IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecoind/v44y2023i1p6-24.html

Why do labour platforms negotiate? Platform strategies in tax-based welfare states

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Ilsøe
  • Trine Pernille Larsen

Abstract

The regulatory setting and growing worker mobilization in the digital platform economy have recently attracted much political and academic attention. However, the perspective of platforms as employers and their role in regulating the online market are less researched. This article contributes with a fresh perspective on labour platforms as potential employers and their various strategies towards collective bargaining. Empirically, the article draws on in-depth case studies of three labour platforms operating in Denmark, but choosing very different strategies towards collective bargaining. The study identifies four factors impacting their choice of strategy: platform ownership, existing sector-level agreements, growth rates and customer base.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Ilsøe & Trine Pernille Larsen, 2023. "Why do labour platforms negotiate? Platform strategies in tax-based welfare states," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 44(1), pages 6-24, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecoind:v:44:y:2023:i:1:p:6-24
    DOI: 10.1177/0143831X211056974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0143831X211056974
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0143831X211056974?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. Jill Rubery & Damian Grimshaw & Arjan Keizer & Mathew Johnson, 2018. "Challenges and Contradictions in the ‘Normalising’ of Precarious Work," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 32(3), pages 509-527, June.
    2. Jacques Bélanger & Paul Edwards, 2007. "The Conditions Promoting Compromise in the Workplace," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 45(4), pages 713-734, December.
    3. Iain Campbell & Robin Price, 2016. "Precarious work and precarious workers: Towards an improved conceptualisation," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 27(3), pages 314-332, September.
    4. Anna Ilsøe & Trine P. Larsen & Emma S. Bach, 2021. "Multiple jobholding in the digital platform economy: signs of segmentation," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 27(2), pages 201-218, May.
    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. Marie Nilsen & Hanne Finnestrand & Trond Kongsvik, 2025. "Unraveling opportunism in platform-mediated work within the Nordic working life model: An institutional complexity perspective," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 46(2), pages 397-422, May.

    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. Amanda Pyman & Peter Holland & Julian Teicher & Brian K. Cooper, 2010. "Industrial Relations Climate, Employee Voice and Managerial Attitudes to Unions: An Australian Study," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 48(2), pages 460-480, June.
    2. Jason Heyes & Sian Moore & Kirsty Newsome & Mark Tomlinson, 2018. "Living with uncertain work," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(5-6), pages 420-437, November.
    3. John Geary & Aurora Trif, 2011. "Workplace Partnership and the Balance of Advantage: A Critical Case Analysis," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 49(Supplemen), pages 44-69, June.
    4. Isabel Dias & Alexandra Lopes & José Azevedo & Ana Sofia Maia & João Santos Baptista, 2022. "Cleaning in Times of Pandemic: Perceptions of COVID-19 Risks among Workers in Facility Services," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Constantine Manolchev & Richard Saundry & Duncan Lewis, 2021. "Breaking up the ‘precariat’: Personalisation, differentiation and deindividuation in precarious work groups," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 42(3), pages 828-851, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Wieteke Conen & Karin Schulze Buschoff, 2021. "Introduction to the special issue: multiple jobholding in Europe," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 27(2), pages 141-147, May.
    8. Bonatti, Luigi & Lorenzetti, Lorenza Alexandra & Traverso, Silvio, 2025. "Bridging the wage gap: A discussion of wage subsidies to low-paid workers and their costs in Italy," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1552, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    9. Krzywdzinski, Martin & Pfeiffer, Sabine & Evers, Maren & Gerber, Christine, 2022. "Measuring work and workers: Wearables and digital assistance systems in manufacturing and logistics," Discussion Papers, Research Group Globalization, Work, and Production SP III 2022-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    10. Ryan Lorraine & MacMahon Juliet & O’Sullivan Michelle & Turner Thomas & Lavelle Jonathan & Murphy Caroline & O’Brien Mike & Gunnigle Patrick, 2019. "The Same but Different: Regulating Zero Hours Work in Two Liberal Market Economies," The Irish Journal of Management, Sciendo, vol. 38(1), pages 3-15, December.
    11. Muffert, Johanna & Riphahn, Regina T., 2025. "Long-Run Career Outcomes of Multiple Job Holding," IZA Discussion Papers 17605, IZA Network @ LISER.
    12. García-Pérez, Carmelo & Prieto-Alaiz, Mercedes & Simón, Hipólito, 2020. "Multidimensional measurement of precarious employment using hedonic weights: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 348-359.
    13. Anthony Dobbins & Patrick Gunnigle, 2009. "Can Voluntary Workplace Partnership Deliver Sustainable Mutual Gains?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 47(3), pages 546-570, September.
    14. Haroon Bhorat & Ravi Kanbur & Benjamin Stanwix & Amy Thornton, 2021. "Measuring Multi‐Dimensional Labour Law Violation with an Application to South Africa," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 59(3), pages 928-961, September.
    15. Catherine Casey & Helen Delaney, 2022. "The effort of partnership: Capacity development and moral capital in partnership for mutual gains," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(1), pages 52-71, February.
    16. Cyndirela Chadambuka & Prossy Kiddu Namyalo & Rhea Raghunauth & Navya Arora & Fiona Kouyoumdjian & Beverley M Essue, 2025. "Precarious employment and gender-based violence against migrant women: A scoping review mapping the intersections," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(12), pages 1-20, December.
    17. Peter Gahan & Peter Turnbull, 2025. "Employment systems in the twenty‐first century," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 63(1), pages 71-87, March.
    18. John Geary & Andrea Signoretti, 2022. "The role of socio-economic embeddedness in promoting cooperation in the workplace: Evidence from family-owned Italian firms," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(4), pages 1867-1890, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Alexander Oluka, 2024. "The impact of digital platforms on traditional market structures," Technology audit and production reserves, PC TECHNOLOGY CENTER, vol. 2(4(76)), pages 21-29, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:sae:ecoind:v:44:y:2023:i:1:p:6-24. 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.ekhist.uu.se/english.htm .

    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.