Public Opinion toward Gig Workers’ Deservingness

• In Event: Economic Inequality, Redistribution, and Public Opinion

Abstract

Considering the drastic increase of precarious non-standard workers who are easily excluded from social security programs and fringe benefits, the research question of this project is “how does the American public perceive the deservingness of non-standard workers receiving unemployment and healthcare benefits?” The CARIN criteria (Control, Attitude, Reciprocity, Identity, Need) outline which features align favorably with deservingness (Van Oorschot et al., 2017). Specifically, identity as immigrants has an inevitable perceived deservingness gap compared to natives (Reeskens & van der Meer 2019). Also, motivation to engage in job-seeking activities is a key indicator of reciprocity, which is why the unemployed are perceived as less deserving (Larsen 2008; Buss 2019). The importance of motivation and work ethic are codified into the selective welfare regime and “workfare system” in the US.

However, there are unanswered questions about how the nature of work affects perceived deservingness. Existing literature investigated motivation to work and work history were crucial for deservingness, but no studies answered how different work statuses, such as non-standard employment, affect perceived deservingness divergently. Second, if those in non-standard jobs are considered less deserving, which aspects of the jobs or the workers factor into this perception? Existing literature assumes that app-based workers are considered undeserving of government support because they are relatively young (Ravenelle et al., 2021). Similarly, app-based workers might be considered less deserving since racial minorities such as Hispanics are more engaged in the app-based economy. Existing work tells us little, however, about how the nature of non-standard work itself affects perceived deservingness.

To fill these gaps in knowledge, I administered a survey experiment for a pilot study as part of the 2022 Cooperative Election Study (CES) and following survey experiments to break down detailed deservingness criteria. Specifically, the first experiment will assess the perceived deservingness of app-based workers receiving unemployment benefits with different conditions of working hours. The control vignette describes a traditional worker searching for full-time jobs after undergoing job loss. The three treatment conditions will describe the case of an app-based worker searching for other app-based jobs after failing to secure tasks in their current job, with varying history of working hours.

The second experiment will be a 2X2 full factorial experiment with treatments for job status and immigration status to measure the perceived deserving of public healthcare benefits. Specifically, each vignette of treatment and control describes the case of an app-based and a regular worker injured in a car accident on duty respectively. Both control and treatment vignettes have a background of Hispanic American or Hispanic immigrants to determine whether immigrants are more penalized for having non-standard jobs. After the conditions are randomly shown, each respondent will be asked how much they think the hypothetical person deserves to get unemployment and healthcare benefits, using a four-point Likert scale.

My expectation is that app-based workers are perceived as less deserving of unemployment benefits than traditional workers. However, this deservingness gap narrows as app-based working hours increase. If the results support this expectation, that would suggest that the public views non-standard workers as undeserving of certain benefits due to the non-standard hours that they work, and that those whose hours more closely resemble the hours of a standard job are held in higher esteem. Regarding healthcare benefits, Americans are perceived as more deserving than immigrants regardless of work status. It shows the criterion of identity strongly impacts perceived deservingness, and this insurmountable gap is even increasing when immigrants do non-standard jobs than traditional ones. To sum up, app-based workers are perceived as less deserving compared to traditional workers because Americans might be skeptical about whether app-based jobs are comparable with standard ones.

This project investigates how specific labor market characteristics affect the perceived deservingness of social benefits. This work is meaningful in that perceptions of deservingness clearly play into the way that social programs are designed and administered (Schneider and Ingram 1993). The current social welfare system in the US puts app-based workers in a precarious position because of their ineligibility for certain programs based on traditional employment, indicating that these programs should be revised to better fit the changing nature of work. The prospects for such change will depend largely on how society views this vulnerable and growing segment of the workforce. Academically, this paper fills an important gap about the social legitimacy of benefit obligations as related to specific types of work.

Author

• Juhyun Bae, University of Texas- Rio Grande Valley