Mark Stuart

Ways in, ways through, ways out of the platform labour market

Organisers:

• Simon Joyce, University of Leeds
• Mark Stuart, University of Leeds
• Chris Forde, University of Leeds

Research on platform work – by which we mean paid work mediated by online platforms – has led to considerable speculation about the future of work (Vandaele 2018). However, we still know relatively little about the realities of the working lives of platform workers and how this might vary across different platforms. This workshop addresses these shortcomings by bringing together contributions from leading European researchers, including a unique mix of academic and policy-oriented backgrounds.

The four papers examine different aspects of the experience of platform work, and together offer new empirical insights and deeper conceptual understanding of the complexity of platform work as a form of employment. In particular, we are interested in the place of platform work in the wider context of work and labour markets, as well as its place in the working lives of the people who do it.

The workshop will explore the following dimensions of working in the platform economy:

• Pathways into platform work – How and why do workers enter the platform economy? Consideration will be given to prior work histories, the balance of platform work and wider household realities and the relationship between platform work and other forms of employment.
• The types and conditions of platform work – Consideration will be given to the types of work performed via platforms, in terms of work content, skills level, length of tasks, remuneration and performance management. Does such work offer high levels of worker autonomy or job satisfaction or is such work indicative of a wider trend towards ‘gig work’ and ‘bad jobs’? Does platform work offer a viable source of long-term work, income security, and social protection?
• Worker mobilisation and emergent forms of collective action – To what extent are platform workers able to represents their interests and, where they are, through what means is this achieved? Set against a backdrop of wider debates on bogus self-employment and lack of social protections, emergent forms of collective action are apparent. But we still know very little about the dynamics of such worker mobilisation, their relationship with established forms of labour organisation and ultimately the gains for workers’ rights that are possible. Are new models of collective action possible?
• Pathways from platform work – Evidence suggests that workers turnover in the platform economy is high, suggesting that workers engage in such work for a limited duration and then move on. What are the dynamics of such pathways, and does platform work represent a temporary form of employment to make ends meet (for example while studying) or does it provide a starting point for particular pathways into more established forms of employment or new types of career trajectory?

It is anticipated that the workshop will run for either 1.5 or preferably 2 hours. If the former, each paper will be allocated 18 minutes, with 12 mins for presentation and then a general 30 minute discussion after the presentations.

References:

• Vandaele, K., 2018. Will trade unions survive in the platform economy? Emerging patterns of platform workers’ collective voice and representation in Europe, ETUI Working Paper 2018.05, ETUI, Brussels.

An empirical examination of the role of trade unions at a UK steel firm

Chris McLachlan, University of Leeds
Mark Stuart, University of Leeds

This paper explores the connection between responsible restructuring and integrative bargaining at a UK steel firm. Through a qualitative case study of the negotiation process between management and trade unions, and drawing on Walton and McKersie’s (1965) seminal framework of labour negotiations, the paper argues that trade unions are able to induce management into more responsible forms of employment restructuring by realising the ‘integrative potential’ when bargaining over restructuring.

Research by Pulignano and Stewart (2012; 2013) highlights two distinct union responses to job loss, described as confrontation based on job protection and cooperation based on job transition. Findings suggest these strategies point to both the positive role unions can play in addressing the social and economic effects of restructuring for affected employees. For instance, unions may cooperate with management in the early stages and bargain around issues such as redeployment, retraining and severance payments. Alternatively, unions may take a confrontational approach that refuses redundancies initially yet uses this as a platform for subsequent negotiations. Although much of the prevailing research tends to accept that unions engage with management to shape the outcomes of restructuring, caution has been raised around whether this reduces unions’ independence from the actions of management and their ability to contest managerial initiatives (Martinez Lucio and Stuart, 2005; MacKenzie, 2009; Rodriguez-Ruiz, 2005).

Recent debates in industrial relations literature have highlighted the relationship between trade union activity and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), suggesting unions are well placed as key stakeholders to engage with CSR initiatives in order to improve outcomes for their members and wider society (Harvey et al, 2017; Preuss et al, 2014). Nonetheless, there has been little empirical research on the role of trade unions in relation to specifically responsible practices. With regards to restructuring processes, the term responsible restructuring represents a range of practices implemented by organisations in order to ameliorate the consequences of redundancy for affected employees (Forde et al, 2009). Responsible restructuring has thus been viewed as connected to an organisation’s CSR agenda, with research suggesting ways in which a more ethical approach to restructuring may also bring strategic benefits (Tsai and Shih, 2013; Rydell and Wigbald, 2013). Moreover, a burgeoning consistency has been identified between responsible restructuring and integrative bargaining, whereby unions may engage with management when bargaining over restructuring in order to seek a quid pro quo when agreeing concessions in relation to job losses (Walton and McKersie, 1965; Teague and Roche, 2014; Garaudel et al, 2008). That is, in an era where restructuring and redundancy is considered inevitable, unions may acknowledge certain complementary interests with management in times of restructuring and utilise these in the negotiation process.  Garaudel et al (2008) refer to this as ‘integrative potential’, where by unions engagement in restructuring processes may help mitigate some of the negative social and economic effects of redundancy for employees.

A key point of departure in this paper is thus to explore burgeoning claims in the literature that integrative concession bargaining may offer a strategy for unions to induce management into implementing more responsible forms of restructuring and redundancy (Teague and Roche 2014; Garaudel et al, 2008; Ahlstrand, 2015; Rodriguez-Ruiz, 2015; Kirov and Thill, 2018; Harvey et al, 2017). In particular, Teague and Roche (2014) have pointed to a consistency between integrative concession bargaining and the management practice of responsible restructuring, though in the specific context of responding to recessionary pressures. The authors suggest that greater union involvement may be mutually beneficial as unions can secure certain ‘institutional gains’ related to extended recognition or representation rights, whereas for management union involvement in restructuring programmes can bestow a legitimacy upon the process amongst the workforce. Research into partnership arrangements between union and management has also demonstrated this, where union presence in restructuring processes, and wider workplace change initiatives, afford management a ‘legitimizing rhetoric’ and help consolidate employee consent (Butler et al, 2011; Martinez Lucio and Stuart, 2004; 2005; Butler and Tregaskis, 2018).

Through an examination of a restructuring process at a UK steel firm (SteelCo), this paper explores the dynamics of management and trade unions bargaining over restructuring. Through interview and ethnographic data, the analysis highlights contextual conditions and critical moments that were indicative of an integrative bargaining approach between management and trade unions and hence shaped management’s claims to have implemented a responsible restructuring process. Three critical stages in the bargaining process are identified. First, the early engagement between senior management and senior trade union officials six months prior to the restructuring is considered. Second, the establishment of an internal redeployment process (cross-matching) shortly after the restructuring announcement which was jointly managed by the HR team and senior trade union officials. Third, contentious incidents in the subsequent delivery of the restructuring are explored. Each of these stages is analysed in relation to three criteria: how legitimacy between management and unions was established; areas of integrative potential; and the outcomes and tensions for each party. There is a specific conceptual focus on understanding an integrative bargaining approach in the restructuring process. Attention is afforded in the findings to analysing the interactions in the negotiations, the concessions sought from either party, critical moments that shaped the bargaining process and implications for trade unions’ role in the implementing of responsible restructuring. The paper concludes with an extended discussion on the subsequent implications for trade union strategy in relation to responding to restructuring processes more widely.

Ways into and ways out of platform work

Simon Joyce, University of Leeds
Mark Stuart, University of Leeds
Chris Forde, University of Leeds

This paper contributes towards understanding platform work in the wider context of working lives. We present first findings from ongoing research based on employment-biographical interviews with present and former platform workers, examining in particular circumstances and motivations for entering and for leaving platform work.