Gig Economy

<html><body>
Along with home delivery of groceries, pharmaceuticals and alcohol, demand for food delivery is booming.
Services such as Uber Eats and Deliveroo have become essential to cafes and restaurants that can now only sell takeaway food.
It is good news for the likes of Uber, whose stock price has risen since it announced a ten-fold increase in the number of restaurants signing themselves up to <a href="https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-eats-growth-coronavirus-delivery-140101683" target="_blank">Uber Eats</a>.
But it’s a situation that has provoked serious questions. Not only about whether delivery services are safe, but <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/godforbid/the-covid-19-conundrum/12095750" target="_blank">whether it’s ethical to use them</a>.
Digital platforms like Uber Eats and Menulog are not, after all, ideal employers. In fact, they don’t regard themselves as employers at all, merely facilitators of work by “independent contractors”.
Food delivery drivers and riders often work for <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/20/food-delivery-bike-couriers-in-australia-being-underpaid-by-up-to-322-a-week" target="_blank">less than the minimum wage</a>, and have no employee rights such as sick leave.
Now we are collectively relying on them to provide an essential service during social distancing, we need to ask what, as a society, we owe these workers in return.
<h2>Vulnerable to exploitation</h2>
We’re interested in how this economic crisis affects food delivery drivers and riders due to our research into the experience of migrant gig workers.
Our research has found migrants are already “socially distanced”, without deep networks of family or friends. They are vulnerable to exploitation and discrimination.
Most food delivery work is done by migrants, through third-party digital platforms like Uber Eats and Menulog. The platforms treat drivers and riders as independent contractors, not employees with the protections and rights of employees.
A 2019 survey <a href="https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/revealing-the-true-size-of-australias-gig-workforce/" target="_blank">commissioned by the Victorian government</a> suggested about 7% of the workforce used digital platforms to get gig work, the most common being Airtasker (35%), Uber (23%), Freelancer (12%), Uber Eats (11%) and Deliveroo (8%).
Previous research suggests <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-way-they-manipulate-people-is-really-saddening-study-shows-the-trade-offs-in-gig-work-79042" target="_blank">many choose gig work</a> simply because it is better than other forms of low-paid work.
Now food delivery workers face pressure from those displaced from such jobs in hospitality or retail. Complicating the situation is the lack of clarity about whether those on temporary work visas are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/mar/22/what-australias-189bn-coronavirus-economic-rescue-package-means-for-you" target="_blank">eligible for income support</a> announced for other workers.
Platforms don’t owe gig workers a minimum wage so can sign up as many “independent contractors” as they like. This improves the service for customers, and increases profit for the platform, but means individual deliverers make less money.
<h2>Increased health risks</h2>
Many delivery services are <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/coronavirus-australia-uber-eats-deliveroo-drive-thru_au_5e71a846c5b63c3b6486e11a" target="_blank">implementing contactless delivery</a> procedures. But the lack of defined employer responsibility in the platform economy means patchy attention to the extra physical and mental health risks gig workers now face.
Unions and others have urged delivery platforms <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2020-03-06/gig-economy-workers-uber-deliveroo-ola-coronavirus-outbreak/12022072" target="_blank">to provide protective equipment</a> such as gloves, face masks and sanitisers. Responses from platforms have been limited.
This was Uber Eats’ response on March 17, by its regional general manager for the Asia Pacific, <a href="https://www.uber.com/en-AU/newsroom/covid19aus/" target="_blank">Jodie Auster</a>:
Our plan to address challenges born by COVID-19 includes making A$5 million in funding available for independent restaurants across Australia and New Zealand. The multi-million dollar fund will allow restaurants to deploy promotions to attract customers and will help restaurants time promotions to suit their individual business needs.
What Auster didn’t mention was a plan to issue safety gear, though she did note the company had started a campaign “reminding Uber Eats users that they can request deliveries be left on their doorsteps”.
Not surprisingly, delivery workers are scared <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/drive/union-seeking-protections-for-delivery-drivers/12094366" target="_blank">they will catch the coronavirus</a>.
Uber says it will financially assist drivers and riders “diagnosed with COVID-19 or placed in quarantine by a public health authority” for a period of <a href="https://www.uber.com/en-AU/newsroom/covid19aus/" target="_blank">up to 14 days</a>.
But what if a worker with viral symptoms wants to self-isolate as a precaution? There’s no sick leave or workers compensation, and they risk “deactivation” if work isn’t accepted.
<h2>Legal protection</h2>
Social distancing measures mean the delivery economy and the health of the general population are now intimately linked.
To secure and safeguard this now essential service, it is time the law ensured gig workers have the same legal rights and protections as other employees.
We need the delivery drivers coming to our doors to be healthy. That health depends on their safety as well as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/18/food-ordering-safe-ethical-coronavirus-with-seamless-uber-eats-should-i-get-takeaway" target="_blank">economic and social inclusion</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/134406/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tyler-riordan-1002045" target="_blank">Tyler Riordan</a>, PhD Candidate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805" target="_blank">The University of Queensland</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gerhard-hoffstaedter-9125" target="_blank">Gerhard Hoffstaedter</a>, Associate professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805" target="_blank">The University of Queensland</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-robinson-958290" target="_blank">Richard Robinson</a>, Research Fellow/Hospitality Management, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805" target="_blank">The University of Queensland</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/delivery-workers-are-now-essential-they-deserve-the-rights-of-other-employees-134406" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Delivery workers are now essential, they deserve the same rights

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
It is fair to say that the 111k or 0.9% rise in employment was a big surprise. The market had been looking for –35k while Westpac was forecasting –50k.
We had based our forecast on the observation of a –1.0% fall in Weekly Payrolls in the first two weeks of August compared to the first two weeks in July (the Labour Force Survey is conducted in the first two weeks of each month).
Even when you take seasonality into account the 0.4% rise in employment in original terms was still much stronger than the –1.0% decline reported by Payrolls.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugPayrolls.JPG" alt="">
'Gig' workers driving recovery in employment.
In the August Labour Force Survey the ABS provided a reconciliation on the difference between the two series highlighting that Weekly Payrolls measure 'employee jobs' for which a payment was reported to the Australian Taxation Office through Single Touch Payroll. This includes jobs held by employees and owner managers of incorporated enterprises (the latter of whom can be paid through the payroll of their business). However, owner managers of unincorporated enterprises are not covered by Weekly Payrolls. There is also lower coverage of small businesses (&lt;20 employees) in the Payrolls data compared to large and medium businesses. As such, any change to the employment status of owner managers of incorporated enterprises without employees is less likely to be reflected in Weekly Payrolls than that with employees.
In the Labour Force Survey employed are categorised according to their 'Status of Employment' reflecting the nature of the employer-employee relationship. The categories are:
<ul>
<li>Employee – someone who works for an employer;</li>
<li>Owner manager of an incorporated enterprise – self-employed who owns and operates their own incorporated business;</li>
<li>Owner manager of an unincorporated enterprise – self-employed operating a business as a sole trader; or a,</li>
<li>Contributing family worker.</li>
</ul>
Owner managers (ie. self-employed) may or may not have employees.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugStatus.JPG" alt="">
In original terms, the Labour Force Survey reported a 44.5k/0.4% increase in employment in August. In the release the ABS noted that the increase in original employment was due to a 50.2k increase in owner managers (self-employed mostly unincorporated sole traders) without employees. This is likely to be dominated by 'gig workers' which can be defined by anyone who is engaged as a contractor rather than an employee. This includes far more people than just those who work as the large aggregation platforms such as Uber, GoCatch, Deliveroo, Airtasker, Freelacer etc. In contrast, there was a small 2.6k lift in the number of employees which was more than offset by a –9.3k decrease in the number of contributing family workers.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugGIG.JPG" alt="">
Excluding 'gig workers' employment was still stronger than the Payrolls measure of jobs.
If we exclude the 50.2k rise in self-employed, total employment would have fallen –5.7k which is closer to, but still stronger than, the –1.0% fall in Payrolls. Unfortunately, the data underpinning this analysis won’t be released until Thursday so we can only note the ABS comments at this stage and add that to the data we do have.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFpayemp.JPG" alt="">
Seasonality matters in August with employees contracting an average of -66.5k in last five years.
From the Labour Force Survey we know that August is a soft month for employment with the ABS seasonal factor falling -0.5% in the month. What we did not realise is that that seasonality is different for employees and owners/self-employed. On average through the last five years the number of employees fell -66.5k in August while the number of self-employed lifted 24.1k. That is to say it was not the strength of owners/self-employed that was surprising in the August survey but rather the lack of weakness in employees (+2.6k in the month compared to the average of -66.5k).
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugseason.JPG" alt="">
We can't exactly replicate the ABS season adjustment process but using eX12 we estimate that seasonally adjusted employees gained 78.8k in the month while the self-employed lifted 18.7k. The real story in August was not the surprising strength in the self-employed, at least half of which was a seasonal norm, but rather the lack of weakness in employees which would have significantly boosted the overall seasonally adjusted total.
Shutdown in Vic hit that state but the NSW recovery continued on regardless.
The shutdown in Victoria did hit the labour market in that state with employment falling –42.4k and unemployment lifting 0.3pt to 7.1%. Victorian employment is now just 9.5k/0.3% higher than the May low post the first round of shutdowns. The recovery in Victoria peaked at +51.9k/+1.6% from May to July.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugStateEmp.JPG" alt="">
The recent Weekly Payrolls data suggested the NSW recovery was running out of steam through July and into August but this did not show up in the Labour Force Survey. In August, NSW employment lifted 51.5k following on from a 56.2k gain in July and +80.3k in June. In the month, the unemployment rate fell 0.5ppt to 6.7%. The NSW labour market continued to power on in August even if the Victorian lockdown was clouding the economic environment.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugStateUnemp.JPG" alt="">
The smaller states continue a robust recovery.
Elsewhere, employment rose 18k in Qld, 32.2k in WA and 18k in SA. It was a similar story for unemployment where it fell 1.3ppt in Qld and WA to 7.1% and 7.0% respectively while it was flat in SA at 7.9%. 
Hours worked lagging in NSW and Victoria but rebounding elsewhere.
Even with the August surge in employment (+111.0k/0.9%) hours worked lifted just 0.1% due to a –4.8% decrease in hours worked in Victoria (employment fell –1.3%) while the rest of the country recorded a 1.8% increase in hours worked. In the month, hours worked per person fell –0.8% driven mostly by a –2.3% fall in hours worked per part-time employee. Hours worked per full-time employee fell –0.2%. Nevertheless, in August the overall weakness was less concentrated in hours worked than it was back in April as hours worked per person is still 2.9% higher than it was in April (we note that hours worked per person recovered a touch in May even though employment fell further). Hours worked per full-time employee is up 1.9% since April while hours worked per part-time employee is up 15.7% again highlighting that the hit from Covid, and recovery to date, has been concentrated more in part-time employment than full-time. 
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugEmpHrs.JPG" alt="">
As it did in April the July/August shutdown in Victoria had a larger impact on hours worked than it had on employment. Nevertheless, given the recovery in hours worked through June and July Victorian hours worked are still 0.5% higher than the May low, a touch better than the +0.3% gain for employment. In NSW hours worked lifted 0.7% which is softer than the 1.3% rise in employment. Victorian shutdown did create some uncertainty in NSW but it was expressed more as a reduction in hours worked than a reduction in employment.
For the smaller states hours worked per person continued to recover in August. Hours worked lifted 2.4% in Qld compared to a 0.7% gain in employment, hours lifted 1.8% in SA while employment lifted 1.6% and over in WA, a 2.4% lift in employment generated a 3.8% surge in hours worked. WA stands out with the strongest recovery so far with a 5.8% increase in employment and a 8.5% increase in hours worked from the shutdown lows.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugRecover.JPG" alt="">
The Victorian shutdown again hit participation while a recovery continued elsewhere.
The weakness in Victoria also led to a fall in participation in that state, from 64.5% to 63.9%, which muted the rise seen elsewhere. Nationally participation rose just 0.1ppt to 64.8% (despite the outsized gain in employment) with the labour force lifting 24.5k. This muted rise in the labour force resulted in a significant correction in the unemployment rate with it falling to 6.8% from 7.5%. Back in May the unemployment rate was 7.1%; it was 6.4% in April.
Despite the employment gains in Qld participation in this state fell -0.5% to 63.9% but this was more than offset by a 0.5% gain in NSW to 65.2%, a 1.0% gain in SA to 62.8% and a 0.6% gain in WA to 67.9%. We are looking for a bounce in participation in Victoria and Qld in September but it is more unclear what to expect from the other states.
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugStatePart.JPG" alt="">
It is very interesting to note that participation in NSW and WA is almost back to the pre-Covid levels in March, down -0.10ppt om NSW and -0.06ppt in WA. In Victoria the participation rate is still -2.5ppt below its March level while in Qld it is still down -2.0ppt. The recovery in participation in NSW and WA suggest that the recovery has drawn workers back into the workforce and should we see any weakness in the labour markets in those state, there is the potential for correcting weakness in participation. Contrast that with Victoria and Qld where the economic weakness has held participation well below pre-Covid levels. As such, as these economies recover then participation is likely to pick-up preventing a more rapid fall in unemployment.
This suggests that there may be still sufficient flexibility in participation to buffer the unemployment rate from any significant change, both up and down, from moderate changes in level of employment. It will, however, depend on which states the weakness or strength appears. If the strength appears in NSW or WA, then there is less scope for participation to lift thus driving unemployment lower. On the other hand, if further weakness appears in Victoria or Qld then there is less scope for participation to correct lower and thus it is likely to drive unemployment higher.
Underemployment was flat in August.
The underemployment rate was flat a 11.2%, at two decimal places it was a 0.7ppt fall from 11.23% to 11.16%, so close to rounding down to 11.1%. From a record peak of 13.4% in April underemployment has eased back as the number of people working less hours than they normally do improved. In August almost 1,000k employees worked less than their usual hours for economic reasons with around 215k (or 22%) doing no work at all; over 760k worked some hours but fewer than usual. Following a 700k increase between March and April the number working zero hours for economic reasons fell by over 600k between April and July. However, in August the number working zero hours increased by almost 50k (+30%).
<img src="https://westpaciq.westpac.com.au/wibiqauthoring/_uploads/image/bulletin/Justin_Images/Sep_Oct_2020/LFAugUnder.JPG" alt="">
By state underemployment fell 0.9ppt in NSW to 9.8%, lifted 0.8% in Victoria to 13.8%, fell 1.3ppt in Qld to 9.3%, gained 0.4% in SA to 11.4% and fell 1.0% in WA to 9.6%. It is hardly surprising that underemployment rose in Victoria and that it is the state with the highest rate but it is interesting to note the strength in WA and that underemployment there is now lower than it is in NSW while Qld has the lowest rate for a mainland state.  
The flat print on underemployment is a further sign that while August may have been a robust month for employment and unemployment, it was not such a good month for economic activity with hours worked almost flat in the month with a solid rise in the number working zero hours for economic reasons and flat underemployment. If you are looking for signs of weakness it is not the rise of self-employed but rather the lift in those working zero hours for economic reasons.
The August survey confirms a more robust recovery in the labour market than many had expected.
This update has made it much more difficult for the RBA to hit its forecast peak in unemployment of 10% by end 2020. We estimate that to achieve that forecast rise in unemployment, employment would have to collapse between -400k to -500k by December; of course it will be dependent on the size of the fall in participation as employment contracts) This would be a very extreme situation and suggests an aggressive unwinding of support packages, such as JobKeeper, a massive rise in business closures and significant job shedding. The rise in the number working zero hours is a sign that things might not be a robust as a 6.8% unemployment rate suggest and we do note that that conditions and payments for JobKeeper have been modified from end September. However, the programme has been extended to March 2021 and we do expect to see further support should conditions deteriorate further, just as we have seen Victoria as conditions deteriorated there. We are not expecting the Government to go 'cold turkey' on JobKeeper and suddenly cut the programme.
Westpac is retaining our current forecast peak in unemployment this year of 7.8% in December which implies a loss of total employment of around 130k to 170k. Without a doubt, the recovery in the rest of the country has been more robust (so far) than we thought while the hit to the Victorian labour market was not as bad as expected. However, with the rolling off or adjustment of many of support packages (in particular JobKeeper) between now and the end of the year there is clear meaningful risk of a further decline in employment and a rise in unemployment.
JUSTIN SMIRK is ‎a senior economist for Westpac 
</body></html>

Gig workers boosted employment in August: Justin Smirk

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
Gig platforms don’t have a large share of the labour market yet.
A common narrative nowadays is that standard, secure full-time work is a thing of the past thanks to increasing casual jobs, labour hire, temping and non-standard work contracts that side-step collective bargaining. The ACTU says insecure work has grown to “<a href="https://www.actu.org.au/media/349417/lives_on_hold.pdf" target="_blank">crisis levels</a>”. A <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Education_and_Employment/AvoidanceofFairWork" target="_blank">Senate inquiry rehashed</a> the same themes last year. Much of the academic literature is also <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10301763.2018.1427424?journalCode=rlab20" target="_blank">toeing this line</a>.
Yet there is very little evidence that jobs are any less secure than they were decades ago. This is not to deny that some people are leading very precarious lives. <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/politics/federal/company-fined-record-660000-for-paying-refugee-worker-as-little-as-350-an-hour-20170802-gxnrsf" target="_blank">Recent stories</a> of wage theft and exploitation, particularly among migrant workers, are truly disgraceful.
But, on the whole, Australian workers are not on some inexorable march toward an uncertain and perilous future of work.
It is true that the labour market has changed. The types of jobs we do and the industries we do them in are very different today than in the ’70s. There’s a <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-charts-on-how-part-time-work-is-growing-more-slowly-but-more-men-are-doing-it-79352" target="_blank">lot more part-time work</a>. There’s a lot <a href="https://theconversation.com/women-are-less-likely-to-be-replaced-by-robots-and-might-even-benefit-from-automation-96728" target="_blank">more women</a> in the workforce. The balance of industrial power has shifted in favour of employers.
These changes partly reflect the restructuring of the economy away from some industries (such as manufacturing) and toward those that offer more part-time and casual work (retail, food, accommodation services and the like). But it is also the result of decades of concerted industrial relations reform, along with sweeping changes in individual work preferences.
There is no widely accepted definition of precarious employment. After all, every job is precarious to some extent. Nevertheless there are some common proxies for this slippery concept.
The rise of casual employment was <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10301763.1998.10669175" target="_blank">an early favourite</a> and is still very relevant. More <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8462.12085" target="_blank">recent research</a> has broadened the scope to include job tenure and involuntary job-loss rates. <a href="https://theconversation.com/workers-are-actually-feeling-less-insecure-in-their-jobs-81836" target="_blank">Others</a> emphasise workers’ own perceptions of job security. There has also been interest in the rate of <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1475-4932.12337" target="_blank">self-employment</a>, the number of <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://ideas.repec.org/a/fli/journl/35019" target="_blank">multiple job holders</a> and the share of workers handled by <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/research/supporting/labour-hire" target="_blank">labour hire firms</a>.
Four of these measures cut to the heart of precarity:
<ol>
<li>
casual employment is a measure of precarious contracts
</li>
<li>
job churn reveals the extent to which employers are hiring and firing with impunity
</li>
<li>
self-employment captures all of the gig economy workers who are supposedly flooding the labour market
</li>
<li>
multiple job holders could be so precariously attached to the labour market that they’re unable to make ends meet with a single job.
</li>
</ol>
On their own, each of these measures is a good but imperfect proxy for precarity. Taken together, however, they largely speak with one compelling voice.
Casualisation
The logic of the casual job is to give employers the flexibility to dial their staffing levels up and down as demand fluctuates. Casual workers don’t get annual and sick leave, and generally aren’t protected against dismissal.
Basically, a casual contract lets an employer hire and fire with impunity.
That sounds pretty precarious. You would expect that a labour market of increasing precarity would exhibit a strong trend toward casualisation. In fact, what we have had is strong growth in casual employment during the last two decades of the 20th century and then nothing.
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/UEcUf/1/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
Now there is no doubt that casual work is usually lower-quality work. On the whole, casual workers <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0018726716686666" target="_blank">get paid less, chase more hours</a> and are a little <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1718/CasualEmployeesAustralia" target="_blank">less satisfied</a> than their permanently employed peers.
But that is not evidence that casual employment is becoming ubiquitous.
Churn
If employers really were hiring and firing with abandon we should see more people staying in jobs for briefer periods. But we’re not.
In fact, as we can see in the chart below, there has not been a huge spike in workers forced out of their jobs involuntarily. And the proportion that have been in their jobs for 12 months is also staying on trend.
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/QysPX/1/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Bni1x/1/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
Self-employment
This category should be the smoking gun of a more precarious workforce. It captures anyone who works for themselves, whether in a formally constituted company or not. I have deliberately excluded in this measure those who employ others, so we’re really looking at the cohort of people who work for themselves and by themselves on commercial contract terms.
Self-employment captures all non-employees, such as Uber drivers and Foodora riders, as well as those who were “pushed out” of employment and onto contract.
And yet, as you can see in the following chart, these people are getting harder to find:
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/yt2iA/2/" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
The downward trend may seem surprising given one supposed key driver of precarity is the digitalised “gig economy”. <a href="https://http-download.intuit.com/http.intuit/CMO/intuit/futureofsmallbusiness/intuit_2020_report.pdf" target="_blank">One projection</a> was that 40% of the US workforce would be freelancers, contractors or temporary workers by 2020.
But the reality is that, for all their visibility and controversy, gig economy platforms are not yet commanding a significant share of the labour market.
Multiple job holders
That a higher share of workers are holding down multiple jobs fits with the notion that the economy is becoming “gigified”, with workers increasingly forced to move from job to job to make ends meet.
Yet the data provide little evidence that this is a material shift in the structure of the labour market.
In 1997, the <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6216.0Aug%201997?OpenDocument" target="_blank">ABS found</a> the proportion of employed persons holding multiple jobs increased from 3.7% in August 1987 to 5.2% a decade later. While the ABS has not published a long-term series since this report, it provided me a custom dataset that shows the current rate is not much higher, at about 5.5%.
The <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6150.0.55.001July%202017?OpenDocument" target="_blank">ABS introduced</a> a similar but not identical measure last year – the proportion of jobs in the economy that are “secondary jobs”. This remained stable between 2010-11 and 2015-16, at around 5.6%.
The takeaway
When I started researching the rise of the gig economy and the future of work I was sure that Australia’s labour market was taking a precarious turn. After all, Uber drivers, Deliveroo riders and Airtaskers seem to be everywhere.
But the weight of evidence clearly suggests that, while the last two decades of the 20th century produced a significant rise in non-standard work, the first two decades of the 21st have seen remarkably little change.
There is much to dislike about the quality and quantity of jobs the economy is delivering. But to make this a conversation about precarity is to chase a red herring.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99739/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">This fruitless pursuit is simply distracting researchers and policymakers from far more pressing questions – like how to create a globally competitive workforce fit for the 21st century.
Robert Sobyra is a PhD Candidate at The University of Queensland
This article was originally published on The Conversation.
</body></html>

Gig Economy

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Gig Economy

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News