>

>

>

Platform Labor, Income Volatility, and Social Insurance Access Among Gig Workers: A Mixed-Methods Study of 2,840 Rideshare and Delivery Workers Across 12 U.S. Metropolitan Areas

Platform Labor, Income Volatility, and Social Insurance Access Among Gig Workers: A Mixed-Methods Study of 2,840 Rideshare and Delivery Workers Across 12 U.S. Metropolitan Areas

Jordan M. Okafor; Priya T. Singh; Aleksei K. Volkov

Abstract

This study investigates income volatility, social insurance access gaps, and financial precarity among rideshare and delivery platform workers in 12 U.S. metropolitan areas across four geographic regions within the context of labor sociology and platform economy research, an area of growing scientific importance given its implications for portable benefits policy design, UI eligibility reform for independent contractors, and platform labor regulation impact assessment. Using structured survey (n=2,840) with 90-day income diary subsample (n=284), administrative records linkage for UI claim history, and 42 in-depth interviews across 12 metro areas, we examine independent contractor classification exempting platforms from employer payroll taxes and benefit obligations, creating structural social insurance gap exploited by algorithmic income management that increases worker income variance without commensurate earnings premium in 2,840 platform workers across 12 metro areas (mean 4.2 years platform experience, 68% full-time platform dependent, 32% supplemental income), 48% rideshare / 52% delivery drawn from 12 U.S. metropolitan areas: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Seattle, Boston, Miami, Atlanta, Denver, Minneapolis, Portland — stratified by labor market tightness. Results indicate that mean weekly income CV is 0.48 for platform workers vs. 0.18 for matched wage employees; 62.4% lack health insurance through platform; 84.2% are UI-ineligible as independent contractors; median worker experiences income shortfall (<$400/week) in 18.4% of weeks (p < 0.001), with CV 0.48 vs. 0.18; 84.2% UI-ineligible; income shortfall 18.4% of weeks as the primary quantitative benchmark. Concordance between primary and confirmatory measurement approaches exceeded 93%, validating the analytical framework. These findings contribute empirically to labor sociology and platform economy research and carry actionable implications for the design of programs and policies targeting portable benefits policy design, UI eligibility reform for independent contractors, and platform labor regulation impact assessment.

100%
Bind a PDF file to preview.

Princeton, New Jersey, United States
Published and Managed by The Princeton Journal of Precollegiate Scholarship Inc.
ISSN: 3143-8423
DOI: 10.67698

Copyright © Princeton Journal of Pre-Collegiate Research. All rights reserved

PJPCR is independently operated and is not affiliated with Princeton University or any of its colleges, departments or programs.

Princeton, New Jersey, United States
Published and Managed by The Princeton Journal of Precollegiate Scholarship Inc.
ISSN: 3143-8423
DOI: 10.67698

Copyright © Princeton Journal of Pre-Collegiate Research. All rights reserved

PJPCR is independently operated and is not affiliated with Princeton University or any of its colleges, departments or programs.

Princeton, New Jersey, United States
Published and Managed by The Princeton Journal of Precollegiate Scholarship Inc.
ISSN: 3143-8423
DOI: 10.67698

Copyright © Princeton Journal of Pre-Collegiate Research. All rights reserved

PJPCR is independently operated and is not affiliated with Princeton University or any of its colleges, departments or programs.