It Is Time to Include Women in the Discourse on Platform Work

By Dr Inga Sabanova, FES Competence Centre on the Future of Work

Business platforms using digital technologies to connect customers and workers have entered service and labour markets in most EU member states (Manyika et al., 2016). While the total number of platform workers is relatively low at the moment, platformisation of traditional economic activities is set to expand, especially with the growing demand for certain services such as care for the elderly or childcare (Kilhoffer et al., 2020).

Unlike activities in the traditional economy, the platform economy is usually viewed as an inclusive economic model (Florisson and Mandl, 2018), which has the capacity to transform the nature of work by providing a liberating option for those unable to attain stable employment elsewhere (Adebiyi, 2019). Flexibility is mentioned as a key advantage, as anyone can enter and start working thereby benefiting from a flexible schedule (Adebiyi, 2019). Considering that many workers face discrimination in the traditional labour market, platform work has the potential to reduce discrimination by offering opportunities, for example to young workers, the long-term unemployed, or people with certain disabilities or health conditions (Kilhoffer et al., 2020). Furthermore, in many countries, where women’s participation in the job market is low, some experts suggest that the platform economy can boost women’s employment by providing such alternative working arrangements (UNDP, 2021).

Nevertheless, the emerging evidence suggest that the rollout of platforms is posing very serious questions about the inclusiveness of the platform economy itself. While the share of women involved in platform work has been increasing worldwide, women’s participation in the platform economy remains invisible to the public gaze. Unlike the work performed by delivery workers, who tend to be men and publicly visible on the streets of any large city, women are usually involved in doing jobs that are hidden from the public (Lloyd and Gauret, 2021). The emerging evidence further suggests that the platform economy may even increase the gender exclusion and inequality that exists in the traditional economy, reproducing race and class hierarchies (Fuster Morell, 2016).

In discussing the platform economy and gender, Schoenbaum (2016) put it well by suggesting that there is currently a significant gap between what is known and what is wished to be known. Despite the public debate about the precarious conditions of platform workers, there has been very little gender-disaggregated data on platform work. Women’s experiences of platform work in reconciling work, home and family life remain largely unaddressed (James and Temple, 2019).

1. Do women take up platform work?

Since a “platform worker” is not a legal category and many contractual arrangements are covered in platform work, including employee, self-employed, fixed-term, part-time and agency work, it is difficult to estimate the actual number of platform workers in the EU. It is evident that both men and women are both drawn to platform work for income-related reasons, despite a significant proportion of them holding a job outside the platform economy (Churchill and Craig, 2019).

Results from the second COLLEEM survey indicate that only a small proportion of those surveyed from the sixteen EU member states participating in the study listed platform work as their main occupation. In 2018, 1.4 per cent of respondents claimed to work more than 20 hours a week providing services via digital labour platforms or earning at least 50 per cent of their income doing so (Buckingham et al., 2020). However, the proportion of secondary platform workers (those who provide services via digital labour platforms more than ten hours a week and earn between 25 percent and 50 percent of their income from platform work) has been increasing (Buckingham et al., 2020).

While men constitute a greater share of the platform workforce, women’s participation in platform work has been increasing since 2000, with significantly more growth among women than men (Palagashvili and Suarez, 2021). Pesole et al (2018) found that women were likely to be overrepresented in certain task types, so it is possible that the proportion of young women has increased because the prevalence of platforms catering for relatively more “feminised” tasks, such as translation or interactive services, has also increased (Hunt et al., 2019).

2. Sectoral and occupational segregation based on gender

The platform economy presupposes that even if not all tasks or projects may be equally suited to be outsourced for platform work, it is likely that some parts of almost every job may be performed via platforms (Florisson and Mandl, 2018). There is a diversity of tasks that can be performed via platforms across various fields that require different competences and skills (Florisson and Mandl, 2018). Some tasks can be carried out remotely at home through such platforms as Upwork, Freelancer, Timeetc, Clickworker or PeoplePerHour, although other platforms, for example Handy, TaskRabbitor Mybuilder, focus on offering assignments to be performed for different customers at different locations. Furthermore, platforms such as Uber or BlaBlacar offer platform work that involves driving someone to a location for a fee using an app (Florisson and Mandl, 2018).

Nevertheless, emerging evidence suggest that along with the growing share of women participating in the platform workforce, the platform market follows the dynamics that already exist in the traditional economic activities with sectoral and occupational segregation based on gender. Results from the second COLLEEM survey showed that men are much more likely to perform transportation and delivery services, while women more often perform translation and certain on-location services (e.g., housekeeping or beauty services). Similarly, previous research conducted in 2014–2015 indicated that 87 per cent of workers on the Etsy platform were women, while only 14 per cent of women worked for the Uber platform (Palagashvili and Suarez, 2021).

Interestingly, Galperin (2019), in examining gender segregation in the context of the platform economy, finds that stereotypes about male and female occupations play an important role in sorting men and women into different jobs in an online freelance marketplace. The analysis based on anonymised data from Nubelo, an online freelance platform based in Spain (that was acquired by Freelancer.com), suggests that women continue to face a significant hiring penalty in male-typed occupations associated with STEM skills. Female candidates are less likely to be hired for male-typed jobs (e.g., software development) but more likely to be hired for female-typed jobs (e.g., writing and translation) than equally-qualified male candidates.

3. Gender gap

Empowering women in the economy and closing gender gaps in the world of work have been named as prerequisites in achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (UNHLP, 2016). It is a well-known fact that sectors and occupations of traditional economic activities are highly segregated by gender and women are significantly overrepresented in low-paying jobs, such as care assistants, cleaners and retail salespersons (Bisello and Maftei, 2020). In addition, women continue to experience stark disparities in pay compared to male colleagues in similar jobs, and make up 58 per cent of minimum-wage earners even though they represent 48 per cent of the workforce. These worrying facts translate into a higher risk of financial instability and precariousness in the lives of women, with long-term effects on their pensions (Bisello and Maftei, 2020).

Considering that sectoral and occupational segregation based on gender are already the emerging reality of the platform economy, the unequal pay between women and men now becomes more evident. Researchers from Columbia University examined the work of over 20,000 men and women who completed more than five million tasks online, using collected data from the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform. On average, they found that women’s hourly earnings were 10.5 per cent lower than men’s earnings. Several factors contributed to the gender pay gap, including the tendency for women to select tasks that have a lower advertised hourly pay (Litman et al., 2020). Similarly, looking at the profiles of men and women working at two freelance platforms, Upwork and Fiverr, researchers found men charge more for their work (Guzior, 2018).

Other findings suggest that female status and participation in the labour market is significantly improved by the platform economy, due to the potential anonymity associated with online working. This would offset barriers, bias, and discrimination still faced by women in the workforce today (James and Temple, 2019). Thirty-three per cent of female platform workers have done work under a username that does not reveal their gender. The majority of women (72%) who choose to work under a gender-neutral name do so to maintain anonymity, while smaller groups do so to increase bids on projects (14%) or to avoid sexism or hostility (14%) (Hyperwallet, 2017).

4. Different notion of flexibility

Women are more likely than men to report that platform work is “fitted with their schedule”, indicating that non-work commitments such as family constrain women more than men (Churchill and Craig, 2019). It is indeed evident that the flexibility of platform work enables women in balancing unpaid and paid work (Hunt et al., 2019). However, flexible work arrangements do not solve the issue of the childcare; in fact, they make it more invisible.

Hyperwallet (2017) surveyed 2,000 female platform workers to understand their behaviours, career aspirations, and the challenges they face. Ninety-six per cent indicated that flexibility was the primary advantage of working for platforms and a quarter of respondents had recently left traditional employment because they needed flexibility or more time to care for a child, parent, or relative.

It is well-known that where support services, notably childcare, are available, women are more likely to engage in the labour force. However, where childcare is lacking outside the household, women are more likely to take up informal and low-paid work (Hunt et al., 2019).

In addition, other findings suggest that although many workers view platform work as more flexible than other paid work available to them, caring for young children proves challenging — not least given unpredictable schedules, early starts and long commutes (Samman and Hunt, 2020).

5. The consequences of atypical work

Many of the working arrangements established by the online platforms match, closely resemble or mix these forms of atypical work, sometimes with the only difference being that they make use of a digital tool (Garben, 2019). According to Eurofound (2017), atypical work refers to employment relationships that do not conform to the standard or “typical” model of full-time, regular, open-ended employment with a single employer over a long time-span. The main problematic issue related to atypical work is that workers can easily find themselves in precarious situations (Buckingham et al., 2020). This can be characterised by a lack of social security and standard working hours that guarantee a regular income (Eurofound, 2017).

The emerging evidence confirm that platform workers are indeed facing high risks of precariousness, irrespective of their employment status. This applies especially those engaged in low-skilled platform work. Huben (2020) identifies five main types of risks of precariousness:

– low, fragmented and unstable income, with insufficient fall-back options during intermittence periods;

– low protection of working conditions, including little or no access to training and career development;

– exposure to particular health and safety risks characteristic of platform work;

– low social protection coverage for risks that are particularly relevant for platform work (e.g., work accidents, unemployment and sickness);

– very low levels of collective labour rights and representation.

The absence of social protection, along with inadequate working conditions, has a negative impact not only on the individual’s wellbeing but also on family life, especially with children. As Suskin (2021) confirms in her study, the platform economy leaves workers’ children vulnerable by posing serious health risks to physical and emotional development.