IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0290403.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How has COVID-19 affected the work environment of delivery workers?: An interpretative phenomenological analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jeehee Pyo
  • Eun Jee Park
  • Minsu Ock
  • Won Lee
  • Hye Jin Lee
  • Sungkyoung Choi

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a rapid worldwide increase in the utilization of delivery services. This study delves into the experiences of delivery workers as one of the activley developed industries during the COVID-19 pandemic in South Korea and sheds light on the effects of the pandemic on their working conditions. Through in-depth interviews with 10 Korean delivery workers, data analysis employed the hermeneutic phenomenology research method developed by Van Manen. The findings indicate a substantial rise in income levels and a positive societal perception of delivery labor post-COVID-19. The pandemic also attracted many new workers to the industry due to low entry barriers and work flexibility. However, challenges persisted as delivery workers grappled with an uncertain legal status and sometimes jeopardized their safety to boost earnings in shorter time frames. The pivotal role played by delivery workers in enhancing communal quality of life and connectivity during the pandemic cannot be overlooked. As we step into a post-COVID-19 era, comprehensive efforts are needed to enhance the working environment for delivery workers globally. Notably, clarifying the relationship between delivery workers and companies within the novel digital labor landscape is essential, alongside establishing institutional frameworks to safeguard workers’ basic rights, including health and safety provisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeehee Pyo & Eun Jee Park & Minsu Ock & Won Lee & Hye Jin Lee & Sungkyoung Choi, 2023. "How has COVID-19 affected the work environment of delivery workers?: An interpretative phenomenological analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(9), pages 1-14, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0290403
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0290403
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0290403&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0290403?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. Jim Stanford, 2017. "The resurgence of gig work: Historical and theoretical perspectives," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(3), pages 382-401, September.
    2. Mariana Luísa da Costa Lage & Antonio Carlos Rodrigues, 2021. "Pandelivery : Reflections on black delivery app workers experiences during COVID‐19 in Brazil," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(S2), pages 434-445, July.
    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. 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.
    2. Paul Dalziel, 2019. "Wellbeing economics in public policy: A distinctive Australasian contribution?," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 30(4), pages 478-497, December.
    3. Krenz, Astrid & Strulik, Holger, 2025. "Automation and the fall and rise of the servant economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    4. Inga Laß & Mark Wooden, 2019. "Non-standard Employment and Wages in Australia," RBA Annual Conference Papers acp2019-04, Reserve Bank of Australia, revised Jul 2019.
    5. Terri L. Griffith & Emma S. Nordbäck & John E. Sawyer & Ronald E. Rice, 2018. "Field study of complements to supervisory leadership in more and less flexible work settings," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, December.
    6. repec:osf:socarx:vstm4_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Troy, Laurence & Wolifson, Peta & Buckley, Amma & Buckle, Caitlin & Adkins, Lisa & Bryant, Gareth & Konings, Martijn, 2023. "Pathways to home ownership in an age of uncertainty," SocArXiv vstm4, Center for Open Science.
    8. Rahul Menon, 2019. "Short-term contracts and their effect on wages in Indian regular wage employment," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 30(1), pages 142-164, March.
    9. Baumber, Alex & Schweinsberg, Stephen & Scerri, Moira & Kaya, Ece & Sajib, Shahriar, 2021. "Sharing begins at home: A social licence framework for home sharing practices," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Yvonne Lott & Clare Kelliher & Heejung Chung, 2022. "Reflecting the changing world of work? A critique of existing survey measures and a proposal for capturing new ways of working," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 28(4), pages 457-473, November.
    11. Sabine Pfeiffer & Sandra Kawalec, 2020. "Justice expectations in crowd and platform-mediated work," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 483-501, December.
    12. Louis Florin & François Pichault, 2022. "Between entrepreneurs and workers: Cleavages and compromises in rationales and policy solutions regarding ‘dependent contractors’," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(4), pages 1789-1816, November.
    13. Heiland, Heiner, 2020. "Workers' Voice in platform labour: An Overview," WSI Studies 21, The Institute of Economic and Social Research (WSI), Hans Böckler Foundation.
    14. 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.
    15. Dick Bryan & Michael Rafferty & Phillip Toner & Sally Wright, 2017. "Financialisation and labour in the Australian commercial construction industry," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 28(4), pages 500-518, December.
    16. Baumber, Alex & Scerri, Moira & Schweinsberg, Stephen, 2019. "A social licence for the sharing economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 12-23.
    17. Kelle HOWSON & Funda USTEK‐SPILDA & Alessio BERTOLINI & Richard HEEKS & Fabian FERRARI & Srujana KATTA & Matthew COLE & Pablo AGUERA RENESES & Nancy SALEM & David SUTCLIFFE & Shelly STEWARD & Mark GRA, 2022. "Stripping back the mask: Working conditions on digital labour platforms during the COVID‐19 pandemic," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 161(3), pages 413-440, September.
    18. Iazzolino, Gianluca, 2021. "Going Karura: colliding subjectivities and labour struggle in Nairobi’s gig economy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110950, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Sunyu Chai & Maureen A. Scully, 2019. "It’s About Distributing Rather than Sharing: Using Labor Process Theory to Probe the “Sharing” Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 943-960, November.
    20. Meagher, Kate, 2020. "Illusions of inclusion: assessment of the World Development Report 2019 on the changing nature of work," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103000, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    21. Peter Waring & Azad Bali & Chris Vas, 2020. "The fourth industrial revolution and labour market regulation in Singapore," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(3), pages 347-363, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0290403. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.