Phase 4: Implications of microwork futures

Phase 4: Implications of microwork futures

Science and fiction both begin with similar questions: What if? Why? How does it all work? But they focus on different areas of life on earth.

– Margaret Atwood

Implications can future-proof your interventions, products, services, and experiences. In response to the microwork scenarios developed in the first workshop, we applied “What if?” questions.

1. First, workshop participants read and discussed their scenarios. 
2. In workshop two, participants placed themselves in Toronto in 2030.
3. Using their scenario, they discussed “What else might be happening here?”
4. Then they asked, “What if this were true?”

The group discussion that took place during the second microwork session covered eight implications, which are documented below.

Microwork futures 1. Democratic reform

What if political priorities and movements connected to microwork spur on democratic reform?

In scenario 3: the social impact franchise, the government is lagging behind microwork. As a result, democratic reform is a top issue. Then, smaller political parties (micro-parties) would emerge. Movements such as decent work, might emerge and gain traction. Once these movements gain traction, people will come together. Because they’ll want a proactive and responsive government.

The group discussed changing voting and elections systems. But in our scenario, there is frustration with the status quo. Workshop one participants all discussed the government and the fact that it’s lagging behind on microwork. Also, they agreed that the decent work movement would gain traction in the scenarios. 

By 2030, the decent work movement could extend into politics and government. Currently, Toronto has a Fair Wage Office and Fair Wage Policy. Because of the Fair Wage Office, the city can’t do business with vendors who discriminate against workers. Also, initiatives like the Ranked Ballot Initiative of Toronto could gain ground. This initiative could extend to provincial and federal electoral reform. 

Democratic reform arising from microwork futures was the most surprising implication.

Although microwork is non-standard employment many missed this implication. The group felt shifting from jobs to tasks will influence political priorities. Therefore new movements will emerge. 

So parties addressing workforce issues connected to the fourth industrial revolution will likely win. They might also gain ground if they align with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). By 2030, SDG Goal 8 wants to provide full and productive employment and decent work for all.

One person cited Estonia’s e-government as a model for smartphone democracy. Estonia provides 24/7 online access to 99% of its public services. In general, it’s a model for e-government. Also discussed was Dave Meslin, who founded the Ranked Ballot Initiative of Toronto.

Group two considered this implication for strategic perspectives. Yet, they expressed a lot of uncertainty about how democratic reform might work. Although they believe that a “decent work caucus” is possible. More likely, parties would fold issues into their broader platform. So, one line of inquiry was about what kind of reform would catalyze micro-parties. Although the Netherlands was cited as a case in point. Despite no vote-share cutoff for party status, there are no parties that serve one class of worker. 

Instead, group two’s strategic conversation focused on political alignments, ideas, and institutions.

Generated by: The social impact franchise 2030 (Scenario 3)

Drivers: Government is behind + profit before purpose

Principal researcher: Marco Campana

Round 2: Alastair Cheng

Ranking (importance + surprise): 6+17=23

Microwork futures 2. Tax collection

What if microwork transforms the tax system?

In scenario 2 (profitably public), microwork is commonplace. So the group’s main microwork futures question was the following: “how is microwork income taxed?” In voting, this implication ranked the most important of all.

One of the issues grappled with throughout the project is delocalization. Microwork requesters are likely in a different country from the microworker. This matters. It matters because we have a long-established model. The government collects revenue for social welfare via taxes or employer contributions. The group could imagine a world where taxation has adapted to borderless work. But, they agreed that it’s a radical remaking of the current model.

The group contended that microwork currently exists on the fringes of the tax system. The group operated under the assumption that people might not declare microwork income. Although this was not judgement. People acknowledged it that usually a small amount or they were compensated in “points.”

Points compensation is difficult for workers to assess and the government to track. Tax assessment is a lot more difficult when points or other benefits are involved. Because it’s a bartering economy that operates in the margins. Although barter transactions are within the purview of Canada’s Income Tax Act, there are no systems available for assessing barters.

Cryptocurrencies, such as bitcoin, could also be an important role in compensation.

This further confounds the issue. The Canada Revenue Agency treats cryptocurrency as a commodity. So, it’s not employment income (T4 or T4A). It is business income or a capital gain.

Microwork platforms have the power to shift profits to low-tax jurisdictions. This could trigger international tax competitions for platforms. Through uneven enforcement, some participants thought that government subsidizes microwork platforms. Furthermore, requesters have an outsourcing mindset. So they do not feel responsible for contributions or reporting. 

The Mowat Centre report, Working Without a Net, explores the issue of taxation in detail. Across microwork actors, these concerns reveal an underlying set of tensions.

Ask yourself: Who’s the boss?

Although a great Uber driver may make you feel like you are the boss, do you view yourself as their employer?

There are potential problems on all sides. Everyone from the requester and platform to the worker and consumer is affected by this. Because more people will be operating beyond government jurisdiction. Then, tax-free zones will be commonplace. As we automate back-office systems, taxation inefficiencies will abound.

Participants also expressed concern about efficient taxation.

Taxation raised concerns because it might place the reporting burden on microworkers, which creates an opportunity. According to the Canada Revenue Agency, digitization barriers are usually psychological and emotional. Although microworkers could speed things along. By helping citizens navigate tools via video or chat, they would help slower adopters. Then there would be no income tax returns. As one participant noted, it’s already happening in Finland. 

The next round for this implication went to Group four. Their scenario was one where tax collection mechanisms had adapted. This opened the black box on microworking. Yet, they acknowledged that policy formulation is challenging – especially since the government does not have a full end-to-end view of microworkers. (This is discussed in detail in our insight piece, Invisible Gigs.)

The group discussed the challenges of formulating effective tax policy. They also expressed concern that microworkers are vulnerable. Two needs emerged from the discussion about policy and precarity. First, the need for more transparency. E.G: a centralized microworker registry. Second, they identified the need for incentives, which drive information collection. For instance, this could be portable health benefits.

The group also anticipated changes to tax collection approaches. They agreed that we need more flexible strategies for assessing tax responsibility. The group considered microwork factors such as income levels and platformization.

Generated by: Profitably public (Scenario 2)

Drivers: Government is proactive + purpose-driven profit

Principal researcher: Alastair Cheng

Round 2: Goran Matic

Ranking (importance + surprise): 11+10=21

Microwork futures 3. Wicked problems

What if microwork helps solve food systems issues?

Food systems were a topic of discussion that came from scenario 2, profitably public. People with farming experience gave this extra prominence. Then a question emerged: “could microwork change world food production practices and pricing structures?” 

In fact, it gained traction and was voted the most important and surprising. People felt that it could be a case study of how microwork might offer solutions to wicked problems. Ana Matic’s talk on aggregated action and microwork was a source of inspiration.

The group’s discussion in workshop one included microwork in Global South countries. This informed Alyx Lee’s persona, which includes elements of food tech. Besides micro-farming, Alyx helps farmers in the Global South by micro-consulting.

The group agreed that the trend towards different modes of agriculture is necessary. For example, large-scale insect farming. Although it’s not microwork-specific, eating bugs for dinner suggests a radical menu transformation.

Bugs aside, microworkers eat at home far more often than onsite workers. The group imagined community kitchen clusters, more food delivery, and other food concepts. 

The group also felt that microwork-related food redistribution could help people in Toronto. Also, the availability of microwork as supplemental income could diversify micro-farmer incomes. A participant suggested that micro-nutritionist consults could improve health outcomes.

Overall, group one placed a strategic focus on lifestyle.

They saw the increase in delivery services as evidence of how fast lifestyles change. Microworkers are also likely to create a demand for new types of food. To meet the demand, there will be new (undiscovered) types of microwork in the food industry. 

Participants saw continued growth in food-delivery and quick-and-localized everything. This includes growing bio-foods or cultured meat production. These ideas extended to localized cooperatives and distributed micro-farms. 

Experience offerings extend to tracking the origin of each specific piece of food.

With more transparency, people will become more aware. Microwork could offer ways to correct food problems throughout the supply chain.

Additionally, the group discussed the impact on the processes behind food systems. They believe that labour market intelligence could alter the way we value time. 

Also, the group identified market opportunities for microwork; managing, distributing, building, and growing food. They also considered how mechatronics could reduce food waste.

Participants visited the idea of water-waste. They considered the waste by-product of microwork technologies (e.g., server farms). This triggered the following question: “what if purpose-driven profit businesses also tackled our climate?”

The group saw that a non-standard workday (that is, not 9-5) would change the foodservice industry. Their emphasis on preparing for changes generated strategic perspectives on education and training.

Generated by: Profitably public (Scenario 2)

Drivers: Government is proactive + purpose-driven profit

Principal researcher: Alastair Cheng

Round 2: Ana Matic

Ranking (importance + surprise): 6+9=15

Microwork futures 4. Upskilling

What if microwork disrupts education and training?

Scenario one (purpose-aimed conglomerates) tackles microwork issues related to training. The Skills Packs concept is woven throughout the scenario. This is a small task approach to training, offering upgrades-as-you-go.

Participants liked the idea of customizable, training options integrated with microworking. They acknowledged that AI can already learn how you learn. So why not offer up bite-sized micro-training over morning coffee? Human micro-teachers could provide five-minute interactive sessions. 

The shift to micro-education renders learning as a commodity rather than a product or service. Tiny segments offered one at a time, and even better, gamified. This raised the question: “would formal education lag behind micro-forms of training?” With the quickening pace of micro-education, traditional education could face obsolescence. 

Group two expanded on these considerations to generate strategic perspectives. Participants thought this would disrupt education. Broader courses of study would give way to focused snippets. Participants assumed that algorithms would match learning to a specific task. In fact, most of the matching would take place on the microwork platform.

Generated by: Purpose-aimed conglomerates (Scenario 1)

Drivers: Government is behind + purpose-driven profit

Principal researcher: Ana Matic

Round 2: Alastair Cheng

Ranking (importance + surprise): 5+3=8

Microwork futures 5. Creativity

What if creativity is part of microwork?

The story of Wangari Maathai and the Green Belt Movement sparked hope. Scenario one (Purpose-aimed conglomerates) started a discussion about creativity, and ways to include it in microwork. When put to a vote it got a high rating for being surprising.

De-introducing boredom to elevate microwork had enormous potential. Participants agreed creativity leads to purpose, sensemaking and (self) identity. And creative life is possible. Generations of artists and other creatives have known only non-standard employment agreements. Union agreements protect artists, i.e., EQUITY, ACTRA, and Union des artistes.

Then, participants generated ideas about collectives. They discussed how shifts in power could help creativity flourish. To do this, feedback loops would need to go beyond rankings. New power structures could reset the dynamics of requesters and microworkers. Reflection and introspection become bona fide tasks. Participants believed in this competitive advantage and thought it was a compelling case for support. But they were unsure how the current system would reframe the rules. 

Finally, the group discussed the opportunity for new types of workers. People add value to creative approaches that expand an organization’s experience offering.

One idea was that by analyzing current data, we could track instances of creativity. Case in point: platforms are bringing together singers and musicians via their phone. Smule is a popular example:

We hold these truths to be self-evident; All people are born creative; Endowed by our Creator with the inalienable right and responsibility to express our creativity for the sake of ourselves and our world.

– Barbara Marx Hubbard, futurist

Generated by: Purpose-aimed conglomerates (Scenario 1)

Drivers: Government is behind + purpose-driven profit

Principal researcher: Ana Matic

Round 2: Ana Matic

Ranking (importance + surprise): 3+5=8

Microwork futures 6. The experience economy

What if the experience economy raises the profile of microwork?

Scenario 4 (Corporate cooperativism) features mega-corporations and AI. The group believed that humans could become “more human,” and the demand for experience offerings would increase. All of the above are experiences best fulfilled by microworkers.

Then, the group discussed an interesting phenomenon. People prefer automated services. There are situations where people don’t add value. E:G: a check-out process in grocery stores. One participant had not dealt with a cashier in over a year and preferred automated check-out.

A health study of mature adults discussed the preference for dealing with AI and automation-based technologies. Then the group discussed issues related to stigma and privacy, which they considered the most likely contributor to this preference. Yet efficiency fatigue may set in when AI is running the shop. The experience-based offer differentiates companies.

Therefore, including wellness-microworkers could add experience to product decision-making in real-time. Because microworkers could explain alternative options. They could also set up delivery or pick-up options for out-of-stock items. Customers might prefer automated check-outs but value a quick in-person interaction. Google can help, but a person can empathize.

The group expressed concern for the loss of entry-level jobs such as cashier. There is merit in proposing tasks where human participation adds value. Because microworkers could enhance, complement, or even mask, efficiency.

Generated by: Corporate cooperativism (Scenario 4)

Drivers: Government is proactive + profit before purpose

Principal researcher: Goran Matic

Round 2: Goran Matic

Ranking (importance + surprise): 4+4=8

Microwork futures 7. Learning to microwork

What if educational institutions more intentionally prepare people for microwork?

Post-secondary institutions focus on knowledge, but they’re expensive and take a lot of time. In scenario 3 (the social impact franchise), learning syncs to needs in real-time. The scenario offers ways to offer training in non-standard employment future. This ranked as important during voting, but not at all surprising.

In fact, a participant summarized the way employment programs work:

• Businesses have long-standing relationships with education and training partners.
• This includes both educational institutions and not-for-profit service providers. 
• Corporations support the training and skills development they define as necessary. 
• Partners funnel workers to employers, based on employer-specific and identified needs. 

Micro-learning and micro-upskilling could upend the system. In scenario 3, the government will maintain an outdated system for workforce training. Furthermore, the group advocated for flexible models for educating children and adolescents (K-12).

This will prepare young people for a future where non-standard work is the norm. However, there’s already a lot of traction. Educators recognize the need to support attributes such as adaptability, and resilience. Skills acquisition and “learning how to learn” are necessary for this microwork future.

The group discussed the increasing emphasis on efficiency. This is partly to do with content. But training will become easier to develop and provide at scale. Learner incentives also merit attention. Especially if corporations lead the workforce training agenda. With fewer intermediating institutions, more people could get relevant credentials.

The group also cautioned against the narrowing of education to fit workforce needs. Long-term workforce planning requires systems support. Narrow training could also reduce the portability of a worker’s skills. The system fails people if they are only learning how to use a proprietary interface. 

Generated by: The social impact franchise 2030 (Scenario 3)

Drivers: Government is behind + profit before purpose

Principal researcher: Marco Campana

Round 2: Marco Campana

Ranking (importance + surprise): 8+0=8

Microwork futures 8. Automation

What if microwork shapes AI development?

In scenario 2 (profitably public), reforms take personal data out of private hands. First, the group discussed data, a key part of the microwork futures conversation. Then acknowledged that it’s one of the three pillars of AI. The other two are processing power and algorithmic capacity. When we voted, this was the weakest implication of all eight top implications.

The group questioned whether the microwork frontier keeps moving. If AI gets good enough to capture data without human intervention, microwork could become obsolete. Yet, participants acknowledged an inextricable connection between automation and microwork. 

Which is it?

Microwork needs AI to work, and AI is a component of microwork.

The bifurcation of the digital labour market is societal. We view microwork as “disposable.” Yet talent is “invaluable.” This extends to how we talk about work. While we manage talent, we rate tasks. We rate microworkers, along with Uber drivers and Airbnb hosts.

So, if microwork is taskification, is AI the talent or a super-microworker? “Managing AI” is what we say. Or is AI the slave? Note that “slave” is a word that’s used in computing. Technology terms apply to microworkers and values-based statements apply to technology.

Overall, the group’s microwork futures discussion centred on data, taskification, and evaluation. So there are pitfalls with evaluation. Optimizing for short-term task clearance is problematic. The group felt that less tangible indicators fail the institution and the microworker. 

It could also limit the potential for computing. One participant noted that extreme taskification could help AI perform management functions. So they viewed this as a technology opportunity.

When we encounter angst about how AI is “taking over” we base it on the idea that AI is shaping the way we live our lives. But microwork is a human (intelligence) task. So, the general consensus is that it’s up to humans to shape AI development.

Generated by: Profitably public (Scenario 2)

Drivers: Government is proactive + purpose-driven profit

Principal researcher: Alastair Cheng

Round 2: Marco Campana

Ranking (importance + surprise): 6+1=7

Implications contributors: Workshop 2

• Abdul Mawlawi, Researcher, North York Community House
• Adriana Beemans, Director, Inclusive Local Economies Program, Metcalf Foundation
• Alison Darcel
• Ann Holmes, Principal Consultant, Ann Holmes & Associates
• Azhda Mehrpoor, Researcher, North York Community House
• Caralyn Quan, Researcher, North York Community House
• Darcy MacCallum, Director of Family & Wellness, The Neighbourhood Organization
• Diane Dyson, Director, Research & Public Policy, The Neighbourhood Group
• Eliana Trinaistic, Social Impact Manager, MCIS Language Solutions
• Emile Baril, York University
• Gina Lihou, Youth Employment Advisor/Facilitator, St. Stephen’s Community House
• Graham Westwood, CEO, Smashblock
• Han Tran, Director, Bridging Services, ACCES Employment
• Jenn Chan, Consultant, North York Community House
• Jordann Thirgood, Senior Policy & Research Officer, City of Toronto
• Judy Doidge, Director, Partnerships, Social Capital Partners
• Julie Witt, Integrated Learning Experience Coordinator, University of Toronto Scarborough
• Julyata Mekonnen, Community Access Coordinator, The Neighbourhood Group
• Kate Kudelka, Senior Project Office, Futures of Income, Pay & Taxation, Canada Revenue Agency
• Mazher Jaffery, Consultant
• Michael Marville, Business Development & Strategic Relationships, Progress Career Planning Institute
• Michi Komori, Consultant
• Rosemary Richings, Rosemary Richings Content Creation & Strategy
• Rowena Power, Director, Online Services, ACESS Employment
• Stephanie Kwan, Innovation Analyst
• Stephanie Mohamed, Victoria Park Hub
• Sukanta Goswami
• Susan Brown, Senior Policy Advisor, Economic Development and Culture, City of Toronto
• Tinashe Mafukidze, Executive Director, Toronto Workforce Innovation Group
• Yasmeen Awadh, Gig worker