The gig economy is rapidly reshaping urban life, yet digital labour platforms fail to provide adequate support to the workers who keep this economy running. According to a recent World Bank report (2023), nearly 435 million people work in the gig economy globally. The total number of gig workers is higher, however, the World Bank report primarily focused on cloud workers. There is a data gap in the gig economy. At a national and global level, we do not really know how many people work in the gig economy. According to ABC News (2023), nearly 250,000 people work in the gig economy in Australia. In Bangladesh, around 800, 000 gig workers are engaged in the gig economy, including 300,000 location-based gig workers and approximately 500,000 cloud or online remote workers, making the country the second-largest online outsourcing destination.
Despite gig workers' contribution to economic development in Australia and Bangladesh, gig workers are classified as independent workers rather than employees. This classification allows platform companies to avoid providing their workers with access to essential services such as parking, water, toilets, and battery charging. Due to geographical location and economic differences, the provision of public amenities varies greatly between Dhaka and Melbourne. However, our research demonstrates that gig workers in Australia and Bangladesh experience similar challenges in accessing essential resources which digital labour platforms fail to provide.
Profit for platforms, precarity for workers
From ride-sharing giants like Uber and Pathao to food delivery services such as DoorDash and Menulog, gig platforms depend heavily on urban infrastructure to function. Yet, they take little responsibility for ensuring workers can access the resources they need. This has led to a phenomenon we call 'parasitic platform urbanism', where platforms profit from cities' existing services without contributing to their maintenance or expansion.
The consequences are visible on the streets. When we asked delivery riders in Melbourne about the kind of amenities they would like greater access to, many focused on toilets. Chitapanya, a 25-year-old Thai food delivery rider working in Melbourne, said:
"Toilets are most important and there should be more of them around. They have toilets in parks, but they're all locked".
This statement suggests that public amenities are insufficient for the needs of those working in the street at night. Similarly, Uber drivers in Dhaka pointed out how the lack of public toilets negatively impacted their health:
"I do not drink enough water when I drive. As there are not many public toilets and public parking available in Dhaka city, it's hard to find a toilet. Also, we can't go to toilet if we have a customer. But it has impacted my health now. I have diabetes now" (Riad, Uber driver).
In Dhaka, Uber drivers often face police harassment due to a lack of designated parking. In Melbourne, food delivery riders struggle to find safe places to rest or charge their devices, particularly at night. Fast food restaurant chains offer some respite, but here delivery riders feel shrivelled and often unwelcome. Drevan, a food delivery rider based in Melbourne, highlighted the value of having somewhere to exchange information.
"It would be nice to have a space to discuss where is busy, and any incidents that have occurred, with other delivery drivers".
The desire for a space to share advice and socialise was common among respondents, illustrating the potential of any dedicated rider amenity to also act as a social space. The above daily hurdles experienced by gig workers expose a growing gap in urban planning, as cities have yet to adapt to the demands of the gig workforce.
Who should be held responsible?
Based on our research findings, we call for greater accountability from platform companies, urging them to share the burden of maintaining urban infrastructure. While local governments typically manage public resources like parking and sanitation. We also suggest that digital platforms should contribute financially to developing infrastructure that directly supports their workers.
In Melbourne, some city officials have shown interest in addressing the parking needs of rideshare and delivery drivers. However, in Dhaka, no such interest has been shown. Within this context, we argue that policymakers must recognise the increasing role of gig workers in the urban economy and take action accordingly.
Ensuring fair work: The need for policy reform
One potential solution is extending occupational health and safety laws to cover gig workers. For example, regulations ensuring employees access to clean drinking water should also apply to delivery riders and rideshare drivers. Additionally, expanding public amenities such as more bike lanes, accessible rest areas and additional public toilets with extended hours would improve working conditions for gig workers.
We further warn that unless governments and unions hold platforms accountable, the burden of accessing essential amenities will continue to fall on workers. A lack of public investment in infrastructure leaves platform workers vulnerable, while cities struggle to manage the consequences of an increasingly digital workforce.
By acknowledging the infrastructural needs of gig workers, cities can move towards a more sustainable and equitable urban future - one where public amenities support workers.
Lutfun Nahar Lata, a Senior Lecturer at School of Social and Political Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Email: [email protected]
Andrew Copolov, a PhD researcher of Art, Design and Architecture, Monash Urban Lab, Monash University, Email: [email protected]
Comments