By Kriangsak Teerakowitkajorn, Director, Just Economy and Labor Institute
In the ongoing struggle for a fairer digital economy, where algorithms hold significant power, platform workers in the Global South represent a story of survival and strength. Picture this: each day, they grapple with the complexities of algorithmic management, while contending with various consequences such as physical injuries, mental stress, and constant threats to their well-being.
For platform workers like couriers and food delivery workers, their occupational reality entails enduring prolonged hours navigating hazardous roads, often exposed to severe conditions such as scorching heat and fine dust. Accidents resulting in disability or even loss of life have become all too common. Meanwhile, for women care workers, the opportunity for income generation is often accompanied by the daily risk of encountering harassment, discrimination, and gender-based violence. The uncertainty of job stability frequently leads to undiagnosed depression. Despite these daunting circumstances, the resilience of these workers shines through, as they persistently organize and advocate for their rights in the face of formidable adversity.
Workers in the gig economy struggle to find solidarity and a collective voice within already weakened labor protection frameworks in many countries. The erosion of labor rights protections, particularly noticeable in several Asian countries, is often politically motivated by leaders who view tech companies and their CEOs as allies, and workers and their unions as adversaries. Advocates for digital labor rights must recognize the economic and political connections at play here. This fight transcends mere legality or technicalities. It's about power—understanding where platforms derive power from and how workers must counterbalance a platform capitalism that perpetuates historical injustices. Moving forward, we must strategize to build workers’ political power, with them leading the charge. Organizing becomes paramount, with freedom of associations and collective bargaining serving as a foundational pillar in the fight against algorithmic oppression.
In this struggle, workers aren't battling a neutral set of data or technologies; they're fighting against those who control their data and dictate technology use—those who define what is fair and transparent in our economy. Our focus must be clear and strategic. While legal and legislative changes are crucial for safeguarding workers, our primary objective is empowering workers to drive the movement forward. This requires a fundamental shift in power structure, with workers reclaiming their place at the forefront of the digital justice movement.
The fight is also deeply political and personal. It's essential to recognize the broader impacts extending beyond individuals to working-class families and communities. As the global feminist movement has shown us, at the core of this battle lies a system of capitalist violence that perpetuates various forms of violence, be it economic, financial, or legal. Notably, it is the economic and social violence of debt that perpetuates gender-based violence against platform-enabled gig workers in their own households and communities. Note that the same AI technology is being used for surveillance in Amazon warehouses and deployed in military drones targeting civilians and aid workers in Gaza.
Easily replaceable at work and structurally weak in the economy, platform workers encounter challenges in constructing a potent movement. However, those who understand that workers’ power lies in their larger network of solidarity can effectively build the movement, and they do so by organizing and mobilizing beyond issues of wage and working conditions. The goal is to claim ownership and the right to decide how the technology is used.
Lastly, given the platform economy's international reach, this battle is global. Our mission goes beyond establishing a robust worker-led base, it involves fostering solidarity across struggles and borders with those fighting the same injustice. Together, we must stand united, acknowledging that our struggles are interconnected on this May Day 2024.
By Adio-Adet Dinika, Researcher, Distributed Artificial Intelligence Research Institute
As digital platforms increasingly dictate the dynamics of labor across the world, the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and worker autonomy has emerged as a point deserving greater scrutiny. While tech evangelists proclaim the virtues of employment opportunities with buzzwords like “flexibility,” and “entrepreneurship,” it is essential to point the spotlight towards the Majority World, where rapid digitalization encounters deeply-rooted socio-economic structures and historical legacies. Furthermore, my recent research in Sub-Saharan Africa, exposes a far more complex picture—one where algorithmic control and data extraction threaten to dispossess workers of their fundamental autonomy.
Through extensive interviews with platform workers, I uncovered a consistent pattern of disempowerment as a result of algorithmic management—the application of AI to oversee and direct human labor, for example through automating managerial functions, such as task assignment and performance evaluation. Across sectors, from ride-hailing to freelancing, workers shared harrowing accounts of income precarity, lack of task control, and relentless algorithmic surveillance. The illusion of flexibility quickly evaporated as opaque algorithms dictated their every move, stripping them of the agency to fully utilize their skills and knowledge.
This loss of autonomy is particularly alarming in the context of the Majority World, where many workers turn to digital platforms as a means of survival in the face of limited formal employment opportunities. The unilateral terms imposed by these platforms, often foreign-owned, mirror historical patterns of economic subjugation, where the fruits of labor are siphoned away from local communities.
The incessant monitoring of workers' every action further compounds this sense of powerlessness. By reducing human labor to mere data points to be optimized for profit, algorithmic management dehumanizes workers and erodes their dignity. A taxi driver in Nairobi revealed that when someone requests a ride on a platform like Bolt, drivers have a mere 15 seconds to accept or reject the request. If their acceptance rate falls below 50%, they face the risk of being banned from the platform. Appeals to the company are often met with a shrug and a claim that “it's the algorithm.” This leaves drivers in an impossible situation, forced to accept unprofitable rides, such as traveling 10 kilometers to pick up a rider who only needs to go two kilometers, without any compensation for the initial journey.
As we mark International Workers' Day, it is crucial to recognize that the struggle against algorithmic exploitation is an extension of the long fight against capitalist oppression. The algorithmic shackles that bind platform workers today are but a new manifestation of the age-old tactics used to extract maximum value from labor while minimizing worker power. It is necessary to avoid a deterministic view where technology alone dictates outcomes. It is essential that we emphasize the paramountcy of human agency and our collective ability to guide tech innovation. This perspective urges us to view AI not just as a force exerted upon us, but as a domain where diverse human inputs can and should direct its trajectory towards more just and empowering outcomes for workers globally.
To truly emancipate workers from the grip of algorithmic control, we must fundamentally rethink the values driving these digital transformations. Worker-centered policies, algorithmic transparency, and fair compensation must be non-negotiable. Crucially, workers must be consulted on any algorithmic tools or practices used to manage them and have a say in when and how these systems are deployed. Platforms must be held accountable for prioritizing profits over worker well-being.
The path to genuine change lies in empowering workers to shape the very systems that govern their labor. Collective organization and innovative forms of solidarity adapted to the digital age are vital tools in the fight against algorithmic despotism. By amplifying worker voices, centering their lived experiences, and demanding a seat at the table where decisions about algorithmic management are made, we can build a movement that challenges the very foundations of capitalist exploitation.
By the International Trade Union Confederation
The world of work has been characterized by unequal power relations between its two main actors: workers on the one hand and companies on the other. How have these relations been regulated? Quite simply, through rules and institutions. But what has changed?
Nowadays, people leave data all the time. When they search on Google, when they download apps on their mobile phones, when they take a ride with a car service, when they shop on websites or have a medical check-up, when they go to a bar or a museum, or when they upload a photo on social media. Every breath someone takes leaves a data trail.
Cathy O'Neil, in her book Weapons of Math Destruction suggests thinking about Big Data and the model of algorithms as a recipe, where if you follow the steps correctly, you will make a cake. Of course, to follow a recipe you need to be able to read.
The world of work is now regulated or “programmed” by algorithms that determine everything, from the methods used to select applicants, to the determination of productivity levels, working time, wages, monitoring, and surveillance. Algorithmic management also poses a threat to the right to privacy, as well as the rights to freedom of assembly, association, and expression. The regulation of the world of work, which used to be aimed at reducing inequalities and power asymmetries, is now based on recipes that few or hardly anyone can read. This is why, the first step is to properly understand what these algorithms are, how they are being used, and the key risks, opportunities, and challenges that unions need to take into account.
An ILO report on normative gap analysis on decent work in the platform economy identified that, “…Algorithmic management, which heavily relies on the processing of personal data, is an important feature of the platform economy that progressively came to encompass other workplace.”
According to an Algorithmic Watch report, “…While a recent study finds that currently one in three workers in Europe does not even know if algorithmic management systems are being used on them, it is high time that also governments set the right frames to support social dialogue and collective bargaining on automation in the workplace.”
Collective bargaining, which is a fundamental right, an enabling right applicable to all workers, i.e., an essential precondition for the exercise of other human rights, is the most effective tool to provide safeguards against the rapid technological developments in algorithmic management.
Trade unions must be involved in the design of new technologies and in negotiations on the introduction of AI systems, automation, machine learning, and robotics in the workplace. Algorithmic management at its core touches on working conditions and should be subject to collective bargaining.
A human rights-based approach to algorithmic management must strengthen the importance of collective rights, such as freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining, in protecting human dignity at work.
By Uma Rani, Rishabh Kumar Dhir and Nora Gobel from ILO
Over the past decade, the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tools, products, and services has reshaped the digital landscape, fueled by substantial venture capital investments.* While some foresee a transition to a “post-work world” driven by AI, especially with the rise in start-ups focused on promising job automation, this narrative faces increasing skepticism from researchers. Moreover, what constitutes AI itself is also under scrutiny. Advances in AI and natural language processing have enabled start-ups to market their services as AI-enabled, potentially reducing costs for firms through automation or productivity improvements.
Contrary to the prevalent discourse on AI-driven automation, studies reveal a growing dependence within the AI industry on invisible and precarious workers. It's crucial to acknowledge the human labor required for AI development, including those who are often ‘invisible,’ as well as workers performing tasks often portrayed as fully automated. The building, developing, and maintaining of AI systems is part of a global value chain and it heavily relies on crowdworkers, unpaid workers on microtask platforms, and workers in Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) companies. These workers constitute an integral part of the evolving global AI supply chains and are dispersed across the world.
Within this supply chain, workers undertake various tasks like data labeling, data and image annotation, transcription, translation, and content moderation, pivotal for training, monitoring, and servicing AI systems. Despite many companies touting complete automation, they continue to depend on a global network of outsourced and invisible workers who execute these tasks. AI systems and algorithms still encounter errors and lack accuracy, necessitating human involvement to produce meaningful outcomes. Many of these workers, primarily located in developing countries, face precarious employment, poor working conditions, and perform repetitive tasks despite their high education levels.
This situation raises concerns about perpetuating and exacerbating inequalities inherent in the digital ecosystems that drive AI development and deployment. Key workers essential to AI systems often remain marginalized within the digital economy, while others, especially those in coding, programming, or marketing roles, are able to gain substantial rewards. This stark inequality mirrors broader global economic dynamics, similar to those seen in the garment industry, where workers in the Global South at the lower-end of the supply chain for making clothes struggle economically while those in the Global North, such as fashion designers, amass wealth.
The proliferation of AI systems further risks widening the gap between companies and workers from advanced economies, who have access to sophisticated AI systems controlled by a handful of tech giants, and those from developing countries with limited resources or training. This disparity can exacerbate existing technology gaps and pose challenges for companies in developing countries to compete. Thus, a transformative shift in the world of work with the advent of AI systems must prioritize promoting decent work opportunities for all. In addition to labor concerns, there's a pressing need to address data privacy issues, particularly concerning workers' data.
It's imperative to contextualize AI systems within this framework of inequality to grasp their wider implications for the world of work. This understanding is essential for determining whether AI-human collaboration can occur on equitable terms rather than perpetuating unequal power dynamics. The development and integration of AI systems have profound implications for the labor market, particularly for those reliant on microtask platforms or BPO work for income. Addressing these issues is crucial to ensuring fair opportunities for workers irrespective of gender or geographical location. While AI has the potential to increase productivity for some workers, addressing decent work deficits faced by workers in developing countries involved in training and servicing AI systems is equally important.
This entails creating meaningful work opportunities that contribute to socio-economic development and promote sustainable and inclusive growth. Exploiting these workers risks deepening inequalities and stifling the potential of highly educated workers engaged in repetitive tasks within the AI supply chain rather than engaging them in innovations for supporting local economic development. Furthermore, it affects the development trajectories of countries where human capital is scarce, and often necessitates significant investments from both households and governments for education.
In this context, this piece calls for digital labor disclosure for informed policies, investments, and ethical AI development. It further emphasizes the importance of digital and AI technologies in driving economic and structural transformations, particularly in developing countries.
*For more details, please read: ‘AI-enabled business model and human-in-the-loop (deceptive AI): Implications for labor’ in Handbook of Artificial intelligence at Work.
By Pratiksha Ashok, Ph.D. candidate at Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium
Algorithmic management, also known as algorithmic governance or algorithmic supervision, refers to the use of algorithms and data analytics to manage and oversee workers in various settings, including platforms. The rise of platform-based work has brought algorithmic management to the forefront of discussions about labor rights and regulations.
The European Union (EU) has recently adopted the Proposal for a Directive on improving the working conditions in platform work. The new Directive is set to reform labor standards in the platform economy. The Directive increases transparency in the use of algorithms by digital labor platforms, ensures human monitoring on their respect of working conditions and gives workers the right to contest automated decisions. These new rights will be granted to both workers and the genuinely self-employed.
While this Directive is meant for the EU and its internal market, what could the potential ramifications be for the global labor economy?
Firstly, the EU often sets regulatory standards that influence global policies, particularly in areas such as data privacy and consumer protection. The EU adopting comprehensive regulations addressing algorithmic management and labor rights in the platform economy, sets a precedent for other regions and could encourage the adoption of similar standards worldwide. Furthermore, platform companies operate across borders, including in EU member states. Compliance with EU regulations on algorithmic management and labor rights would likely require these companies to implement changes globally, impacting their operations and practices beyond the EU.
Secondly, by prioritizing transparency, fairness, and worker rights in algorithmic management, EU regulations could empower workers globally by setting clear expectations for platform companies. This could lead to improved working conditions and protection of rights for platform workers worldwide as companies adjust their practices to comply with EU standards.
Thirdly, the EU's approach to regulating the platform economy could spur international cooperation and dialogue on best practices for addressing the challenges posed by algorithmic management. Collaborative efforts between the EU and other regions could lead to the development of global guidelines or standards for protecting worker rights in the digital economy. Additionally, policymakers in other regions may look to the EU's regulations as a model for addressing similar challenges in their own jurisdictions. This could lead to a domino effect, with EU-inspired regulations influencing policy decisions in other parts of the world and shaping global governance of the platform economy.
Fourthly, stricter regulations in regions like the EU may create pressure for upward convergence in cheaper labor markets. As platform companies adapt to comply with higher standards in more regulated markets, they may extend similar protections and benefits to workers in cheaper labor markets to maintain consistency in their operations and avoid negative publicity or legal challenges creating a race to the top.
Fifthly, platform companies in cheaper labor markets may face pressure to improve working conditions and offer better benefits to attract and retain workers, they may compete more directly with traditional employers for talent. This could lead to improvements in overall labor standards and compensation levels in these markets.
Additionally, stricter regulations in major markets like the EU could also have indirect effects on labor practices throughout global supply chains. As platform companies and their suppliers adjust to comply with regulations, they may implement similar standards across their operations, affecting workers in sectors such as manufacturing and logistics in cheaper labor markets.
Furthermore, stricter regulations in major markets may create opportunities for local or regional platform companies in cheaper labor markets to fill the gap left by larger multinational platforms. These companies may differentiate themselves by offering more favorable working conditions, stronger labor protections, or better opportunities for workers in these markets.
While the EU’s Directive evolves the perception of labor and their conditions, a global shift in platform work is needed to recognize and protect workers who operate on such platforms. While the kinds and levels of protection may vary, platforms and regulators must be sensitive to their operations and their transformational value in their economies.
