Documents arXiv.org 5 results

"The tech industry's shifting landscape and the growing precarity of its labor force have spurred unionization efforts among tech workers. These workers turn to collective action to improve their working conditions and to protest unethical practices within their workplaces. To better understand this movement, we interviewed 44 U.S.-based tech worker-organizers to examine their motivations, strategies, challenges, and future visions for labor organizing. These workers included engineers, product managers, customer support specialists, QA analysts, logistics workers, gig workers, and union staff organizers. Our findings reveal that, contrary to popular narratives of prestige and privilege within the tech industry, tech workers face fragmented and unstable work environments which contribute to their disempowerment and hinder their organizing efforts. Despite these difficulties, organizers are laying the groundwork for a more resilient tech worker movement through community building and expanding political consciousness. By situating these dynamics within broader structural and ideological forces, we identify ways for the CSCW community to build solidarity with tech workers who are materially transforming our field through their organizing efforts."

This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

"Digital media have become central to how labor unions communicate, organize, and sustain collective action. Yet little is known about how unions' online discourse relates to concrete outcomes such as representation elections. This study addresses the gap by combining National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election data with 158k Facebook posts published by U.S. labor unions between 2015 and 2024. We focused on five discourse frames widely recognized in labor and social movement communication research: diagnostic (identifying problems), prognostic (proposing solutions), motivational (mobilizing action), community (emphasizing solidarity), and engagement (promoting interaction). Using a fine-tuned RoBERTa classifier, we systematically annotated unions' posts and analyzed patterns of frame usage around election events. Our findings showed that diagnostic and community frames dominated union communication overall, but that frame usage varied substantially across organizations. In election cases that unions won, communication leading up to the vote showed an increased use of diagnostic, prognostic, and community frames, followed by a reduction in prognostic and motivational framing after the event--patterns consistent with strategic preparation. By contrast, in lost election cases unions showed little adjustment in their communication, suggesting an absence of tailored communication strategies. By examining variation in message-level framing, the study highlights how communication strategies adapt to organizational contexts, contributing open tools and data and complementing prior research in understanding digital communication of unions and social movements."

This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

"The rapid growth of the digital platform economy is transforming labor markets, offering new employment opportunities with promises of flexibility and accessibility. However, these benefits often come at the expense of increased economic exploitation, occupational segregation, and deteriorating working conditions. Research highlights that algorithmic management disproportionately impacts marginalized groups, reinforcing gendered and racial inequalities while deepening power imbalances within capitalist systems. This study seeks to elucidate the complex nature of digital platform work by drawing on feminist theories that have historically scrutinized and contested the structures of power within society, especially in the workplace. It presents a framework focused on four key dimensions to lay a foundation for future research: (i) precarity and exploitation, (ii) surveillance and control, (iii) blurring employment boundaries, and (iv) colonial legacies. It advocates for participatory research, transparency in platform governance, and structural changes to promote more equitable conditions for digital platform workers."

This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

"The massive shock of the COVID-19 pandemic is already showing its negative effects on economies around the world, unprecedented in recent history. COVID-19 infections and containment measures have caused a general slowdown in research and new knowledge production. Because of the link between R&D spending and economic growth, it is to be expected then that a slowdown in research activities will slow in turn the global recovery from the pandemic. Many recent studies also claim an uneven impact on scientific production across gender. In this paper, we investigate the phenomenon across countries, analysing preprint depositions. Differently from other works, that compare the number of preprint depositions before and after the pandemic outbreak, we analyse the depositions trends across geographical areas, and contrast after-pandemic depositions with expected ones. Differently from common belief and initial evidence, in few countries female scientists increased their scientific output while males plunged."

"Economists have predicted that damages from global warming will be as low as 2.1% of global economic production for a 3$^\circ$C rise in global average surface temperature, and 7.9% for a 6$^\circ$C rise. Such relatively trivial estimates of economic damages -- when these economists otherwise assume that human economic productivity will be an order of magnitude higher than today -- contrast strongly with predictions made by scientists of significantly reduced human habitability from climate change. Nonetheless, the coupled economic and climate models used to make such predictions have been influential in the international climate change debate and policy prescriptions. Here we review the empirical work done by economists and show that it severely underestimates damages from climate change by committing several methodological errors, including neglecting tipping points, and assuming that economic sectors not exposed to the weather are insulated from climate change. Most fundamentally, the influential Integrated Assessment Model DICE is shown to be incapable of generating an economic collapse, regardless of the level of damages. Given these flaws, economists' empirical estimates of economic damages from global warming should be rejected as unscientific, and models that have been calibrated to them, such as DICE, should not be used to evaluate economic risks from climate change, or in the development of policy to attenuate damages."