Hacking platform capitalism: the case of domestic workers on South Africa’s SweepSouth platform

Q1 Social Sciences Gender and Development Pub Date : 2022-09-02 DOI:10.1080/13552074.2022.2136838
Shaeera Kalla
{"title":"Hacking platform capitalism: the case of domestic workers on South Africa’s SweepSouth platform","authors":"Shaeera Kalla","doi":"10.1080/13552074.2022.2136838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In South Africa, digital labour platforms for domestic work sit at the nexus of formal and informal labour, apartheid geospatial planning, and persisting racialised accessibility to labour markets. Domestic work remains one of the most important sources of income for black African women and its demand is only growing in the digital age. However, the rising demand has not reversed the devaluation of paid domestic work (Ally 2009). The devaluation of paid domestic work is both an extension of the devaluation of women’s unpaid reproductive labour under global capitalism (Fraser 2017) and bottom-of-the-pyramid models of development which redeploy the jobless as entrepreneurs in the making (Dolan and Rajak 2018). Since the end of apartheid in 1994, South Africa has made significant strides towards recognising domestic work as work but while the legal frameworkmay have changed, social attitudeswhich devalue domestic work persist. There are over onemillion domestic workers in SouthAfrica.Despite their contribution to the economy – through carework for children, the elderly, the sick, as well as providing psychosocial emotional and intimate support and labour – domestic workers are systematically exploited, and viewed as ‘unskilled’. Platforms create or disrupt markets by bringing together different users to interact and transact. Supporters of digital labour platforms argue that they offer opportunities to ‘bring informal workers out of the shadows and into the mainstream’ (Grunewald 2017). However, Meagher (2018) posits that the rise of platforms has exacerbated a ‘broken social contract’which used to be characterised by stable employment and social welfare provision but has been replaced by ‘an emergent regime of accumulation that encompasses a new capital– labour relation that institutionalises informal work’ (Ettlinger 2017, 69). In sub-Saharan Africa though, the majority have never been formally employed and therefore precarity and informality are the norm rather than the exception (Meagher 2018). SweepSouth is the first Silicon Valley venture capital-backed South African start-up, describing itself as the ‘Uber-for-cleaning services’, and claiming to create employment, with its marketing and branding aimed at poor black African women. Hill Collins and Kunushevci (2017) argue that when women reject the representations of themselves as","PeriodicalId":35882,"journal":{"name":"Gender and Development","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gender and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2022.2136838","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In South Africa, digital labour platforms for domestic work sit at the nexus of formal and informal labour, apartheid geospatial planning, and persisting racialised accessibility to labour markets. Domestic work remains one of the most important sources of income for black African women and its demand is only growing in the digital age. However, the rising demand has not reversed the devaluation of paid domestic work (Ally 2009). The devaluation of paid domestic work is both an extension of the devaluation of women’s unpaid reproductive labour under global capitalism (Fraser 2017) and bottom-of-the-pyramid models of development which redeploy the jobless as entrepreneurs in the making (Dolan and Rajak 2018). Since the end of apartheid in 1994, South Africa has made significant strides towards recognising domestic work as work but while the legal frameworkmay have changed, social attitudeswhich devalue domestic work persist. There are over onemillion domestic workers in SouthAfrica.Despite their contribution to the economy – through carework for children, the elderly, the sick, as well as providing psychosocial emotional and intimate support and labour – domestic workers are systematically exploited, and viewed as ‘unskilled’. Platforms create or disrupt markets by bringing together different users to interact and transact. Supporters of digital labour platforms argue that they offer opportunities to ‘bring informal workers out of the shadows and into the mainstream’ (Grunewald 2017). However, Meagher (2018) posits that the rise of platforms has exacerbated a ‘broken social contract’which used to be characterised by stable employment and social welfare provision but has been replaced by ‘an emergent regime of accumulation that encompasses a new capital– labour relation that institutionalises informal work’ (Ettlinger 2017, 69). In sub-Saharan Africa though, the majority have never been formally employed and therefore precarity and informality are the norm rather than the exception (Meagher 2018). SweepSouth is the first Silicon Valley venture capital-backed South African start-up, describing itself as the ‘Uber-for-cleaning services’, and claiming to create employment, with its marketing and branding aimed at poor black African women. Hill Collins and Kunushevci (2017) argue that when women reject the representations of themselves as
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
黑客平台资本主义:南非SweepSouth平台上家政工人的案例
在南非,家庭工作的数字劳动力平台处于正式和非正规劳动力、种族隔离地理空间规划和持续的劳动力市场种族化准入之间的联系。家务劳动仍然是非洲黑人妇女最重要的收入来源之一,在数字时代,家务劳动的需求只会不断增长。然而,不断增长的需求并没有扭转带薪家政工作的贬值趋势(Ally,2009年)。有偿家务劳动的贬值既是全球资本主义下女性无偿生殖劳动贬值的延伸(Fraser 2017),也是将失业者重新部署为创业者的金字塔底层发展模式(Dolan和Rajak,2018)。自1994年种族隔离结束以来,南非在承认家务劳动为工作方面取得了重大进展,但尽管法律框架可能已经改变,但贬低家务劳动的社会态度依然存在。南非有100多万家政工人。尽管家庭佣工通过照顾儿童、老人和病人,以及提供心理、情感和亲密支持和劳动力,为经济做出了贡献,但他们仍受到系统性剥削,被视为“非技术性”。平台通过将不同的用户聚集在一起进行互动和交易来创建或扰乱市场。数字劳工平台的支持者认为,它们提供了“将非正规工人从阴影中带入主流”的机会(Grunewald 2017)。然而,Meagher(2018)认为,平台的兴起加剧了“破碎的社会契约”,这种契约过去以稳定的就业和社会福利为特征,但现在被“一种新兴的积累制度所取代,这种积累制度包括一种新的资本-劳动关系,将非正规工作制度化”(Ettlinger 2017,69)。然而,在撒哈拉以南非洲,大多数人从未正式就业,因此不稳定和非正式是常态,而不是例外(Meagher 2018)。SweepSouth是第一家由硅谷风险投资支持的南非初创公司,自称为“清洁服务的优步”,并声称创造就业机会,其营销和品牌针对贫穷的非洲黑人女性。Hill Collins和Kunushevci(2017)认为,当女性拒绝将自己作为
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Gender and Development
Gender and Development Social Sciences-Gender Studies
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Since 1993, Gender & Development has aimed to promote, inspire, and support development policy and practice, which furthers the goal of equality between women and men. This journal has a readership in over 90 countries and uses clear accessible language. Each issue of Gender & Development focuses on a topic of key interest to all involved in promoting gender equality through development. An up-to-the minute overview of the topic is followed by a range of articles from researchers, policy makers, and practitioners. Insights from development initiatives across the world are shared and analysed, and lessons identified. Innovative theoretical concepts are explored by key academic writers, and the uses of these concepts for policy and practice are explored.
期刊最新文献
‘If You Want Peace, Create Peace’: women’s rights organisations as operatives of hybrid peace in the former Yugoslavia Engendering injustice: gendered lawfare in Guatemala Suspicion: Vaccines, Hesitancy, and the Affective Politics of Protection in Barbados Ekla Chalo Re: a tribute to Ms. Mary Roy Funding schemes and support towards gender-based violence prevention and sexual and reproductive health in Lebanon: a critical analysis of their impacts on human rights defenders
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1