"The Same Tools Work Everywhere": Organizing Gig Workers with Foodsters United

Resource type
Author/contributor
Title
"The Same Tools Work Everywhere": Organizing Gig Workers with Foodsters United
Abstract
Foodsters United, a work-place organizing campaign by Toronto food couriers, shows that, even in the gig economy, the classic organizing methods work. The Foodsters successfully challenged their misclassification as independent contractors, got over 40 per cent of a large workforce to sign union cards, and triggered a union vote that they won with 88.8 per cent support. These victories were tempered by a devastating setback: their employer, Foodora, exited from Canadian markets. Nevertheless, what Foodsters United achieved through work-place organizing sustained its transformation into Gig Workers United, which is organizing all delivery platform workers in Toronto. Although platform companies like Foodora promote the idea that the gig economy is unprecedented, its historical continuities are more important than its discontinuities. This is also true of the work-place organizing in the gig economy. Foodsters United achieved substantial victories, not because they invented new organizing methods but because they adapted the classic methods, in often ingenious ways, to their gig economy work-place. This article is based on interviews with the campaign organizers. It is organized thematically according to classic work-place organizing methods, particularly those developed in the industrial organizing tradition, including organizing conversations, mapping, charting, leader identification, issue identification, and the creation of democratic organizations.
Publication
Labour / Le Travail
Volume
90
Pages
41-84
Date
2022
Language
en
ISSN
1911-4842
Short Title
"The Same Tools Work Everywhere"
Accessed
12/17/22, 5:37 AM
Library Catalog
Project MUSE
Extra
Publisher: The Canadian Committee on Labour History
Citation
Gray, P. C. (2022). “The Same Tools Work Everywhere”: Organizing Gig Workers with Foodsters United. Labour / Le Travail, 90, 41–84. https://doi.org/10.52975/llt.2022v90.003