Hello, in the previous class, we discussed a little about the transformations in the World of Work and some of its characteristics. In today's class, we're going to discuss a little more about how this work has effects on the characteristics of workers. We have already seen some of these characteristics in previous classes.
We will work a little more on them and their relationship and their effects on how people are and behave. This is our objective because we need to understand this in order to comprehend the processes of illness related to these new worlds of contemporary work. An important aspect that was pointed out in previous classes, is how contemporary work demands more intellectual work, so there is a greater demand for intellectual and personal characteristics from workers.
This has effects on the way people develop as subjects. One of the implications of this is that as we are in demand all the time, not only physically but also through our personal mobilization, we end up working much more. It's not uncommon for us to be thinking about work at home.
We sleep or lose sleep thinking about work issues, wake up startled at dawn remembering things at work, or receive work-related e-mail notifications during our rest time. WhatsApp groups are permeated with work issues even when we are not working, so it seems that we are constantly working. Even in our personal relationships, to maintain employability, we always think about how to sell ourselves to others.
It seems like we never stop working even in times of leisure, relaxation, and social relationships. We also think, or are led to believe, that we can, and need to always grow more within the organizations. Obviously, for financial reasons, everyone is interested in earning more.
Still, it is as if every investment has to be rewarded by a career ascension, so we are always led to believe that we must grow. Grow, develop, earn more, and this has no end. Paradoxically, the exact opposite is expected of those who do not have access to this.
They are not expected to invest in their careers or to stay in a company for a long time, because the less time in a company, the less responsibility it has with these workers. And, for example, if they get sick in the company, as they are short-term workers and the organizational link is smaller, there is greater difficulty proving that they became ill due to that job. There are rotating workers who don't stay long in these less privileged jobs, and unlike the privileged workers, it is not expected that they invest or dream of the company, but think only in the present, being subjected to more precarious conditions, and being satisfied with this.
So, even future projects are unevenly distributed, and those workers who have more precarious jobs are expected to invest less in their careers and not think too much about it. All of these changes have become more accentuated since the 1980s. Until the 1980s, businesses and corporations had singular characteristics but were typically pyramidal where everything took place within the organization.
This started to change in the 80s, and the transformations were so great and diverse that it’s impossible to describe in this class. There was a great variety of transformations that occurred in the organizational world. But I would like to point out something that has appeared within the last 10 years or so, which is more symbolic and representative of these changes in the contemporary world of work.
I’m referring, in particular, to the process of Uberization, which has the Uber company as its main reference. What is this Uberization process? It is a process of brutal deregulation of labor relations, In which Uber and other such service platforms, theoretically, in theory, don’t have a direct employer and employee relationship.
For example, Uber, who is the owner of the capital, in theory, just in theory, is not the employer of their drivers. Thus, theoretically, Uber does not hire its drivers. In theory, the people who are providing this service, the drivers, are meeting the customers’ demand and are supposedly being mediated by the platform, which obviously has its rules and regulations to guarantee the drivers’ access to the clients, but in theory, there is no contractual relationship there.
We say “theoretically” because there is a long debate going on in the world right now about this, including the legal implications, and this exemplifies a total deregulation of labor because drivers can work for Uber and several other transportation service platforms at the same time. This deregulation is brutal to the point that it is also possible, in theory, to make your own hours, work as much as you want, as many times as you want, accept rides or not, and this gives workers a certain feeling of autonomy. These Uber-style workers have a more radical experience of what it is to be an “entrepreneur” with the sensation that they in fact are the owners of the schedule, the service, and the vehicle.
They just don’t own the platform. This gives them several benefits, which are undoubtedly very interesting. They don’t have a boss telling them what to do.
They don't work with great rigor, and this allows them to manage their lives in a very different way than they would in a typical, normal company. They manage to have some planning, as they have some kind of control over their expenses and costs, and they can perceive the return on their investment. What they invest comes back to them in some way.
Thus, there are many benefits, and they can also supplement their income from other jobs they may have elsewhere. However, it is important to note that these new technologies also subject people to very difficult types of relationships. For example, these supposed “entrepreneurs” are unable to alter the platform in any way.
They are totally subjected to what is defined by someone else as much as a regular worker. Even more so than workers who, to some extent, have someone to complain to about their issues. In their case, they have no one to address their complaints.
The only way they can go against this kind of subjection is to cut ties with the platform. The social and union relations are completely fragmented. There is indeed a set of experiences of grouping these people, but as theoretically they are not employees or unionized, there is no existing union capable of mediating this relationship because the owners of these platforms are not even here in Brazil.
They are completely pulverized in terms of shareholders worldwide. Their head office is far from Brazil, having only some small offices in the country to basically represent legal issues, so the relationship with these companies is much more virtual and fragmented, and the worker is more subjected to these processes. It is interesting to observe that although there are a series of perceptible benefits, this Uber-style of work also subjects people to very difficult conditions.
And part of this perception is perhaps not yet very visible because it is a relatively novel contemporary form of work. But it is also necessary to imagine the permanence of these people over time. One of the interesting things to observe in the relationship between illness processes and work is that not every illness process emerges right at the beginning of a work process.
People's aging and exposure to the accumulation of work can also lead to certain long-term effects. It is still too early to verify the long-term effects of this kind of work. But some simple things are evident; an accident, an illness, the loss of social references, family problems, all of these issues may lead to very immediate damages in the lives of these workers.
And due to this deregulation, it is difficult to negotiate employment relationships with Uber. At the end of the day, Uber workers, in spite of perceiving benefits, are ultimately left to their own devices. They are unable to make effective and long-term plans for their careers and future.
They may have a certain amount of planning, but there is a limit to the benefits, including financial ones, that they can actually have concerning their lives and development over time. And why do I talk about the Uber issue? Because it is an emblem of this process of fragmentation and deregulation of work, which began exactly in the 1980s and has been growing ever since causing these effects of fragmentation and deregulation of social life.
Nowadays, people are experiencing a social loss of reference and principles. We are always talking about a moral crisis, and it seems to have something to do with this loss of reference in the world of work. It is interesting how this also affects workers' mental health.
There is an increase in anxiety, distress, depression, and fatigue because one has to work all the time; they can't turn off, because if they don’t work, they don’t get paid. Although there are benefits, as I said, from the perception of a certain flexibility and autonomy by not necessarily being restricted and controlled all the time by someone at your side and things like that. On the other hand, there are also very deleterious effects that are also part of this same dynamic.
Therefore, it is crucial to understand that these transformations can point to important scenarios. Who knows, we may be able to produce more flexible jobs, with genuine autonomy, which is a desire of many of the people who work in these jobs. But how can these positive characteristics be guaranteed without the fragmentation and lack of corporate responsibility and without the harm that this type of deregulation produces?
This is how we need to understand contemporary forms of work, with some gains but huge challenges to be faced. And we can perceive these challenges in the processes of illness and suffering linked to these new modes of production. And it is exactly these enormous challenges, especially the suffering experienced through these new forms of production that will be the main focus of our next class.
Good class to you all.
