Big Tech Built a Gig Economy That Works Against Us

Recent reporting has confirmed what many working people already feel every day: companies are using personal data to decide the lowest wage someone will accept. What working people call exploitation, Silicon Valley calls innovation.

The seven largest gig platforms in the United States — Amazon Flex, DoorDash, Favor, Instacart, Lyft, Shipt, and Uber — are using data that tracks how long its users stay on an app, what jobs they accept, and how urgently they need income. This algorithm calculates what the employers can pay to get the job done at the lowest rate individuals will accept.

Not what their labor is worth. Not what is fair.

Gig work was sold as a way to make extra money on a flexible schedule. But that’s not what it looks like today. Nearly one in four people in the U.S. now participate in some form of gig or freelance work. What was supposed to be a side hustle has become a main source of income for one third of gig workers.

As layoffs rise and wages fall further behind the cost of living, more people are being pushed into this kind of work to keep up. Black people and other workers of color, who tend to be more dependent on this type of work than white people, have been especially hard hit. But these unfair practices can impact all workers.

“Under surveillance wage systems, different people may be paid different wages for largely the same work, and individual workers cannot predict their incomes over time,” the Washington Center for Equitable Growth reports. “Not only has pay for app-controlled jobs decreased over time,” but “people who work longer hours are paid less per hour.”

This is what happens when an economy limits options for some people, then funnels them into systems that take advantage of that lack of choice. Now they’re going even further — using data to predict what some experts call a “desperation wage,” or the lowest amount someone will accept based on their behavior.

And it’s not just happening in gig work. Similar systems are being used to set rent and adjust prices for goods and services in real time. The same idea applies: use data to figure out the worst price or wage someone will tolerate, then charge just below that or pay just above it.

When you combine higher unemployment, lower wealth, and fewer protections, you get a system where some people have less room to say no — and are more likely to be taken advantage of. The message is simple: take it or leave it. And for many, leaving it isn’t an option.

That’s why we’re starting to see pushback. Working people are demanding more transparency. Some are organizing. New models are emerging that promise fairer pay and more control. But these changes are happening because people are speaking up — not because companies chose to act.

So what needs to happen next is clear. If companies are going to use algorithms to shape pay and access to work, those systems should be transparent. People should know how their pay is calculated.

Workers should be able to see how much of each transaction goes to them compared to how much the company keeps. There should be rules that prevent companies from using personal data to quietly lower pay for some people while others earn more for the same work. And working people should have the ability to organize and push back.

Because this isn’t just about gig work. It’s about whether we allow companies to rewrite the rules of the economy — or whether we demand a system that works for the people in it. Technology should make work more stable, more fair, and more predictable. Right now, it’s doing the opposite. And that’s not inevitable.

It’s a choice.

—

Previously Published on otherwords.org with Creative Commons License

***

At The Good Men Project, we are proud to syndicate work from OtherWords, a public-interest editorial service published by the Institute for Policy Studies. We value their work because it brings readers clear, accessible, fact-checked commentary on the policies and power structures shaping everyday life, often from voices and perspectives that do not get nearly enough mainstream attention.

We believe these conversations belong here because questions about democracy, inequality, justice, rights, and public responsibility are not separate from the human story. They shape how families live, how communities function, who gets heard, who gets protected, and what kinds of values a culture rewards. Many of the issues OtherWords covers also overlap with questions we care deeply about at GMP: power, identity, belonging, care, fairness, and how to build a society that is more humane than the one we inherited. That is one reason we are glad to share their work with our readers.