need a Executive summary

Study Method: (300 words)

Findings: (500 words)

Among the five respondents, Austin, Benjamin and Yoe are studying bachelor’s degree. Aung and Jan have already received a master’s degree. All five interviewees have gig economy working experience. Aung and Jan are currently working full time, Benjamin and Yoe are currently working on gig jobs, and Austin is looking for gig jobs. In addition, both Yoe and Austin have experience working in convenience stores. Aung and Austin believe that gig jobs can get more money during their student years and improve their quality of life. Yoe and Jan believe that gig jobs can accumulate a lot of experience to help them get full time work. Benjamin is more concerned about his uni work, he does not want gig job to affect his studies. Compared to full time work, the flexibility of gig job is more concerned by respondents. Yoe, Aung and Austin both hate 9 to 5 jobs, they are eager for free time and want to manage their own time. The flexible working schedules and small stress of gig jobs are perfect for them. Benjamin also cherishes gig economy to provide jobs for workers. However, Jan and Benjamin are concerned that gig jobs lack the benefits of full-time jobs. For example, gig workers are at risk of vicarious liabilities and insurance obligations, and Gig workers are excluded from employment laws labor protections. Gig workers are not eligible for employment benefits such as pensions and medical benefits. And they have no job security and income stability. In addition, their income also challenges the government's tax revenue. Most respondents believe that whether they are engaged in gig jobs or full-time jobs are the freedoms people choose and deserve to be respected. Both modes of work contribute to society. Especially, Benjamin believes that although people who work full-time now have higher stability and more income than gig workers, the future of gig jobs is limitless. Yoe, Aung and Austin are satisfied with their current work arrangements. However, Jan has too few job opportunities and he is looking forward to getting more gig jobs or a full-time job. In addition, although Benjamin currently has a lot of job opportunities, he is worried about whether gig jobs can maintain a balance between work and life after graduation. All respondents were surprisingly consistent about their ideal work arrangement. They all want to work more flexible the better. Neither Jan nor Austin likes to work in the office. Aung, Benjamin, Jan and Austin all want to work remotely outdoors and at home. Four respondents wanted to strictly monitor the gig economy, including benefits for making long-term contracts, regulate the exploitation of gig workers, set a minimum wage, and formulate insurance during gig worker's working period. Finally, all respondents believe that the government should adopt legislation to promote the more standardized growth of gig economy.

Discussion: (1500 words and 10 peer reviewed references ) In order to define the future of gig work within Australia the following will be discussed; the pros and cons of gig work, probable future trends in gig work, demands for regulation and proposed regulation recommendations.

Ideas for discussion parras:   

-          Appeal of gig work – external forces that cause it to grow 

-          Negatives of gig work – current anxieties towards it

-          Future of gig work – what will it look like in future 

In the future, companies are increasingly disliked to hire permanent employees. CEOs hope that their employees will serve the company during the company's rapid development and leave the company during the downturn. Moreover, large companies are reluctant to work on occupational hazards and are unwilling to bear too much of their insurance, medical examinations and treatment costs. Therefore, a large number of job opportunities exist only in the form of outsourcing, which translates into more and more scattered jobs, and the future Gig economy has developed rapidly.

Traditionally, Gig economy has focused on delivery and travel services such as Uber and Deliveroo. In the future, new gig workers will be active in all industries including B2B, retail and education. At present, gig economy is dominated by low-income jobs such as carpooling and delivery. The company has signed contracts with gig workers to use low-skilled, low-cost workers to execute non-core processes and achieve high efficiency. In the future, gig economy will produce highly skilled, high-paying jobs such as software development and design. As the demand for talent continues to change, valuable gig workers are increasingly seen as a source of scarce talent and expertise. The labor sharing platform can provide companies with rare skilled talents that are difficult to obtain in the traditional full-time labor market. More and more multinational companies are beginning to promote gig economy, for example, Samsung is expanding its use of freelance platforms. Previously, small businesses and start-ups hired gig workers using a freelance platform. In the future, multinational giants are also interested in hiring gig workers and are using online freelance platforms to hire IT professionals, designers, marketers and other high-paying jobs. Multinational companies hire gig workers because gig workers are more cost effective than full-time employees. And gig workers can only be hired flexibly when demand arises. Moreover, the company is not obligated to provide gig workers with employee benefits that are generally mandatory for full-time employees, such as health care and pension benefits.

Companies will use the labor sharing platform to increase company flexibility. These platforms can be a valuable tool when companies are looking for scarce technology and talent to respond to changing customer needs. Companies can leverage existing human-sharing platforms and networks, as well as build their own. Companies and gig workers are not just employment relationships, they will be integrated. Companies must clearly articulate the role of gig workers in order to gain broad internal support and collaboration from other employees.

-          Need for regulation

-          Possible regulation methods etc

With the external forces of technology and globalisation continuing to revolutionise the ways we carry out work and a strong desire for increased flexibility within society, many anticipate that the gig economy will account for a large sector of the labour market in the near future (Minter 2017). Currently the majority of gig work within Australia takes the form of platform based business models which offer services such as food delivery and transportation (Sarina & Riley 2018). It is expected that the general practice of gig work will revolutionize the services sector, with work becoming available in areas like legal aid, finance and education (Minter 2017). Although these trends are expected to prevail, Australia has made little efforts to evolve with them compared to other countries such as the UK and Germany (REFFFF still to addd).

Current statutes and regulations that could protect the rights of gig workers are uncertain, outdated and vague (Stewart & Stanford 2017). Regulations that determine minimum wages, maximum working hours, entitlements, protections and rights to collective bargaining only cover ‘employees’ (Stewart & Stanford 2017). As gig workers are most commonly classified as ‘independent contractors’ or ‘self employed’ by the business models that they work for, their rights are undermined and uncertain (Sarina & Riley 2018). Companies avoid liability and the responsibility to pay entitlements, workers compensation and superannuation by what many are referring to as ‘sham contracting’ (Sarina & Riley 2018; Stewart & Stanford 2017). In many instances, gig workers are being subject to offering up their own assets and security only to work with minimal autonomy or control over their working conditions, a situation that is distant from that of a legitimate independent contractor (Stewart & Stanford 2017). With the vulnerabilities placed upon workers within the gig economies already prevalent, there will need to be changes implemented by the Australian government to protect workers and the wellbeing of the Australian labour force in the face of the gig economy (Minter 2017).

Recommendations are being made as to the necessary changes to support new work forms and allow workers to thrive. Policy makers should consider expanding upon the current definition of employment. If work organised and facilitated by a digital intermediary was recognised as employment, this would enable gig workers to enforce their rights and stand up to unfair treatment (Stewart & Stanford 2017). There could also be strict regulation imposed upon companies to prohibit artificial categorisation of workers as independent contractors in order to tackle sham contracting (Knox 2018; Minter 2017). An alternative solution is creating a new category of worker known as ‘the independent worker’. As this new work form is so distant from what we know, a new classification of worker may be warranted (Minter 2018). Platform and gig workers would be legitimized and provided with avenues to maintain justice and attain fair treatment in their work. Contractual agreements would be controlled to avoid the exploitation that many companies currently engage in (Stewart & Stanford 2017).

The research obtained through interviews in this report suggests that despite the challenges and insecurities presented by the gig economy, young Australian’s maintain an ambitious and optimistic outlook towards the opportunity it presents. With value placed upon flexibility, freedom and convenience, it seems that working arrangements created by the gig economy are in keeping with the wants and needs of future generations. Policymakers and governments should recognise the relevance and prominence of the gig economy and implement policy to support it (Minter 2018). Changes in the way we recognise these forms of work could be the fine tuning necessary to allow platform workers and their providers to thrive. 

Conclusion: (200 words) 

References: 

Knox, A 2018, ‘Regulatory avoidance in the temporary work agency industry: evidence from australia’, The Economic Labour Relations Review, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 190-206, viewed 25 September 2019, SAGE Journals database. 

Minter, K 2017, ‘Negotiating labour standards in the gig economy: airtasker and unions new south whales’, The Economic and Labour Relations Review, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 438-454, viewed 25 September 2019, SAGE database. 

Sarina, T & Riley, J 2018, ‘Re-crafting the enterprise for the gig-economy’, New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 27-35, viewed 25 September 2019, ProQuest database. 

Stewart, A & Stanford, J 2017, ‘Regulating work in the gig economy: what are the options’, The Economic and Labour Relations Review, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 420-437, viewed 25 September 2019, SAGE Journals database.