Is Platform Cooperativism an Alternative for the Gig Economy?: The Stories from Domestic Worker Cooperatives in S. Korea

Background:

The term "gig work" refers to task-based and electronically mediated jobs, facilitated by online platforms or smartphone apps connecting service providers with customers (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018). Jobs in digital platform businesses, like taxi services and delivery, present challenges to traditional labor regulations due to their unique features. Existing literature highlights how digital platforms fragment work activities through unknown algorithms and risk workers' rights by prioritizing cost reduction. To address these challenges, recent literature suggests platform cooperatives as an alternative to venture capital-funded platforms (Scholz, 2016; Saner et al., 2018). Platform cooperatives are worker-owned and democratically governed businesses that use computing platforms to sell goods and services. However, there's a need for a deeper understanding of how these cooperative strategies are perceived and implemented, as well as the factors influencing their adoption. This study explores how platform cooperatives are understood, discussed, and practiced in South Korea, focusing on how different organizational forms and missions of worker cooperatives influence their response to the gig economy's challenges.

Methods:

We conducted a case study including individual interviews and document analysis. For interviews, we selected two prominent domestic worker cooperatives in South Korea: The National Family Management Association (NFMA) and Life Magic Care (LMC). These organizations represent the sole recognizable domestic worker cooperatives in South Korea. To gain in-depth insights into their organizational strategies related to the platform cooperative approach, we interviewed the leaders of these cooperatives and requested them to nominate two representatives for further interviews. To ensure the reliability of our interviews, we also conducted additional interviews with a representative from an LMC branch and a researcher who had studied both cases.

Results

Preliminary findings show significant differences in how two worker cooperatives perceive the benefits of platform cooperative strategies for domestic workers. NFMA sees platform co-ops as violating key principles of worker cooperatives, citing concerns about autonomy and feasibility, particularly in the domestic work sector. Conversely, LMC views platform cooperatives as an opportunity to attract younger workers, streamline labor management, and provide legal protection. These varying perspectives are influenced by the organizations' origins, missions, and structures.

Further analysis, including experiences of LMC-launched platform cooperatives, tests if these understandings manifest in real practice. The findings highlight challenges faced by LMC, revealing that ongoing financial investment is crucial for platform cooperative success, leading to minimized app usage due to financial constraints and identifying potential negative impacts like reduced worker participation.

Conclusion and Implication

The contrasting viewpoints of NFMA and LMC shed light on the nuanced challenges and benefits associated with the platform cooperative approach. The implications of these findings extend to policymakers and cooperative leaders, emphasizing the need to consider contextual factors, address financial sustainability concerns, and recognize the diversity of perceptions within worker cooperatives.