IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pophec/v20y2021i3p229-250.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the (mis)classification of paid labor: When should gig workers have employee status?

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Halliday

    (197050University of Melbourne, Australia)

Abstract

The emergence of so-called ‘gig work’, particularly that sold through digital platforms accessed through smartphone apps, has led to disputes about the proper classification of workers: Should platform workers be classified as independent contractors (as platforms typically insist), or as employees of the platforms through which they sell labor (as workers often claim)? Such disputes have urgency due to the way in which employee status is necessary to access certain benefits such as a minimum wage, sick pay, and so on. In addition, classification disputes have philosophical significance because their resolution requires some foundational account of why the law should make a distinction between employed and freelance workers in the first place. This paper aims to fill this foundational gap. Central to it is the idea that employment involves a worker ceding certain freedoms in return for a degree of security, at least with respect to income. Insofar as the misclassification objection has force against digital platforms, it is when a platform is attempting to have it both ways: Workers are giving up freedom but not being granted a proportionate increase in security. As I shall explain, this approach offers some flexibility as to how actual disputes might be resolved – justice may be indifferent between whether platforms offer greater security or permit workers greater freedom, provided they do at least one of these things.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Halliday, 2021. "On the (mis)classification of paid labor: When should gig workers have employee status?," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 20(3), pages 229-250, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:20:y:2021:i:3:p:229-250
    DOI: 10.1177/1470594X211015467
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1470594X211015467
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1470594X211015467?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zwolinski, Matt, 2008. "The Ethics of Price Gouging," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 347-378, July.
    2. Lee, Jooho, 2018. "Contracts and Hierarchies: A Moral Examination of Economic Theories of the Firm," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 153-173, April.
    3. Andrew Stewart & Jim Stanford, 2017. "Regulating work in the gig economy: What are the options?," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(3), pages 420-437, September.
    4. Gerald Friedman, 2014. "Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 171-188, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Uchiyama, Yosuke & Furuoka, Fumitaka & Md. Akhir, Md. Nasrudin, 2022. "Gig Workers, Social Protection and Labour Market Inequality: Lessons from Malaysia," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 56(3), pages 165-184.
    2. Goff, Sarah C., 2024. "When is work unjust? Confronting the choice between “pluralistic” and “unifying” approaches," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119859, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Santana, Monica & Cobo, Manuel J., 2020. "What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 846-862.
    2. Uchiyama, Yosuke & Furuoka, Fumitaka & Md. Akhir, Md. Nasrudin, 2022. "Gig Workers, Social Protection and Labour Market Inequality: Lessons from Malaysia," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 56(3), pages 165-184.
    3. Alvaro von Borries & Markus Grillitsch & Karl-Johan Lundquist, 2024. "Structural transformation, the knowledge economy, and the geography of low-income work," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 285-308.
    4. Francisca GUTIÉRREZ CROCCO & Maurizio ATZENI, 2022. "The effects of the pandemic on gig economy couriers in Argentina and Chile: Precarity, algorithmic control and mobilization," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 161(3), pages 441-461, September.
    5. Radosław Malik & Anna Visvizi & Małgorzata Skrzek-Lubasińska, 2021. "The Gig Economy: Current Issues, the Debate, and the New Avenues of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    6. Kevin Hu & Feng Fu, 2021. "Evolutionary Dynamics of Gig Economy Labor Strategies under Technology, Policy and Market Influence," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-31, June.
    7. Mohamed Mousa & Walid Chaouali & Monowar Mahmood, 2023. "The Inclusion of Gig Employees and their Career Satisfaction: Do Individual and Collaborative Job Crafting Play a Role?," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1055-1068, September.
    8. John Burgess & Julia Connell, 2020. "New technology and work: Exploring the challenges," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(3), pages 310-323, September.
    9. Gilles Paché, 2020. "Inside Delivery Platforms: The Covid-19 Pandemic And After," Post-Print hal-03041080, HAL.
    10. Geissinger, Andrea & Laurell, Christofer & Sandström, Christian, 2020. "Digital Disruption beyond Uber and Airbnb—Tracking the long tail of the sharing economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    11. Behl, Abhishek & Jayawardena, Nirma & Ishizaka, Alessio & Gupta, Manish & Shankar, Amit, 2022. "Gamification and gigification: A multidimensional theoretical approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1378-1393.
    12. Daniel Belanche & Luis V. Casaló & Carlos Flavián & Alfredo Pérez-Rueda, 2021. "The role of customers in the gig economy: how perceptions of working conditions and service quality influence the use and recommendation of food delivery services," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 15(1), pages 45-75, March.
    13. Bögenhold, Dieter & Klinglmair, Robert & Kandutsch, Florian, 2018. "Self-employment on the way in a digital economy: A variety of shades of grey," MPRA Paper 85321, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Juan Elegido, 2009. "The Just Price: Three Insights from the Salamanca School," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 29-46, November.
    15. Veronica Rattini, 2023. "Worker autonomy and performance: Evidence from a real‐effort experiment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 300-327, April.
    16. R. Chakraborti & G. Roberts, 2021. "Learning to Hoard: The Effects of Preexisting and Surprise Price-Gouging Regulation During the COVID-19 Pandemic," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 507-529, December.
    17. Inga Laß & Mark Wooden, 2019. "Non-standard Employment and Wages in Australia," RBA Annual Conference Papers acp2019-04, Reserve Bank of Australia, revised Jul 2019.
    18. Zoe Hitzig & Benjamin Niswonger, 2022. "Optimal Defaults, Limited Enforcement and the Regulation of Contracts," Papers 2203.01233, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    19. Jerod Coker & Jean-Manuel Izaret, 2021. "Progressive Pricing: The Ethical Case for Price Personalization," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 173(2), pages 387-398, October.
    20. Martins, Antje & Riordan, Tyler & Dolnicar, Sara, 2020. "A post-COVID-19 model of tourism and hospitality workforce resilience," SocArXiv 4quga, Center for Open Science.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:pophec:v:20:y:2021:i:3:p:229-250. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.