IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/indrel/qt4c8862zj.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Labor Platforms and Gig Work: The Failure to Regulate

Author

Listed:
  • Collier, Ruth B
  • Dubal, V.B.
  • Carter, Christopher

Abstract

Since 2012, the platform economy has received much academic, popular, and regulatory attention, reflecting its extraordinary rate of growth. This paper provides a conceptual and theoretical overview of rapidly growing labor platforms, focusing on how they represent both continuity and change in the world of work and its regulation. We first lay out the logic of different types of labor platforms and situate them within the decline of labor protections and the rise of intermediated employment relations since the 1970s. We then focus on one type of labor platform—the ondemand platform—and analyze the new questions and problems for workers and the political problem of labor regulation. To examine the politics of regulating labor on these platforms, we turn to Uber, which is the easiest case for labor regulation due to its high degree of control over work conditions. Because Uber drivers are atomized and ineffective at organizing collectively, their issues are most often represented by surrogate actors—including plaintiffs’ attorneys, alt labor groups, unions, and even Uber itself—whose own interests shape the nature of their advocacy for drivers. The result of this type of politics, dominated by concentrated interests and surrogate actors, has been a permissive approach by regulators in both legislative and judicial venues. If labor regulation has not occurred in this “easy” case, it is unlikely to occur for gig work on other labor platforms.

Suggested Citation

  • Collier, Ruth B & Dubal, V.B. & Carter, Christopher, 2017. "Labor Platforms and Gig Work: The Failure to Regulate," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt4c8862zj, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:indrel:qt4c8862zj
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4c8862zj.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leung, Ming D., 2016. "Learning to hire? Hiring as a dynamic experiential process in an online market for contract labor," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt6z86b2vx, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    2. Lawrence F. Katz & Alan B. Krueger, 2016. "The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015," Working Papers 603, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    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. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano & Cirillo, Valeria & Guarascio, Dario, 2019. "Quantity and quality of work in the platform economy," GLO Discussion Paper Series 420, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    2. Keller, Berndt, 2020. "Interest representation and industrial relations in the age of digitalization ‒ an outline [Interessenvertretung und Arbeitsbeziehungen im Zeitalter der Digitalisierung - ein Überblick]," Industrielle Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Arbeit, Organisation und Management, Verlag Barbara Budrich, vol. 27(3), pages 255-285.
    3. Panos Constantinides & Ola Henfridsson & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2018. "Introduction—Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 381-400, June.
    4. Michael David Maffie, 2024. "Politicized shopping in the gig economy: Retaliation and solidarity on the “other side” of the app," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 343-367, July.
    5. Katarzyna Cieslik & Roland Banya & Bhaskar Vira, 2022. "Offline contexts of online jobs: Platform drivers, decent work, and informality in Lagos, Nigeria," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 40(4), July.
    6. Valeria Cirillo & Dario Guarascio & Zachary Parolin, 2021. "Platform Work and Economic Insecurity: Evidence from Representative Italian Survey Data," Working Papers in Public Economics 208, Department of Economics and Law, Sapienza University of Roma.
    7. Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Annarosa Pesole & Enrique Férnandéz-Macías, 2020. "New evidence on platform workers in Europe: Results from the second COLLEEM survey," JRC Research Reports JRC118570, Joint Research Centre.

    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. Jae Song & David J Price & Fatih Guvenen & Nicholas Bloom & Till von Wachter, 2019. "Firming Up Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(1), pages 1-50.
    2. Werner Eichhorst & Ulf Rinne, 2017. "Digital Challenges for the Welfare State," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 18(04), pages 03-08, December.
    3. Brice Corgnet & Simon Gaechter & Roberto Hernan Gonzalez, 2020. "Working Too Much for Too Little: Stochastic Rewards Cause Work Addiction," Discussion Papers 2020-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    4. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Matthieu Lequien & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Tax simplicity and heterogeneous learning," CEP Discussion Papers dp1516, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Hirsch, Barry T. & Winters, John V., 2016. "Rotation group bias in measures of multiple job holding," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 160-163.
    6. HASEBE Takuya & KONISHI Yoshifumi & SHIN Kong Joo & MANAGI Shunsuke, 2018. "White Collar Exemption: Panacea for long work hours and low earnings?," Discussion papers 18002, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    7. Joshua Greenstein, 2020. "The Precariat Class Structure and Income Inequality among US Workers: 1980–2018," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 447-469, September.
    8. Vazquez,Emmanuel Jose & Winkler,Hernan Jorge, 2017. "How is the internet changing labor market arrangements ? evidence from telecommunications reforms in Europe," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7976, The World Bank.
    9. Basu, Arnab K. & Chau, Nancy H. & Soundararajan, Vidhya, 2019. "Wage fairness in a subcontracted labor market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 24-42.
    10. Cody Cook & Rebecca Diamond & Jonathan V Hall & John A List & Paul Oyer, 2021. "The Gender Earnings Gap in the Gig Economy: Evidence from over a Million Rideshare Drivers [Measuring the Gig Economy: Current Knowledge and Open Issues]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(5), pages 2210-2238.
    11. Rosa Abraham, 2017. "Informality in the Indian Labour Market: An Analysis of Forms and Determinants," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 60(2), pages 191-215, June.
    12. Zsolt Bihary & P'eter Cs'oka & P'eter Ker'enyi & Alexander Szimayer, 2019. "Self-respecting worker in the precarious gig economy: A dynamic principal-agent model," Papers 1902.10021, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    13. Annabelle Mourougane & Balazs Egert & Mark Baker & Gábor Fülöp, 2020. "The Policy Drivers of Self-Employment: New Evidence from Europe," CESifo Working Paper Series 8780, CESifo.
    14. M. Keith Chen & Judith A. Chevalier & Peter E. Rossi & Emily Oehlsen, 2019. "The Value of Flexible Work: Evidence from Uber Drivers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 2735-2794.
    15. Datta, Nikhil, 2019. "Willing to pay for security: a discrete choice experiment to analyse labour supply preferences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103390, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Annarosa Pesole & Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Enrique Fernandez Macias & Federico Biagi & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez, 2018. "Platform Workers in Europe: Evidence from the COLLEEM Survey," JRC Research Reports JRC112157, Joint Research Centre.
    17. David Autor & David Dorn & Lawrence F Katz & Christina Patterson & John Van Reenen, 2020. "The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms [“Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 645-709.
    18. Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Annarosa Pesole & Enrique Fernandez Macias, 2019. "Digital Labour Platforms in Europe: Numbers, Profiles, and Employment Status of Platform Workers," JRC Research Reports JRC117330, Joint Research Centre.
    19. Munnell, Alicia & Sanzenbacher, Geoffrey T. & Walters, Abigail N., 2021. "How do older workers use nontraditional jobs?," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 374-392, July.
    20. Konstantinos Pouliakas & Wieteke S. Conen, 2023. "Multiple job-holding: Career pathway or dire straits?," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 3562-3562, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social and Behavioral Sciences; labor; platforms; gig work; regulate;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cdl:indrel:qt4c8862zj. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/irucbus.html .

    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.