当前位置: X-MOL 学术Econ. Labour Relat. Rev. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Justice expectations in crowd and platform-mediated work
The Economic and Labour Relations Review ( IF 1.5 ) Pub Date : 2020-09-24 , DOI: 10.1177/1035304620959750
Sabine Pfeiffer 1 , Sandra Kawalec 2
Affiliation  

Crowdwork conducted via digital platforms is a young form of work, but a growing part of the gig economy. Typical for crowdwork is low pay, volatile income streams and no social security benefits. Also, crowdworkers have few possibilities for social comparison or negotiation because they work outside of company organisations. This article examines the question of whether these conditions mean that crowdworkers’ expectations about justice in crowdwork arrangements differ in comparison to their expectations regarding justice in conventional employment relationships. This question is addressed empirically on the basis of 36 qualitative interviews and a survey of 230 crowdworkers. The justice expectations of crowdworkers involved in different types of crowdworking platforms in German-speaking countries were examined. In our sample, crowd work typically serves to supplement – not replace – conventional employment. This explorative research shows that crowdworkers use similar standards of justice regarding work performance in their evaluations of work mediated via crowdwork platforms and conventional employment. It shows that crowdworkers perceive injustices in four specific areas: planning insecurity, lack of transparency in performance evaluation, lack of clarity in task briefings and low remuneration. These areas correspond to the theoretical dimensions of distributive and procedural justice on Colquitt’s (2001) organisational justice scale. These findings have implications for future efforts to regulate crowdwork.

JEL codes: J88; J3



中文翻译:

人群和平台中介工作中的正义期望

通过数字平台进行的众包工作是一种年轻的形式,但在演出经济中却越来越多。人群工作的典型特征是低薪,不稳定的收入流以及没有社会保障福利。同样,群众工作人员很少有进行社会比较或谈判的可能性,因为他们在公司组织之外工作。本文研究了以下问题:与传统的雇佣关系中的人群对正义的期望相比,这些条件是否意味着人群对人群的正义期望有所不同。根据36个定性访谈和对230名群众工作者的调查,以经验方式解决了这个问题。考察了德语国家参与不同类型众筹平台的众筹工作者的正义期望。在我们的样本中 人群工作通常是为了补充而非替代传统的就业机会。这项探索性研究表明,在通过人群工作平台和常规就业进行的工作评估中,人群工作人员在工作绩效方面使用类似的正义标准。它表明,群众工作人员在四个特定领域中感到不公正:计划不安全,绩效评估缺乏透明度,任务简介不清晰和薪酬低。这些领域对应于Colquitt(2001)组织正义量表上的分配正义和程序正义的理论维度。这些发现对将来规范人群工作的努力具有启示意义。这项探索性研究表明,在通过人群工作平台和常规就业进行的工作评估中,人群工作人员在工作绩效方面使用类似的正义标准。它表明,群众工作人员在四个特定领域中感到不公正:计划不安全,绩效评估缺乏透明度,任务简介不清晰和薪酬低。这些领域对应于Colquitt(2001)组织正义量表上的分配正义和程序正义的理论维度。这些发现对将来规范人群工作的努力具有启示意义。这项探索性研究表明,在通过人群工作平台和常规就业进行的工作评估中,人群工作人员在工作绩效方面使用类似的正义标准。它表明,群众工作人员在四个特定领域中感到不公正:计划不安全,绩效评估缺乏透明度,任务简介不清晰和薪酬低。这些领域对应于Colquitt(2001)组织正义量表上的分配正义和程序正义的理论维度。这些发现对将来规范人群工作的努力具有启示意义。任务介绍缺乏明确性,报酬低。这些领域对应于Colquitt(2001)组织正义量表上的分配正义和程序正义的理论维度。这些发现对将来规范人群工作的努力具有启示意义。任务介绍缺乏明确性,报酬低。这些领域对应于Colquitt(2001)组织正义量表上的分配正义和程序正义的理论维度。这些发现对将来规范人群工作的努力具有启示意义。

JEL代码: J88;J3

更新日期:2020-09-24
down
wechat
bug