Where can child care and domestic gig workers seek support for their challenges?

In the United States, over 15% of individuals have participated in online gig platforms and earned money.

Using these platforms has become an indispensable part of many people’s daily lives. However, challenging and criticizing these companies’ policies can be challenging. Companies like Uber, Lyft, and Instacart have abundant resources and powerful public relations teams that shape the narrative around gig work and workers’ rights. Julia Ticona, an assistant professor of communication at the Annenberg School for Communication, emphasizes the difficulty of speaking up against these companies.

Ticona and her colleague, Ryan Tsapatsaris, a doctoral candidate at Annenberg, conducted a recent study published in the International Journal of Communication. The study focuses on domestic gig workers who utilize Care.com, one of the largest online platforms connecting nannies, housekeepers, babysitters, and senior caregivers with potential jobs.

Surprisingly, Ticona and Tsapatsaris found that discussions about the experiences of domestic workers were not prevalent on popular social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit. Instead, they discovered a unique space for these workers to share their uncensored experiences: consumer review sites. On these platforms, workers and those looking to hire them share stories and provide feedback, a phenomenon seldom observed with other types of gig work.

These makeshift communities on review sites include both gig workers and prospective employers, creating a comprehensive perspective on the platform. In contrast, Facebook groups for Postmates couriers or subreddits for Uber drivers primarily consist of workers discussing their day-to-day experiences.

Exploring the Care.com Discussions

When Ticona and Tsapatsaris initially sought out discussions about Care.com, they checked the conventional spaces like Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit, but found minimal content related to their research. Ticona even searched Facebook groups specifically dedicated to domestic workers, but did not find in-depth conversations about the platform.

However, Tsapatsaris, drawing from his experience as a former gig worker, knew where to look for engaged communities beyond social media platforms. He used his sleuthing skills to uncover discussions about Care.com happening on unconventional platforms like TrustPilot and Better Business Bureau.

The researchers identified thousands of reviews from workers and customers dispersed across various websites. Interestingly, many of these reviews resembled narratives and prompted others to take action against the platform. Ticona describes this community as a “counterpublic” where marginalized voices can openly discuss and debate issues important to them, which are often ignored in mainstream conversations.

‘I am not the only one that this has happened to’

To build a counterpublic on a review site, individuals read and comment on other people’s reviews. Ticona and Tsapatsaris noticed reviewers referencing and supporting one another, even considering them as friends. This sense of solidarity is largely absent on platforms’ official social media channels, where conversations are quickly redirected to private messages.

This is why users turn to review sites to voice their critiques, according to Ticona.

After analyzing over 2,000 posts from six different review sites, the researchers identified three common topics discussed by workers and clients: background checks, communication fees, and the platform’s subscription model. Background checks were mentioned in 18% of worker reviews and 12% of client reviews. Communication fees were raised in 61% of worker reviews and 17% of client reviews. The auto-renew feature of memberships was referenced in 14% of worker reviews and 55% of client reviews.

Reviews from both clients and workers often referenced one another’s experiences. For example, a client expressed concern that workers weren’t getting jobs because clients had to pay to message potential hires. Another review pointed out the discrepancy in background check requirements for families and care workers.

Ticona points out that previous research on online discussions about gig work has primarily focused on workers, but on review sites, both workers and clients share a desire for reform. They empathize with each other’s need to be heard and advocate for addressing issues within the gig economy similar to how other concerns have been addressed.

Future Steps

The discovery of this niche counterpublic on review sites opens up exciting possibilities for future research, according to Ticona and Tsapatsaris. It not only reveals where domestic workers and clients interact online but also establishes a framework for studying other gig platforms.

Ticona emphasizes the importance of a shared theoretical tool for understanding and critiquing these companies. By employing the concept of a counterpublic, scholars can gain a more comprehensive understanding of gig platforms and their impact on workers’ rights.

Outside of academia, investigating these spaces can facilitate regulatory efforts in addressing pressing issues faced by domestic workers and their clients, from scams to background checks to job quality.

 

Reference

Denial of responsibility! TechCodex is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.

Denial of responsibility! TechCodex is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.