Rise of the digital economy - another opportunity for worker exploitation?
The nature of work is rapidly changing, with technology allowing for more workers around the world to find employment from the gig and platform economies, which cover on-demand work through apps and websites. Digital technologies and in particular online jobs can create income-generating opportunities for marginalised communities including youth, women, retired people, workers based in remote areas and even those with disabilities – which can give workers flexibility and a means to achieve a better work life balance.
However, as noted in a UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs report, the digital economy is rife with issues around financial and workplace precarity: unpredictable working hours and income which are characterised by alternative working patterns, temporary contractual relationships, alternative workplaces and irregular working hours. This invariably leads to potential labour exploitation, where workers may be individual contractors, self-employed freelancers without employee benefits or insurance and health and safety conditions that would be required in a standard contract. The connectivity that comes from the digital economy also means that a culture of ‘permanently being on call’ is implicit – with workers expected to be contactable outside working hours, with little recourse or rights to disconnect.
In 2021, in recognition of the changes to working environments exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, the International Labour Organization (ILO) published a report recommending international policy dialogue and regulatory cooperation in order to provide decent work opportunities and ensure consistent and sustainable growth for businesses. Problematically, half of online platform contractors earn less than USD2 per hour – with much of the data around pricing being opaque. The report also found that the cost benefits of the gig and platform economies and digital work broadly are not equally shared, with around 96% of investment being concentrated in Asia, North America and Europe. There is often outsourcing from companies in the ‘Global North’ to the ‘Global South’, the latter whom are providing value added services to the companies but as a result of their jurisdiction are paid much less than their counterparts.
This uneven growth across digital economies means there are clear winners and losers across the digital divide. One example of this type of exploitation comes from ChatGPT, who hired online workers in Kenya, Uganda and India. Workers were paid USD2 per hour to moderate content and build training data for US clients – meaning they were subject to hundreds of hours of reviewing content involving grievous bodily harm, torture, sexual assault and murder. This is only one example of a tech company which has used exploitative data and labour practices – paying workers in low-income countries far less than local hires for the same tasks; while also making it difficult for governments in developing nations to ensure technology transfer for local innovation is possible.
While global bodies are making steps to build recommendations around best practices to support workers in the gig and platform economies, there is a role to be played by different stakeholders. Speaking to Devex, NGO IT for Change noted that the global development community can play a role in ensuring that workers have opportunities available to them which do not also lead to situations of precarity. GIZ, a German development agency aims to support gig workers by offering capacity building to enrich their skillset – while also giving support to policymakers, NGOs and corporates on the regulatory issues around digital work platforms. Philanthropy can play a role to benchmark the standards for decent work amid the digital economy and support the data rights of workers and broadly support the creation of a more equitable digital economy.
In navigating a way forward, the ILO Report recommends that internal policy and dialogue be employed to apply global labour standards – as most gig and platform work is cross-jurisdictional. Additionally, several objectives could be considered, such as classifying workers’ employment status with national standards, greater transparency and accountability of algorithms, collective bargaining for self-employed platform workers, social security for gig workers, access to courts and remedy in the worker’s jurisdiction to arbitrate disputes where required. All of the above would require social dialogue across platforms, workers and governments to work towards a consistent approach.
