns
Earlier this year, for instance, the U.K
government announced a package of labor market reforms — and committed to being responsible for quality of work, not just quantity of
jobs, for the first time.
The Oxford University study, entitledGood Gig, Bad Big: Autonomy and Algorithmic Control in the Global Gig
Economy, looks at remote gig economy work, such as tasks like research, translation and programming carried out via platforms such as
Freelancer.com and Fiverr (rather than gig economy platforms such as food delivery platforms, where workers must be in local proximity to
the work — albeit, those platforms have their own workforce exploitation critiques).
The researchers note that an estimated 70 million
workers worldwide are registered on remote work platforms.Their study methodology involved carrying out face-to-face interviews with just
over 100 workers in South East Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa who had been active on one of two unnamed &leading platforms& for at least six
months.
They also undertook a remote survey of just over 650 additional gig platform workers, from the same regions, to supplement the
Participants for the survey portion were recruited via online job ads on the platforms themselves, and had to have completed work through
one of the two platforms within the past two months, and to have worked in at least five projects or for five hours in total.
Free to get
the job done
The study paints a mixed picture, with — on the one hand — gig workers reporting feeling they can remotely access
stimulating and challenging work, and experiencing perceived autonomy and discretion over how they get a job done: A large majority (72
percent) of respondents said they felt able to choose and change the order in which they undertook online tasks, and 74 percent said they
were able to choose or change their methods of work.
At the same time — and here the negatives pile in — workers on the platforms lack
collective bargaining so are simultaneously experiencing a hothouse of competitive marketplace and algorithmic management pressure, combined
with feelings of social isolation (with most working from home), and the risk of overwork and exhaustion as a result of a lack of
regulations and support systems, as well as their own economic needs to get tasks done to earn money.
Our findings demonstrate evidence that
the autonomy of working in the gig economy often comes at the price of long, irregular and anti-social hours, which can lead to sleep
deprivation and exhaustion,& said Dr
Alex Wood, co-author of the paper, commenting in a statement
&While gig work takes place around the world, employers tend to be from the U.K
and other high-income Western countries, exacerbating the problem for workers in lower-income countries who have to compensate for time
differences.
The competitive nature of online labour platforms leads to high-intensity work, requiring workers to complete as many gigs as
possible as quickly as they can and meet the demands of multiple clients no matter how unreasonable.
The survey results backed the
researchers& interview findings of an oversupply of labor, with 54 percent of respondents reporting there was not enough work available and
just a fifth (20 percent) disagreeing.
The study also highlights the fearsome power of platforms& rating and reputation systems as a means
of algorithmically controlling remote workers — via the economic threat of loss of future work.
The researchers write:
A far more
effective means of control [than non-proximate monitoring mechanisms such as screen monitoring software, which platforms also deployed] was
the ‘algorithmic management& enabled by platform-based rating and reputation systems (Lee et al., 2015; Rosenblat and Stark, 2016)
Workers were rated by their clients following the completion of tasks
Workers with the best scores and the most experience tended to receive more work due to clients& preferences and the platforms& algorithmic
ranking of workers within search results.
This form of control was very effective, as informants stressed the importance of maintaining a
high average rating and good accuracy scores
Whereas Uber algorithmic management ‘deactivates& (dismisses) workers with ratings deemed low (Rosenblat and Stark, 2016), online labour
platforms, instead, use algorithms to filter work away from those with low ratings, thus making continuing on the platform a less viable
means of making a living.
As a result of how platforms are organized, remote gig workers reported that the work could be highly intense,
with a majority (54 percent) of survey respondents sayingthey had to work at very high speed; 60 percent working to tight deadlines; and
more than a fifth (22 percent) experiencing pain as a result of their work.
This is particularly felt by low-skilled workers, who must
complete a very high number of gigs in order to make a decent living,& added professor Mark Graham, co-author, in another supporting
&As there is an oversupply of low-skill workers and no collective bargaining power, pay remains low
Completing as many jobs as possible is the only way to make a decent living.
The study also highlights the contradictions inherent in the
gig economy &flexible working& narrative — with the researchers noting thatwhilealgorithms do not formally controlwhere workers work, in
reality remote platform workers may have &little real choice but to work from home, and this can lead to a lack of social contact and
feelings of social isolation.
Gig platform workers also run up against the rigid requirements of demanding clients and deadlines in order to
get paid for their work — meaning there a whip being cracked over them after all
The study found most workers had to work &intense unsocial and irregular hours in order to meet client demand.
The autonomy resulting from
algorithmic control can lead to overwork, sleep deprivation and exhaustion as a consequence of the weak structural power of workers
vis-a-vis clients,& they write
&This weak structural power is an outcome of platform-based rating and ranking systems enabling a form of control which is able to overcome
the spatial and temporal barriers that non-proximity places on the effectiveness of direct labour process surveillance and supervision
Online labour platforms thus facilitate clients in connecting with a largely unregulated global oversupply of labour.
Workers that gained
the most in this environment were good at mastering skills independently and navigating platforms& reputation systems so they could keep
winning more work — albeit essentially at other workers& expense, on account of how the platforms& algorithms funnel more work toward the
best-rated (meaning there less for the rest).
The studyconcludes that platform reputations have asymbolic power& — as &an emerging form of
marketplace bargaining power& — and &as a consequence of the algorithmic control inherent to online labour platforms.&
The workers who
lacked the individual resources of skills and reputationsuffered from low incomes and insecurity.
Our findings are consistent with remote
workers& experiences across many national contexts,& added Graham
&Hopefully, this research will shed light on potential pitfalls for remote gig workers and help policymakers understand what working in the
online gig economy really looks like
While there are benefits to workers such as autonomy and flexibility, there are also serious areas of concern, especially for lower-skill
