IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/woemps/v34y2020i3p388-406.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Platform-Capital’s ‘App-etite’ for Control: A Labour Process Analysis of Food-Delivery Work in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Alex Veen

    (The University of Sydney, Australia)

  • Tom Barratt

    (Edith Cowan University, Australia)

  • Caleb Goods

    (University of Western Australia, Australia)

Abstract

This qualitative case study adopts a labour process analysis to unpack the distinctive features of capital’s control regimes in the food-delivery segment of the Australian platform-economy and assesses labour agency in response to these. Drawing upon worker experiences with the Deliveroo and UberEATS platforms, it is shown how the labour process controls are multi-facetted and more than algorithmic management, with three distinct features standing out: the panoptic disposition of the technological infrastructure, the use of information asymmetries to constrain worker choice, and the obfuscated nature of their performance management systems. Combined with the workers’ precarious labour market positions and the Australian political-economic context, only limited, mainly individual, expressions of agency were found.

Suggested Citation

  • Alex Veen & Tom Barratt & Caleb Goods, 2020. "Platform-Capital’s ‘App-etite’ for Control: A Labour Process Analysis of Food-Delivery Work in Australia," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(3), pages 388-406, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:34:y:2020:i:3:p:388-406
    DOI: 10.1177/0950017019836911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0950017019836911
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0950017019836911?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. Paul Thompson & Diane van den Broek, 2010. "Managerial control and workplace regimes: an introduction," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 24(3), pages 1-12, September.
    2. Chris Smith, 2006. "The double indeterminacy of labour power," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 20(2), pages 389-402, June.
    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. Woodcock, Jamie & Johnson, Mark R., 2018. "Gamification: what it is, and how to fight it," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86373, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Johnston, Hannah & Land-Kazlauskas, Chris., 2018. "Organizing on-demand representation, voice, and collective bargaining in the gig economy," ILO Working Papers 994981993502676, International Labour Organization.
    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. McDaid, Emma & Andon, Paul & Free, Clinton, 2023. "Algorithmic management and the politics of demand: Control and resistance at Uber," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Fuchs Martina & Dannenberg Peter & López Tatiana & Wiedemann Cathrin & Riedler Tim, 2023. "Location-specific labour control strategies in online retail," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 67(4), pages 189-201, December.
    3. Bo-Yi Lee, 2024. "Neither Employee nor Contractor: A Case Study of Employment Relations between Riders and Platform-Based Food-Delivery Firms in Taiwan," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 38(1), pages 122-139, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Xiaotian Li, 2023. "Managerial Technique and Worker Subjectivity in Dialogue: Understanding Overwork in China’s Internet Industry," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 37(6), pages 1699-1716, December.
    3. Ivanova, Mirela & Bronowicka, Joanna & Kocher, Eva & Degner, Anne, 2018. "Foodora and Deliveroo: The App as a Boss? Control and autonomy in app-based management - the case of food delivery riders," Working Paper Forschungsförderung 107, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, Düsseldorf.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Sharon C. Bolton, 2009. "Getting to the heart of the emotional labour process: a reply to Brook," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 23(3), pages 549-560, September.
    7. Elena Baglioni, 2022. "The Making of Cheap Labour across Production and Reproduction: Control and Resistance in the Senegalese Horticultural Value Chain," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 36(3), pages 445-464, June.
    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. 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.
    10. Katie J Wells & Kafui Attoh & Declan Cullen, 2021. "“Just-in-Place†labor: Driver organizing in the Uber workplace," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(2), pages 315-331, March.
    11. Tom Barratt & Caleb Goods & Alex Veen, 2020. "‘I’m my own boss…’: Active intermediation and ‘entrepreneurial’ worker agency in the Australian gig-economy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(8), pages 1643-1661, November.
    12. Simon Schaupp, 2022. "Algorithmic Integration and Precarious (Dis)Obedience: On the Co-Constitution of Migration Regime and Workplace Regime in Digitalised Manufacturing and Logistics," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 36(2), pages 310-327, April.
    13. Alex J Wood, 2018. "Powerful Times: Flexible Discipline and Schedule Gifts at Work," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 32(6), pages 1061-1077, December.
    14. Grohmann, Rafael & Pereira, Gabriel & Guerra, Abel & Abilio, Ludmila Costhek & Moreschi, Bruno & Jurno, Amanda, 2022. "Platform scams: Brazilian workers’ experiences of dishonest and uncertain algorithmic management," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115622, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. 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.
    16. Niki Panteli & Andriana Rapti & Dora Scholarios, 2020. "‘If He Just Knew Who We Were’: Microworkers’ Emerging Bonds of Attachment in a Fragmented Employment Relationship," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 34(3), pages 476-494, June.
    17. Laurence Romani & Patrizia Zanoni & Lotte Holck, 2021. "Radicalizing diversity (research): Time to resume talking about class," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 8-23, January.
    18. Gernot Grabher & Erwin van Tuijl, 2020. "Uber-production: From global networks to digital platforms," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(5), pages 1005-1016, August.
    19. Ciotti, Fabrizio & Hornuf, Lars & Stenzhorn, Eliza, 2021. "Lock-In Effects in Online Labor Markets," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2021014, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    20. Zoe Hitzig & Benjamin Niswonger, 2022. "Optimal Defaults, Limited Enforcement and the Regulation of Contracts," Papers 2203.01233, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.

    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:woemps:v:34:y:2020:i:3:p:388-406. 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: http://www.britsoc.co.uk/ .

    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.