Suchergebnisse

AbstractPlatform gig work is created and contested in dynamic, triangular relationships between platforms, workers, and consumers. Compared with the first two groups, however, evidence about the role of the third—consumers—is sparse. In this paper, we investigate consumers' changing perceptions of work in the platform gig economy and argue that their perspective warrants greater attention in sociological analyses. Using data from two Australian public opinion surveys conducted 5 years apart (2017 and 2022), we explore how consumers' views of platform gig work evolved during a period of rapid change that includes the first 2 years of the COVID‐19 pandemic. We find that while overall platform use increased markedly, many consumers felt conflicted about gig workers' conditions and key features of platforms' typical labour practices. There is a pronounced, enduring, and consequential tension in consumers' views of the merits and drawbacks of this work; between, on the one hand, an acceptance that platforms do benefit workers to some extent and, on the other hand, misgivings about workers' vulnerability to harm. In centring consumers, our paper empirically enriches current triangular conceptions of labour relations in the platform gig economy, by showing how consumers mediate the interests of platforms and workers, to shape how gig work manifests and who benefits from it. We also contribute useful new practical knowledge, by elucidating the prevailing concerns of consumers that could be developed into resonant themes for campaigns aimed at improving platform gig workers' rights.

The study of work is central to understanding how changes in organizations and their environments impact lives and livelihoods. While industrial sociology and its concern with the organization of work are foundational to management and organization studies, scholars have bemoaned the waning interest in work and its evolution within these fields. In this article we seek to re-energize this tradition, arguing that Critical Management Studies (CMS) and Industrial Relations (IR)—two disciplines whose core interests concern work and its changing nature—have much to gain from further cross-fertilization. As Organization becomes a recognized platform for scholarship on the organization of work, we submit that more could be done to bring IR's intellectual legacy into CMS approaches, and that doing so will yield mutual benefits. We focus here on IR's core concerns with rules and regulatory frameworks, and collectivities over individualities. Similarly, IR can benefit from integrating and building on insights developed in CMS. We argue that CMS as a whole offers lessons for IR in at least three ways: (i) the emphasis on cultural dominance over workers; (ii) recognition of social and identity-based fault lines that define life and work experiences; and (iii) attention to the social construction of subjectivities. In closing, we suggest four areas that cross-fertilization between IR and CMS is likely to greatly contribute to: resistance in late capitalism, alternative organizations, inclusion, and the "future of work."

Decentralization of collective bargaining has become widespread in developed economies, and EU policies have pushed this trend further. We use process-tracing methodology to explore the consequences of decentralization for the reproduction of partnership bargaining relations at company level. We compare two cases of decentralized bargaining in manufacturing, one in Denmark and one in Australia. Agreement-based decentralization seems to offer better process conditions for reproduction of local partnership compared to decentralization regulated by law. This implies that future decentralization measures should be negotiated rather than imposed.

The Covid-19 pandemic both popularized and politicized the designation of essential work. Interrogating the dialectics of essential work, this volume of Research in the Sociology of Work presents original research that explores the essentiality of work and highlights the experiences of essential workers during the pandemic, drawing on empirical studies in Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. Demonstrating an enduring struggle for recognition and dignity, as well as for revaluing and materially rewarding essential work, contributors examine the emotional labour involved in gendered care work, the impact of COVID-19 on residential care work, the politics of essentiality and the diversity and intersectional inequality of essential workforces. The final chapters are the first of a new recurring section spotlighting ethnography by presenting both new empirical research and in-depth reviews of extant contributions. Raising pressing questions about the essence of work and its place in contemporary society, Essentiality of Work inspires new debates about the centrality of the work experience and how labour is understood in modern life both for those undertaking work as well as those who benefit.

Presenting cutting-edge ethnographic research on contemporary worlds of work and the experiences of workers from a range of contexts, this volume offers fine-grained, exploratory ethnographic data to provide insights unmatched by other research methods.

To confront the climate crisis requires fundamental system change in order to break the convention of relentless economic exploitation of nature. In this Special Issue we extend understanding of the opportunities for an organizing perspective on sustainability in order that organization studies might contribute more effectively to the challenges of organizing sustainably. This organizing perspective is particularly sensitive to (1) a variety of forms and practices of sustainable organizing in different societal spheres and on different levels, (2) the social institutions, logics and value systems in which these forms and practices are embedded, (3) the power and politics of promoting (or blocking) sustainable organization, and (4) the ways in which work, voice, participation, and inclusion are organized and contribute to developing societal capabilities. These features formed the basis of our original call for papers and we review selected literature on sustainability, including the contribution of organization studies and the articles in this Special Issue, through this organizing perspective. In so doing we identify four key themes of a future research agenda that builds from the foundations of existing research and addresses key current limitations in both theory and practice: sustainability requires social justice; connecting local and global scale shifts; democratizing governance; and acting collectively. We conclude with some implications for our own scholarship in organization studies if we are to meet the twin challenges of the need for new theorizing in combination with devising practically relevant support for change.