Digital platforms provide many workers with vital income and offer the promise of flexible work, and yet also contribute to experiences of precariousness and exploitation, particularly with regard to pressures to undertake unpaid work. This article explores why unpaid labour is necessary and what drives its extent and form among diverse types of digital platforms. We theorize two ideal types of ‘open’ and ‘closed’ socio-technical platform regimes of worker autonomy, building on sociological insights about socio-technical systems, management control over worker autonomy and labour market segmentation by skill. In principle, ‘open’ (‘closed’) platform regimes grant relatively high (low) worker autonomy in terms of access to the platform, paid work and control over work tasks. Analysing five case studies, illustrative of ‘open’ and ‘closed’ regimes, we investigate unpaid labour in low-skill locational (i.e. food delivery) platforms and medium/high-skill online (i.e. freelancing) platforms. In brief, digital freelancers exhibit a lower extent of unpaid labour within relatively ‘open’ regimes, owing to greater autonomy over access to, and control over, platform work in a sector requiring medium/high skills. Conversely, ‘closed’ regimes mitigate unpaid labour for food-delivery platforms by providing market shelter for workers, who are easily replaced in an overcrowded sector requiring few skills.
BélangerJ (2006) Technology and work. In: KorczynskiMHodsonREdwardsPK (eds) Social Theory at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 7–25.
2.
BélangerJEdwardsP (2007) The conditions promoting compromise in the workplace. British Journal of Industrial Relations45(4): 713–734.
3.
BergJFurrerMHarmonE, et al. (2018) Digital Labour Platforms and the Future of Work: Towards Decent Work in the Online World. Geneva, Switzerland: ILO.
4.
BlaunerR (1964) Alienation and Freedom. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
5.
BoltanskiLChiapelloE (2005) The New Spirit of Capitalism. London: Verso.
6.
BurawoyM (1985) The Politics of Production. London: Verso Books.
7.
CasilliAPosadaL (2019) The platformization of labor and society. In: GrahamMDuttonWH (eds) Society and the Internet. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 293–306.
8.
CinqueSNybergDStarkeyK (2021) ‘Living at the border of poverty’: How theatre actors maintain their calling through narrative identity work. Human Relations74(11): 1755–1780.
9.
CirilloVEvangelistaRGuarascioD, et al. (2021) Digitalization, routineness and employment: An exploration on Italian task-based data. Research Policy50(7): 104079.
10.
CrozierSECassellCM (2016) Methodological considerations in the use of audio diaries in work psychology. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology89(2): 396–419.
11.
D’CruzPNoronhaE (2016) Positives outweighing negatives: The experiences of Indian crowdsourced workers. Work Organisation, Labour and Globalisation10(1): 44–63.
12.
De SitterLUDen HertogJFDankbaarlB (1997) From complex organizations with simple jobs to simple organizations with complex jobs. Human Relations50(5): 497–534.
13.
DiabRS (2017) Becoming-infrastructure: Datafication, deactivation and the social credit system. Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies1(1): 1–23.
14.
DotyDGlickW (1994) Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review19(2): 230–251.
15.
EdwardsPK (1986) Conflict at Work. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
16.
EisenhardtKMGraebnerME (2007) Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal50: 25–32.
17.
EisenmannTParkerGVan AlstyneMW (2006) Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard Business Review84(10): 92–103.
18.
FrenkenKFuenfschillingL (2020) The rise of online platforms and the triumph of the corporation. Sociologica14(3): 101–113.
19.
FriedmanA (1977) Responsible autonomy versus direct control over the labour process. Capital & Class1(1): 43–57.
20.
GallieDZhouYFelsteadA, et al. (2012) Teamwork, skill development and employee welfare. British Journal of Industrial Relations50(1): 23–46.
21.
GandiniA (2016) Digital work: Self-branding and social capital in the freelance knowledge economy. Marketing Theory16(1): 123–141.
22.
GandiniA (2019) Labour process theory and gig economy. Human Relations72(6): 1039–1056.
23.
GardnerN (2019) New divisions digital labour in architecture. Feminist Review123(1): 106–125.
24.
GegenhuberTEllmerMSchüßlerE (2021) Microphones, not megaphones: Functional crowdworker voice regimes on digital work platforms. Human Relations74(9): 1473–1503.
25.
GerberC (2021) Community building on crowdwork platforms: Autonomy and control of online workers?Competition & Change25(2): 190–211.
26.
GlaserBStraussA (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
27.
GoldmanE (2011) Regulating reputation. In: MasumHToveyM (eds) The Reputation Society. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 51–62.
28.
GrayMLSiddarthS (2019) Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
29.
GriesbachKReichAElliot-NegriL, et al. (2019) Algorithmic control in platform food delivery work. Socius5: 1–15.
30.
GuestDKnoxAWarhurstC (2022) Humanizing work in digital age: Lessons from socio-technical systems and quality of working life initiatives. Human Relations75(8): 1461–1482.
31.
HackmanJROldhamGR (1976) Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance16(2): 250–279.
32.
HarveyL (2011) Private diaries in qualitative research. Qualitative Research11(6): 664–682.
33.
HeilandH (2022) Neither timeless, nor placeless: Control of food delivery gig work via place-based working time regimes. Human Relations75(9): 1824–1848.
34.
HolfordWD (2019) The future of human creative knowledge work within the digital economy. Futures105: 143–154.
35.
JoshiDKTaylorJDengXN (2022) Accounting for digital variability in crowd work: Three research considerations. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems53(3): 7–9.
36.
KässiOLehdonvirtaV (2018) Online labour index: Measuring the online gig economy for policy and research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change137(C): 241–248.
37.
KelloggKCValentineMAAngéleC (2020) Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Academy of Management Annals14(1): 366–410.
38.
KorczynskiM (2009) The mystery customer: Continuing absences in the sociology of service work. Sociology43(5): 952–967.
39.
KornbergerMPfluegerDMouritsenJ (2017) Evaluative infrastructures: Accounting for platform organization. Accounting, Organizations and Society60: 79–95.
40.
KrzywdzinskiMGerberC (2021) Between automation and gamification: Forms of labour control on crowdwork platforms. Work in the Global Economy1(1–2): 161–184.
41.
LeeD (2011) Networks, cultural capital and creative labour in the British independent television industry. Media, Culture and Society33(4): 549–565.
42.
LehdonvirtaVBarnardHGrahamM, et al. (2014) Online labour markets-levelling the playing field for international service markets?Paper presented at IPP2014: Crowdsourcing for Politics and Policy Conference, Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford.
43.
LeungMD (2014) Dilettante or renaissance person? How the order of job experiences affects hiring in an external labor market. American Sociological Review79(1): 136–158.
44.
McCannD (2016) Travel time as working time: Tyco, the unitary model and the route to casualisation. Industrial Law Journal45(2): 244–250.
45.
MaffieMD (2020) Are we ‘sharing’ or ‘gig-ing’? A classification system for online platforms. Industrial Relations Journal51(6): 536–555.
46.
MaffieMD (2022) The perils of laundering control through customers: A study of control and resistance in the ride-hail industry. Industrial & Labor Relations Review75(2): 348–372.
47.
MauriceMSellierFSilvestreJJ (1982) Politique d'éducation et organisation industrielle en France et en Allemagne. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
48.
MazmanianMOrlikowskiWJYatesJA (2013) The autonomy paradox. Organization Science24(5): 1337–1357.
49.
MintzbergHT (1979) The Structuring of Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
50.
MorseJMNiehausL (2009) Mixed Method Design. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
51.
PulignanoVMaráC (2021) Working for Nothing in the Platform Economy. Bruxelles: Solidar.
52.
RaniUKumar DhirRFurrerM, et al. (2021) The Role of Digital Labour Platforms in Transforming the World of Work. Geneva, Switzerland: ILO.
53.
ReljicJEvangelistaRPiantaM (2021) Digital technologies, employment, and skills. Industrial and Corporate Change 1–22.
54.
RiessmanCK (1993) Narrative Analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
55.
RosenblatAStarkL (2016) Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: A case study of Uber’s drivers. International Journal of Communication10(27): 3758–3784.
56.
RuberyJGrimshawDKeizerA, et al. (2018) Challenges and contradictions in the ‘normalising’ of precarious work. Work, Employment and Society32(3): 509–527.
57.
SchorJB (2020) After the Gig. How the Sharing Economy Got Hijacked and How to Win it Back. California: University of California Press.
58.
SchorJBAttwood-CharlesWCansoyM, et al. (2021) Dependence and precarity in the platform economy. Theory and Society49(5): 833–861.
59.
SchüßlerEAttwood-CharlesWKirchnerS, et al. (2021) Between mutuality, autonomy and domination. Socio-Economic Review19(4): 1217–1243.
60.
ShapiroA (2020) Dynamic exploits: Calculative asymmetries in the on-demand economy. New Technology, Work and Employment35(2): 162–177.
61.
ShibataS (2020) Gig work and the discourse of autonomy: Fictitious freedom in Japan’s digital economy. New Political Economy25(4): 535–551.
62.
SmithC (2015) Rediscovery of the labour process. In: EdgellSGottfriedHGranterE (eds) The SAGE Handbook of the Sociology of Work and Employment. London: Sage, 205–225.
63.
SmithC (2016) The double indeterminacy of labour power: Labour effort and labour mobility. Work, Employment and Society20(2): 389–402.
64.
SørensenABKallebergAL (1981) An outline of a theory of the matching of persons to Jobs. In: BergI (ed.) Sociological Perspectives on Labor Markets. New York, NY: Academic Press, 49–74.
65.
StraussACorbinJ (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
66.
TerranovaT (2000) Free labor: Producing culture for digital economy. Project Muse18(2): 33–58.
67.
ThompsonP (1989) The Nature of Work, 2nd edn.London: Macmillan.
68.
TirapaniANWillmottH (2023) Revisiting conflict: Neoliberalism at work in the gig economy. Human Relations76(1): 53–86.
69.
TristELBamforthKW (1951) Some social and psychological consequences of the longwall method of coal-getting. Human Relations4(1): 3–38.
70.
TubaroP (2021) Disembedded or deeply embedded? A multi-level network analysis of online labour platforms. Sociology55(5): 927–944.
71.
VallasS (2019) Platform capitalism: What’s at stake for workers. New Labor Forum28(1): 48–59.
72.
VallasSSchorJB (2020) What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Review of Sociology46(1): 273–294.
VidalM (2013) Postfordism as a dysfunctional accumulation regime. Work, Employment & Society27(3): 451–471.
75.
WeilD (2014) The Fissured Workplace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
76.
WoodALehdonvirtaV (2021) Platform Precarity: Surviving Algorithmic Insecurity in the Gig Economy. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3795375 or http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3795375
77.
WoodAJ (2021) Algorithmic management consequences for work organisation and working Conditions. JRC Working Papers Series, No. 2021/07. Seville, Spain: European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC).
78.
WoodAJLehdonvirtaV (2022) Platforms disrupting reputation: Precarity and recognition struggles in the remote gig economy. Sociology. Epub ahead of print 1November2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385221126804.
79.
WoodAJGrahamMLehdonvirtaV, et al. (2019) Networked but commodified: The (dis) embeddedness of digital labour in the gig economy. Sociology53(5): 931–950.
80.
WoodcockJ (2020) The algorithmic panopticon at Deliveroo. Ephemera20(3): 67–95.
81.
YinRK (2014) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. London: Sage.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
