Author
Listed:
- Smith, Brett
- Goods, Caleb
- Barratt, Tom
- Veen, Alex
Abstract
The emergence of the ‘gig’ economy is disrupting industries, reshaping the organisation of work and the terms and conditions under which work is carried out. In effect, the terms and conditions of ‘gig’ work mean that minimum standards, for example minimum wages, that are attached to work in advanced capitalist economies like Australia, regularly do not apply to ‘gig’ work. This study explores the attitudes and understandings of Australian consumers towards work conditions and entitlements in app-based food-delivery services. The study explores whether consumers are willing to pay to ensure ‘gig’ workers receive equivalent minimum entitlements and whether an awareness-raising treatment influences their moral consumption behaviours. This is achieved by employing a survey and a choice experiment to assess moral decision-making of consumers. To date, a moral dimension in discrete choice models has been dominated by sustainability in transport, discussed from the perspective of personal lifestyle or adherence to social norm. The study's focus on consumers and their concern for worker entitlements, therefore, makes a unique contribution. Our findings demonstrate that consumers have a very low awareness of worker entitlements in the ‘gig’ economy. While the choice experiment highlights that a significant proportion of the treatment group was willing to pay more to increase the earnings and conditions of food-delivery workers, at the same time it found that their willingness to pay would unlikely result in a sustained improvement in working conditions and lead to ‘decent work’ standards. The study further highlights that bridging the boundary between choice modelling methodologies and industrial relations research offers potential insights into the moral motivations behind decisions made by industrial relations actors.
Suggested Citation
Smith, Brett & Goods, Caleb & Barratt, Tom & Veen, Alex, 2021.
"Consumer ‘app-etite’ for workers' rights in the Australian ‘gig’ economy,"
Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:38:y:2021:i:c:s1755534520300518
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2020.100254
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:eee:eejocm:v:38:y:2021:i:c:s1755534520300518. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.