IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/woemps/v36y2022i2p310-327.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Algorithmic Integration and Precarious (Dis)Obedience: On the Co-Constitution of Migration Regime and Workplace Regime in Digitalised Manufacturing and Logistics

Author

Listed:
  • Simon Schaupp

Abstract

This article analyses the interaction of the algorithmic workplace regime and the migration regime in manual work in platform logistics and manufacturing in Germany. Based on ethnographic case studies, the article reconstructs how companies integrate migrant workers by using systems of algorithmic work control. These simplify the labour process and direct workers without relying on a certain language. Algorithmic work control, however, does not realise its intended disciplining effects on its own but is dependent on external factors. A precarious residence status is such an external disciplining factor as it can create an implicit alliance of migrant workers with their employers in the hope for permanent residence. Nonetheless, the interaction of the two regimes also produced new forms of solidarity between the workers, which in some cases led to new forms of self-organisation. Thus, workplace regime and migration regime co-constitute each other.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:woemps:v:36:y:2022:i:2:p:310-327
    DOI: 10.1177/09500170211031458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09500170211031458
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/09500170211031458?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. David H. Autor & David Dorn, 2013. "The Growth of Low-Skill Service Jobs and the Polarization of the US Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(5), pages 1553-1597, August.
    2. 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.
    3. Maarten Goos & Alan Manning, 2007. "Lousy and Lovely Jobs: The Rising Polarization of Work in Britain," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 118-133, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Bauder, Harald, 2006. "Labor Movement: How Migration Regulates Labor Markets," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195180886, Decembrie.
    6. Seils, Eric & Baumann, Helge, 2019. "Trends und Verbreitung atypischer Beschäftigung: Eine Auswertung regionaler Daten," WSI Policy Briefs 34, The Institute of Economic and Social Research (WSI), Hans Böckler Foundation.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Holmes, Craig & Mayhew, Ken, 2015. "Have UK Earnings Distributions Polarised?," INET Oxford Working Papers 2015-02, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    2. Guido Matias Cortes & Giovanni Gallipoli, 2018. "The Costs of Occupational Mobility: An Aggregate Analysis," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 275-315.
    3. James Spletzer & Elizabeth Weber Handwerker, 2015. "The Role of Establishments and the Concentration of Occupations in Wage Inequality," Working Papers id:7427, eSocialSciences.
    4. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    5. Silvia Vannutelli & Sergio Scicchitano & Marco Biagetti, 2022. "Routine-biased technological change and wage inequality: do workers’ perceptions matter?," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(3), pages 409-450, September.
    6. Georg Graetz & Guy Michaels, 2017. "Is Modern Technology Responsible for Jobless Recoveries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 168-173, May.
    7. Dirk Antonczyk & Thomas DeLeire & Bernd Fitzenberger, 2018. "Polarization and Rising Wage Inequality: Comparing the U.S. and Germany," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-33, April.
    8. David J. Deming, 2017. "The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(4), pages 1593-1640.
    9. Maya Eden & Paul Gaggl, 2018. "On the Welfare Implications of Automation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 29, pages 15-43, July.
    10. Bárány, Zsófia L. & Siegel, Christian, 2020. "Biased technological change and employment reallocation," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. Davide Consoli & Francesco Vona & Francesco Rentocchini, 2016. "That was then, this is now: skills and routinization in the 2000s," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(5), pages 847-866.
    12. Comin, Diego & Mestieri, Martí & Danieli, Ana, 2020. "Income-Driven Labor Market Polarization," CEPR Discussion Papers 14980, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. David Kunst, 2019. "Deskilling among Manufacturing Production Workers," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-050/VI, Tinbergen Institute, revised 30 Dec 2020.
    14. Goos, Maarten & Rademakers, Emilie & Röttger, Ronja, 2021. "Routine-Biased technical change: Individual-Level evidence from a plant closure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).
    15. van der Velde, Lucas, 2022. "Phasing out: Routine tasks and retirement," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 784-803.
    16. Andrei Zlate & Federico Mandelman, 2013. "Offshoring, Low-skilled Immigration and Labor Market Polarization," 2013 Meeting Papers 1073, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Gagliardi, Luisa, 2019. "The impact of foreign technological innovation on domestic employment via the industry mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1523-1533.
    18. Michael J. Böhm, 2020. "The price of polarization: Estimating task prices under routine‐biased technical change," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), pages 761-799, May.
    19. Irene Brambilla, 2018. "Digital Technology Adoption and Jobs: A Model of Firm Heterogeneity," Department of Economics, Working Papers 117, Departamento de Economía, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    20. Zsófia L. Bárány & Christian Siegel, 2018. "Job Polarization and Structural Change," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 57-89, January.

    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:36:y:2022:i:2:p:310-327. 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.