Hybrid Work Patterns: A Latent Class Analysis of Platform Workers in Denmark
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.133721Keywords:
Employment, Wages, Unemployment & RehabilitationAbstract
This paper presents a novel approach for studying differences and similarities among platform workers, by taking into account the wider labor market position of platform workers. Analytically, we seek inspiration from literature on labor market segmentation (SLM) and multiple jobholding (MJH) to nuance the often-dichotomized view of labor markets characterized by SLM theory. By using survey data from a set of additional questions tied to the Danish LFS, we apply latent class analysis models to discover patterns of labor market divisions among platform workers in Denmark. We identify three major groups of platform workers, and while all of them have multiple income sources, they have very different labor market positions in the traditional labor market. We categorize them as ‘established workers’, ‘transitional workers’, and ‘new labor market entrants’. These divisions point to marked differences among platform workers, implying that platform work is characterized by varying blends of labor market hybridity.
Author Biographies
Jonas Hulgård Kristiansen, University of Copenhagen
PhD Student, Employment Relations Research Centre (FAOS). E-mail: jhk@faos.dk
Trine Pernille Larsen, University of Copenhagen
Associate Professor, Employment Relations Research Centre (FAOS)
Anna Ilsøe, University of Copenhagen
Associate Professor, Employment Relations Research Centre (FAOS)
References
Atkinson, J. (1987). Flexibility or Fragmentation? Labor and Society, 12(1), 86-105.
Berg, J. (2016). Income security in the on-demand economy: Findings and policy lessons from a survey of crowdworkers. Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal, Geneva: ILO
Berg, J., Furrer, M., Harmon, E., Rani, U., Silberman, M. (2018). Digital labour platforms and the future of work. Towards decent work in the online world, ILO.
Boje, T. P. (1986). Segmentation and Mobility: An Analysis of Labour Market Flows on the Danish Labour Market. Acta Sociologica, 29(2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/000169938602900207
Campion, E. D., Caza, B. B., & Moss, S. E. (2020). Multiple Jobholding: An Integrative Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda. Journal of Management, 46(1), 165–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319882756
Carter, S., Tagg, S., & Dimitratos, P. (2004). Beyond portfolio entrepreneurship: multiple income sources in small firms. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(6), 481–499. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620410001693008
Collins, L. M., & Lanza, S. T. (2009). Latent Class and Latent Transition Analysis (1st ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470567333
Conen, Wieteke (2020): Multiple jobholding in Europe: Structure and dynamics, WSI Study, No. 20. (WSI), Düsseldorf.
Danish Disruption Council. (2019). Prepared for the future of work. Follow-up on the Danish Disruption Council (p. 64).
De Stefano, V. (2016). Introduction: Crowdsourcing, the Gig-Economy, and the Law. Comparative Labor Law Journal, 37, 461–470.
Doeringer, PB and Piore, M. J. (1971): Low income employment and the disadvantaged labor force, In. M. Reich (2008) Segmented Labor Markets and Labor Mobility, vol. 1, Cheltenham: Elgar reference Collection, 4-28.
Fiadzo, C., Buckingham, S., Pozza, V. D., & Todaro, L. (2020). Precarious work from a gender and intersectionality perspective, and ways to combat it, Brussels: European Parliament.
Fink, M. N., Ettrup, S.E. (2019). Skatte- og momsmæssige udfordringer ved arbejdevia digitale platforme. Præsentation på Århus Universitet, 9. december.
Grimshaw, D., Fagan, C., Hebson, G., & Tavora, I. (2017). A new labour market segmentation approach for analysing inequalities: Introduction and overview, Manchester University Press. https://www.manchesteropenhive.com/view/9781526125972/9781526125972.00007.xml
Hauben (ed.), H., Lenaerts, K. & Waeyaert, W. (2020) The platform economy and precarious work, Publication for the committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg.
Healy, J., Nicholson, D., & Pekarek, A. (2017). Should we take the gig economy seriously? Labor & Industry: A Journal of the Social and Economic Relations of Work, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10301763.2017.1377048
Hirsch, B. T., Husain, M., & Winters, J. V. (2016): Multiple Job Holding, Local Labor Markets, and the Business Cycle. IZA Discussion Paper No. 9630. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2716571
Hotvedt, M. J., Munkholm, N. V., Westregaard, A., Ylhäinen, M., Alsos, K., & Aradóttir Pind, D. (2020). The future of nordic labour law: facing the challenges of changing labour relations. Nordic Council of Ministers. 10.6027/temanord2020-534.
Hotvedt, M. J. & Alsos, K. (2021). Chapter 6 Is Nordic labour law fit to meet future challenges? In Alsos, K. & Dølvik, JE. (Red.), The Future of Work in the Nordic countries: Opportunities and Challenges for the Nordic Working Life Models. Nordisk ministerråd. ISSN 978-92-893-7014-1.
Howcroft, D., & Bergvall-Kåreborn, B. (2019). A Typology of Crowdwork Platforms. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018760136
Ilsøe, A., & Larsen, T. P. (2020). Digital platforms at work: champagne or cocktail of risks? In A. Strømmen-Bakhtiar & E. Vinogradov (Eds.), The Impact of the Sharing Economy on Business and Society (1st ed.), Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429293207
Ilsøe, A., Larsen, T. P., & Bach, E. S. (2021). Multiple jobholding in the digital platform economy: signs of segmentation. Transfer: European Review of Labor and Research, 1024258921992629. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258921992629
Jacqueson, C. (2021). Platform work, social protection and flexicurity in Denmark. International Social Security Review, 74(3–4), 39–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12277
Jesnes, K. (2019). Employment Models of Platform Companies in Norway: A Distinctive Approach? Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 9. https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.v9iS6.114691
Kalleberg, A. L. (2011). Good Jobs, Bad Jobs: The Rise of Polarized and Precarious Employment Systems in the United States, 1970s-2000s. Russell Sage Foundation.
Kalleberg, A. L., & Dunn, M. (2016). Good Jobs, Bad Jobs in the Gig Economy. 5.
Kibria, N. (1994). Household Structure and Family Ideologies: The Dynamics of Immigrant Economic Adaptation among Vietnamese Refugees. Social Problems, 41(1), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/3096843
Kovalainen, A., Vallas, S., & Poutanen, S. (2019). Theorizing Work in the Contemporary Platform Economy (pp. 31–55). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429467929-3
Lanza, S. T., Dziak, J. J., Huang, L., Wagner, A. T., & Collins, L. M. (2018). LCA Stata Plugin Users’ Guide Version 1.2. 27.
Leontaridi, M. (1998). Segmented Labor Markets: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys, 12(1), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6419.00048
Lukac, M., Doerflinger, N., & Pulignano, V. (2019). Developing a Cross-National Comparative Framework for Studying Labor Market Segmentation: Measurement Equivalence with Latent Class Analysis. Social Indicators Research, 145(1), 233–255. http://dx.doi.org.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/10.1007/s11205-019-02101-3
Mailand, M., Larsen, T. (2018): Hybrid Work – Social Protection of Atypical Employment in Denmark. WSI. https://d-nb.info/1155510291/34
O'Farrell, Rory & Montagnier, Pierre. (2019). Measuring Platform Mediated Workers. April 2019. No. 282. OECD.
Oppegaard, S. M. N. (2020). Regulating Flexibility: Uber’s Platform as a Technological Work Arrangement. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.122197
Palier, B., & Thelen, K. (2010) Institutionalizing dualism. Politics & Society 38(1): 119–148.
Peck, J. (1996). Work-place: The Social Regulation of Labor Markets. Guilford Press.
Piasna, A., Zwysen, W., Drahokoupil, J. (2022). The platform economy in Europe. In ETUI, The European Trade Union Institute. https://www.etui.org/publications/platform-economy-europe
Pichault, F., & McKeown, T. (2019). Autonomy at work in the gig economy: analysing work status, work content and working conditions of independent professionals. New Technology, Work and Employment, 34(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12132
Rasmussen, S., Nätti, J., Larsen, T. P., Ilsøe, A., & Garde, A. H. (2019). Nonstandard Employment in the Nordics – Toward Precarious Work? Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 9. https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.v9iS6.114689
Rosenberg, S. (1987). From Segmentation to Flexibility. In. M. Reich (2008) Segmented Labor Markets and Labor Mobility, vol. 1, Cheltenham: Elgar reference Collection, 4-28.
Rubery, J. (2015) Change at work. Employee Relations 37(6): 633–644.
Rubery, J., & Piasna, A. (2017) Myths of Employment Deregulation. Brussels: ETUI.
Schor, J. B., & Attwood-Charles, W. (2017). The “sharing” economy: labor, inequality, and social connection on for-profit platforms. Sociology Compass, 11(8), e12493. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12493
Schor, J. B., Attwood-Charles, W., Cansoy, M., Ladegaard, I., & Wengronowitz, R. (2020). Dependence and precarity in the platform economy. Theory and Society, 49(5), 833–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09408-y
Seo, H. (2021). ‘Dual’ labor market? Patterns of segmentation in European labor markets and the varieties of precariousness. Transfer: European Review of Labor and Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/10242589211061070
Sloth Laursen, C., Nielsen, M. L., & Dyreborg, J. (2021). Young Workers on Digital Labor Platforms: Uncovering the Double Autonomy Paradox. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.127867
Smith, A., & McBride, J. (2021). ‘Working to Live, Not Living to Work’: Low-Paid Multiple Employment and Work–Life Articulation. Work, Employment and Society, 35(2), 256–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017020942645
Sutela, H., & Pärnänen, A. (2018). Platform jobs. Helsinki. Statistics Finland.
Thelen, K. (2018). Regulating Uber: The Politics of the Platform Economy in Europe and the United States. Perspectives on Politics, 16(4), 938–953. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592718001081
Thelen, K., Wiedemann, A., & Palier, B. (2018) The Anxiety of Precarity. Unpublished manuscript, MIT.
Urzi Brancati, C., Pesole, A., & Macias, E. (2019). Digital Labor Platforms in Europe: Numbers, Profiles, and Employment Status of Platform Workers. https://doi.org/10.2760/16653
Vallas, S., & Schor, J. B. (2020). What Do Platforms Do? Understanding the Gig Economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46(1), 273–294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054857
Van Aerden, K., Moors, G., Levecque, K., & Vanroelen, C. (2014). Measuring Employment Arrangements in the European Labor Force: A Typological Approach. Social Indicators Research, 116(3), 771–791.
Vandaele, K. (2022). Vulnerable food delivery platforms under pressure: protesting couriers seeking “algorithmic justice” and alternatives. In: Ness, I. (ed), Routledge handbook of the gig economy, New York, NY: Routledge, forthcoming
Weller, B. E., Bowen, N. K., & Faubert, S. J. (2020). Latent Class Analysis: A Guide to Best Practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 46(4), 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798420930932
Yoon, Y., & Chung, H. (2016). New Forms of Dualization? Labor Market Segmentation Patterns in the UK from the Late 90s Until the Post-crisis in the Late 2000s. Social Indicators Research, 128(2), 609–631. http://dx.doi.org.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/10.1007/s11205-015-1046-y
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Author and Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Holder of this Journal is the authors and the Journal. Normally the journal use the CC-BY NC-ND 4.0 licence.
Exceptions to the license terms may be granted
If you want to use content in the Journal in another way then described by this license, you must contact the licensor and ask for permission. Contact Bo Carstens at bo.carstens@gmail.com. Exceptions are always given for specific purposes and specific content only.
Sherpa/Romeo
The Journal is listed as a blue journal in Sherpa/Romeo, meaning that the author can archive post-print ((ie final draft post-refereeing) and author can archive publisher's version/PDF.
Copyright of others
Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere.
Archives policy
All published material is archived at Roskilde University Library, Denmark, and transmitted to the Danish Royal Library in conformity with the Danish rules of legal deposit.
Plagiarism screening
We do not screen articles for plagiarism. It is the responsibility of the authors to make sure they do not plagiate.
