4 research outputs found
Crowdworkers' temporal flexibility is being traded for the convenience of requesters through 19 'invisible mechanisms' employed by crowdworking platforms
Crowdworking platforms are a prime example of a product that sells
flexibility to its consumers. In this paper, we argue that crowdworking platforms sell temporal flexibility to requesters to the detriment
of workers. We begin by identifying a list of 19 features employed
by crowdworking platforms that facilitate the trade of temporal
flexibility from crowdworkers to requesters. Using the list of features, we conduct a comparative analysis of nine crowdworking
platforms available to U.S.-based workers, in which we describe
key differences and similarities between the platforms. We find
that crowdworking platforms strongly favour features that promote requestersâ temporal flexibility over workersâ by limiting the
predictability of workersâ working hours and restricting paid time.
Further, we identify which platforms employ the highest number of
features that facilitate the trade of temporal flexibility from workers
to requesters, consequently increasing workersâ temporal precarity.
We conclude the paper by discussing the implications of the results
Remote Work, Work Measurement and the State of Work Research in Human-Centred Computing
Over the past few decades, a small but growing group of people have worked remotely from their homes. With the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic, millions of people found themselves joining this group overnight. In this position paper, we examine the kinds of work that âwent remoteâ in response to the pandemic, and consider the ways in which this transition was influenced by (and in turn came to influence) contemporary trends in digital workplace measurement and evaluation. We see that employers appeared reluctant to let certain classes of employee work remotely. When the pandemic forced staff home, employers compensated by turning to digital surveillance tools, even though, as we argue, these tools seem unable to overcome the significant conceptual barriers to understanding how people are working. We also observed that, in the United Kingdom context, the pandemic didnât mean remote work for a significant proportion of the population. We assert that, to maximize its impact, âfuture of workâ research in human-centred computing must be more inclusive and representative of work, rather than focusing on the experiences of knowledge workers and those involved in new forms of work
âSometimes itâs Like Putting the Track in Front of the Rushing Trainâ: Having to Be âOn Callâ for Work Limits the Temporal Flexibility of Crowdworkers
Research suggests that the temporal flexibility advertised to crowdworkers by crowdsourcing platforms is limited by both client-imposed constraints (e.g., strict completion times) and crowdworkersâ tooling practices (e.g., multitasking). In this paper, we explore an additional contributor to workersâ limited temporal flexibility: the design of crowdsourcing platforms, namely requiring crowdworkers to be âon callâ for work. We conducted two studies to investigate the impact of having to be âon callâ on workersâ schedule control and job control. We find that being âon callâ impacted: (1) participantsâ ability to schedule their time and stick to planned work hours, and (2) the pace at which participants worked and took breaks. The results of the two studies suggest that the âon-demandâ nature of crowdsourcing platforms can limit workersâ temporal flexibility by reducing schedule control and job control. We conclude the paper by discussing the implications of the results for: (a) crowdworkers, (b) crowdsourcing platforms, and (c) the wider platform economy