数字劳动平台和工作的未来：在网络世界实现体面劳动（英文版）.pdf

ILO Digital labour platforms and the future of work Towards decent work in the online world Digital labour platforms and the future of work Towards decent work in the online world Janine Berg s Marianne Furrer s Ellie Harmon Uma Rani s M Six SilbermanInternational Labour Office Geneva 2018 Digital labour platforms and the future of work Towards decent work in the online worldDigital labour platforms and the future of work Towards decent work in the online worldCopyright International Labour Organization 2018 First published 2018 Publications of the International Labour Office enjoy copyright under Protocol 2 of the Universal Copyright Convention. Nevertheless, short excerpts from them may be reproduced without authorization, on condi- tion that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation, application should be made to ILO Publications (Rights and Licensing), International Labour Office, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland, or by email: rightsilo. The International Labour Office welcomes such applications. Libraries, institutions and other users registered with a reproduction rights organization may make copies in accordance with the licences issued to them for this purpose. Visit ifrro to find the reproduction rights organization in your country. Digital labour platforms and the future of work: Towards decent work in the online world International Labour Office Geneva, ILO, 2018 ISBN 978-92-2-031024-3 (print) ISBN 978-92-2-031025-0 (web pdf) ISBN 978-92-2-031026-7 (epub) ILO Cataloguing in Publication Data The designations employed in ILO publications, which are in conformity with United Nations practice, and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the International Labour Office concerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers. The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles, studies and other contributions rests solely with their authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the International Labour Office of the opinions expressed in them. Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the International Labour Office, and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a sign of disapproval. Information on ILO publications and digital products can be found at: ilo/publns.Printed in Switzerland This publication was produced by the Document and Publications Production, Printing and Distribution Branch (PRODOC) of the ILO. Graphic and typographic design, manuscript preparation, copyediting, layout and composition, proof readings, printing, electronic publishing and distribution. PRODOC endeavours to use paper sourced from forests managed in an environmentally sustainable and socially responsible manner. Code: DTP-CHD-REPne of the major transformations in the world of work over the past decade has been the emergence of online digital labour platforms. This new form of work has not only disrupted existing business models but also the employment model upon which these business models relied. Work on digital labour platforms provides work- ers the opportunity to work from any place, at any time and take up whatever jobs suits them. However, there are also some risks from engaging in such work with regard to their status of employment, whether they receive adequate income, social protection and other benefits. The opportunities and risks that the workers face raise questions about what motivates these workers to undertake this form of work. Do these motivations vary across different parts of the world? And what are the consequences for workers of engaging in this form of work? To investigate some of these questions the ILO Research Department along with the Inclusive Labour Markets, Labour Relations and Working Conditions Branch (INWORK) carried out two surveys in 2015 and 2017, covering 3, 500 workers liv- ing in 75 countries around the world and working on five major globally operating microtask platforms. This was supplemented with in-depth interviews and other qual- itative surveys undertaken by researchers at IG Metall. The survey focused on micro- task platforms, wherein businesses and other clients have access to a large, flexible workforce (“crowd”) who are geographically dispersed around the world to undertake short, simple and mostly clerical tasks and are remunerated on the basis of task or piece completed. Based on the survey findings, this report provides one of the first comparative studies of working conditions on microtask platforms. It presents the basic characteristics and motivations of workers to undertake these tasks, and finds both commonalities and dif- ferences between workers from the global North and global South. The report analyses the working conditions on these micro-task platforms and advances a series of princi- ples for improving working conditions on digital labour platforms. This report will be helpful to the ILOs Future of Work Initiative and aims to support the work of the Global Commission on the Future of Work, an independent commission convened by the Director-General of the International Labour Organization in August 2017. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the ILO. Damian Grimshaw Director, Research Department v O FOREWORDForeword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v ACKNowLedGeMeNTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii exeCuTive SuMMAry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv CHAPTer 1. iNTroduCTioN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 .1 What is crowdwork? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 .2 History and origins of crowdwork platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1 .3 Is crowdwork a new form of work? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1 .4 What are microtask platforms? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1 .5 Structure of work: Treating workers algorithmically . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 CHAPTer 2. MAiN MiCro TASK PLATForMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2 .1 Description of platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2 .1 .1 Employment arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2 .1 .2 Business models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2 .1 .3 Platform specializations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2 .2 Description of work on the platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 2 .3 Platform terms of service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2 .3 .1 Non-user-friendly adhesion contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2 .3 .2 Terms of service documents as sites of intervention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 CHAPTer 3. wHo Are THe CrowdworKerS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 3 .1 Geographical coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3 .2 Basic demographics of crowdworkers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3 .3 Reasons for undertaking crowdwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 3 .4 Main source of income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 vii COntEntsviii diGiTAL LAbour PLATForMS ANd THe FuTure oF worK CHAPTer 4. How do CrowdworKerS FAre? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 4 .1 Remuneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 4 .2 Access to social protection benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4 .3 Insufficient availability of work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4 .4 Working hours and worklife balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 CHAPTer 5. wHAT Are THe riSKS ANd oPPor TuNiTieS For CrowdworKerS? . . . . . . . 73 5 .1 Rejections, opacity and non-payment of work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 5 .2 Lack of communication, responsiveness and representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 5 .3 Content of work and skill mismatch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 5 .4 Is this the best use of developing countries skilled labour? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 CHAPTer 6. TowArdS deCeNT worK iN THe oNLiNe worLd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 6 .1 Improving microtask platforms: Some initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 6 .1 .1 Turkopticon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 6 .1 .2 The Dynamo Guidelines for academic requesters on Amazon Mechanical Turk 97 6 .1 .3 FairCrowdWork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 6 .1 .4 The Crowdsourcing Code of Conduct and its Ombuds office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 6 . 1 . 5 Engaging clients to improve pay and working conditions: An emerging strategy . 99 6 .2 Improving the platform terms of service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 6 .2 .1 Worker account and profile control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 6 .2 .2 Evaluation of work and payment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 6 .2 .3 Workers privacy, safety and well-being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 6 .2 .4 Workers legal rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 6 .3 What can be done? 18 criteria for fairer microwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 6 .4 Three additional criteria on adapting social protection for crowdwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109ix CoNTeNTS CoNTeNTS bibLioGrAPHy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 APPeNdix i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 APPeNdix ii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 FiGureS 1 .1 Categorization of digital labour platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 .1 Example of a task for content access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2 .2 Example of a task for verification and validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2 .3 Example of a task for machine learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2 .4 Example of a transcription task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2 .5 Example of a content creation task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3 .1 Regional coverage of the two surveys and distribution of 2017 survey respondents . . . 31 3 .2 Regional distribution of crowdworkers, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3 .3 Distribution of crowdworkers, by platform and gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 3 .4 Age distribution of crowdworkers, all platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3 .5 Distribution of crowdworkers by age group and gender, all platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 3 .6 Educational level of crowdworkers, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 3 .7 Tenure of crowdworkers, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 3 .8 Most important reason for performing crowdwork, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 3 .9 General health status of crowdworkers, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3 .10 Main activity prior to beginning crowdwork, by gender, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 3 .11 Main source of income, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3 .12 What best describes your role in your other job? by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3 .13 Occupation of crowdworkers engaged in other jobs, by region, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 3 .14 Satisfaction with crowdwork, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 4 .1 Distribution of hourly paid and unpaid work among workers, by platform, 2017 . . . . . . 51 4 . 2 Distribution of hourly pay (paid and unpaid work) among Indian and American workers on AMT 544 .3 Distribution of hourly pay (paid and unpaid work) among Indian and American workers on AMT, PPP adjusted and in real terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4 .4 Income shares, by primary means of income, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 4 .5 Financial precariousness of crowdworkers, by region, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4 .6 Employment, underemployment and job search, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4 .7 Reasons for not currently doing more crowdwork, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 4 .8 Number of crowdwork platforms used in the past month, by platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 4 .9 Intensity of crowdwork, by gender, 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .