Gig work has long been a factor in the labor economy, but in the last decade, the advent of platform-based gig work has boosted its dominance and for reasons that I will outline in this paper, accelerated precarity. First, I will discuss the conditions that allow for the gig economy to exist and expand, including technological, social, and political economic factors. These factors can combine to create or deepen precarity for gig workers, as I will examine. Finally, I will present the possibility of full employment as a foil to this precarity to determine whether the gig economy could, in some ways, become a lasting and sustainable part of the labor economy.
Factors Contributing to the Rise of Gig Work
In the internet age, the face of work has changed dramatically. Multiple technological factors have made the gig economy a fast-growing and efficient source of labor. The primary factor, and the one on which this paper will focus, is the creation of platforms, defined as “a digital base upon which a gig firm is built” (Woodcock, 10). Additionally, the mass connectivity that the internet provides has completely changed the way that many industries do business, from retail giants like Amazon to food service outlets like GrubHub.
Mass connectivity is also reliant on the widespread availability of cheap technology, both for the consumers using applications on their phones and computers and for those who work to service those apps. As Veena Dubal describes in her brief history of the gig economy, “[s]ince 2012, much of the positive discourse around Uber and Lyft has continued to regurgitate the notion that these are companies built on technological innovations that brought new forms of transportation to people and places who needed them” (Dubal). The article expresses doubt about the “need” for this to happen, but few can argue that it is the technology-based connections that make it possible. Accessible technology translates to accessible gig work, which these platforms tout as one of the benefits of being employed by them.
Myriad social factors have also contributed to the rise of the gig economy. The technological factors discussed above have also given rise to changes in consumer attitudes, namely that ubiquitous technology and connection promote an expectation of instant gratification when it comes to online shopping, rideshare services and delivery apps. The idea of convenience as king is a pillar of platform-based gig work. The average consumer has become well-accustomed to the next-day or instant delivery capabilities made possible buy platform-based workers. Indeed, the speed and ease of access have become an unsustainable industry standard.
Similarly, from the standpoint of a laborer, technology has changed the social norms of what can be expected from work. The desire for work to be “flexibilized” (Vallas 280) is a driving force for employment in platform-based gig work. Laborers cite an ability to choose their own schedule and to work independently as motivation for taking jobs. In a video interview with bike delivery workers for Curbed with New York Magazine, some of those workers described these parts of their job that they love in the same breath as a description of the dangers that they might face on any given night. So, while flexible work has it’s benefits, the human toll is a very real consequence of that trend.
When it comes to social factors that contribute to gig work, it is worth mentioning that the platform-based gig economy has also perpetuated gendered and racialized aspects of work. Very often the relationship between platform, business, worker and customer is misinterpreted and widely unregulated. This confusion and lack of accountability for workers by the apps creates an attractive employment relationship for undocumented workers, perpetuating stereotypical types of work, for example, for Latinx workers like the ones in Josh Dzieza’s article and video. The same came be said for gendered work like house cleaning and while platform work did not evolve because of these trends, the targeted employment of certain groups of people has contributed to the expansion of the gig economy. Platforms are free to expand at an exponential rate, knowing that the type of employment that they offer will be attractive to many in higher risk employment situations.
There are also political economic factors to be considered when looking at the growth of the gig economy. For one, there is a trend toward the shift of responsibility from the owners of capital over to the worker, a shift “from being organization-centric to being individual-centric” (Kost 1). This shift happens when, as discussed above, the employer to employee relationship is unclear because of the use of a platform. The platform has the power of capital and the businesses that use the app have less responsibility for workers or any issues that may arise.
Another political economic factor in gig work is globalization and outsourcing of labor. In Manfred Steger’s introduction to globalization, he sets the definition to mean “the expansion and intensification of social relations across world-space and world-time”(Steger 35). This intensification can be witnessed in the global spread of gig work. As we have discussed, the economy is a political economy, and the globalized nature of platform-based gig work makes it easier to subvert workers’ rights in order to capitalize.
Precarity and Outcomes of Gig Work
Since we have now analyzed the factors that make gig work possible and popular, it is time to turn to the consequences and outcomes of gig work as such a large part of the labor economy. To do this, I’ll frame gig work in the context of precarity as outlined in Guy Standing’s article The Precariat. In this, Standing touches on the history of globalization in labor and the process of “governments and corporations chasing each other in making their labour relations more flexible”. As a result, “the number of people in insecure forms of labour multiplied” (Standing 6). Precarity in the late 1980s and 1990s is the subject of this article, but we can see a clear connection between the part time and inconsistent labor of that era to the platform based gig work that we have discussed.
The consequences of gig work are the same consequences discussed in The Precariat. Workers experience decreased visibility, as the tasks are increasingly distributed online and without human interaction. This also leads to difficulty organizing, as the workers themselves may not know who one another is. Even today, with increased focus on the labor economy during the pandemic, there is no clear picture of issues facing gig workers because of a lack of viable and reliable data sets.
As well, platforms are not narrowly defined as “employers,” creating a space for a lack of regulation and accountability. Essentially, this fosters the creation of a different and lower class of working people, ones with fewer rights and protections, less access to resources, and a disconnection from the rest of the working world and society.
For Standing, the implications of “precaritaization” also extend far beyond the world of labor. There is a human toll that matches or sometimes exceeds all of the issues outlined above. Standing talks about “the four As:” (Standing 19), anomie, anxiety, anger and alienation, which, summarized, are all of the feelings of disconnection from society and resentment for the work and employer. Platform gig workers experience this on a hyper level, as the technological aspect of the work makes them even further removed from and potential feelings of gratification surrounding their employment.
In all, when we look at the platform-based gig economy through the lens of precarity, it becomes clear that while the idea of the precariat has existed for some time, the advent of web-based employment has created even more precarious employment. A flexible schedule and the ability to “be your own boss” become, instead, an immense burden that would formerly have been taken up by an employer and add to the uncertain nature of gig work. In Steven Vallas and Juliet Schorr’s article “What Do Platforms Do?”, the authors conclude that “precarity is often an apt descriptor of the conditions that platform workers confront as they struggle to keep their balance under conditions of rising uncertainty” (Vallas, 280). There seems to be no end in sight when it comes to that uncertainty, but a shift away from a gig economy could provide relief for many workers
Full Employment as a Solution
After reviewing the pitfalls and sometimes dire consequences of operating within the gig economy, one wonders if there is a more sustainable way for Americans to sustain themselves. For such a solution, I found that the idea of full employment, as it was born out of the New Deal era, provides a foil to the types of employment that many of us experience today.
In Michael Dennis’s piece The Idea of Full Employment he lays out the origins of the idea as a “challenge to the most fundamental ideals of American capitalism” (Dennis, 70). In fact, full employment turns capitalism on its head, in that it places emphasis on security for workers rather than profits for the owners of capital. The idea puts the responsibility of providing employment to every ready, willing and able person onto the federal government. The idea also serves as an insurance that each person will earn enough money for that work to sustain themselves and their families. With these assurances, the average person is free from the stress and toil of cobbling together gigs or supplementing salaried employment to be able to make ends meet.
In examining the way the platform-based gig economy functions, it seems we have strayed even further from security for workers than was true in the New Deal era. Those workers who do earn enough seem to make sacrifices, both mentally and physically, to do so. Further, the platform-based structure allows the employer to disengage with the labor force, causing an even greater chasm of disparity. After analyzing all of the factors that contribute to the success of platform-based gig work and the precarity that ensues, it is more important than ever that we strive toward full employment in this country, before it is too late.
Works Cited
Dennis, M. (2017, May 1). The idea of full employment: A challenge to capitalism in the new deal era. Labor. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://read.dukeupress.edu/labor/article-abstract/14/2/69/28348/The-Idea-of-Full-Employment-A-Challenge-to?redirectedFrom=PDF.
De Stefano, V. (2015). The rise of the just-in-time workforce: On-demand work, crowdwork, and labor protection in the gig-economy. Comp. Lab. L. & Pol’y J., 37, 471.
Dubal, V. (2020, April 27). A brief history of the gig. Logic Magazine. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://logicmag.io/security/a-brief-history-of-the-gig/.
Dzieza, Josh, “Revolt of the NYC Delivery Workers,” Curbed, September 13, 2021.
Kost, D., Fieseler, C., & Wong, S. I. (2019). Boundaryless careers in The gig economy: An oxymoron? Human Resource Management Journal, 30(1), 100–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12265
Pinotti, R. (2014, May 27). Steger, Manfred. (2003). globalization: A very short introduction. Academia.edu. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://www.academia.edu/7176061/Steger_Manfred_2003_Globalization_A_very_short_introduction.
Standing, G. (n.d.). The Precariat – Guy Standing, 2014. SAGE Journals. Retrieved December 13, 2021, from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1536504214558209.
Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020). What do platforms do? understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46(1), 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
Woodcock, J., & Graham, M. (2020). The gig economy: a critical introduction. Polity Press.
