Measuring employment precariousness in gig jobs: A pilot study among food couriers in Brussels1.
Elief Vandevenne, Christophe Vanroelen
PMID 37742677WHAT IT FOUND
Gig food couriers in Brussels scored 0.561 on a new 0 to 1 precarity questionnaire.
Couriers with worse well-being also reported more precarious work, but the study was too small to show clear differences by age, sex, education, migration status, or job type.
Key findings
01The adapted EPRES-gw scale showed a mean precarity score of 0.561, with workplace rights and undesirable working times highest and vulnerability lowest.
02Couriers with higher overall precarity also reported poorer well-being, with a reported correlation of 0.373.
03Couriers working only as food couriers had a higher mean precarity score (0.608), but the study did not find statistically significant differences between demographic or socio-economic groups.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample was a convenience sample of Brussels platform-based food couriers, not a representative sample. The quantitative analysis used 99 respondents after imputing missing dimension scores, and the authors say the sample had limited statistical power. The study was cross-sectional, so it cannot show that precarious work causes poor well-being. The instrument did not fully distinguish food couriers for whom this is a main job from students or side-job workers by different coding. The comparison with employee and transport worker EPRES scores should be interpreted with caution because the scales differ and the sample is small. The paper is a pilot instrument study, not a clinical trial, so it does not test whether any therapy or workplace intervention improves health.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the association between higher precarity scores and poorer well-being as proof that precarious gig work causes poor well-being. The study is cross-sectional, uses a convenience sample, and does not test any therapy outcome.