For Black people specifically, while gig work has helped build wealth, it hasn’t measurably closed the racial wealth gap and it is hurting work-life balance. The Black community is often leveraging gig work on top of full-time work and now, in the age of surveillance wages, even this good deed does not go unpunished. This story about Nicole drives home the point:
Under surveillance wage systems, different people may be paid different wages for largely the same work, and individual workers cannot predict their incomes over time. These pay practices—especially those that rely on panoptic worker surveillance and on algorithmic intelligence or machine learning systems—invert the deeply held maxim that long, hard work steers toward higher wages and economic security. Not only has pay for app-controlled jobs, such as Nicole’s work for Lyft, decreased over time, suggesting shifting compensation brackets within firms, but industry research also affirms what workers like her have described: People who work longer hours are paid less per hour.
This didn’t happen by accident. It’s what happens when an economy limits options for some people, then funnels them into systems that take advantage of that lack of choice. And now reporting shows these systems are going even further — using data to predict what some experts call a “desperation wage,” the lowest amount someone will accept based on their behavior.
This is a system designed to extract as much work as possible for as little pay as possible.
And it’s not just happening in gig work. Similar systems are being used to set rent and adjust prices for goods and services in real time. The same idea applies: use data to figure out what someone will tolerate, then charge just below that or pay just above it.
The impact of this isn’t felt equally. When you combine higher unemployment, lower wealth, and fewer protections, you get a system where some people have less room to say no — and are more likely to be taken advantage of. And because this happens through code rather than announcements, it often goes unnoticed. At the same time, working people have very little power in these systems.
Most can’t negotiate their pay. They can’t see how decisions are made. And if something changes, there’s often no one to talk to and no clear way to challenge it. The message is simple: take it or leave it. And for many, leaving it isn’t an option.
That’s why we’re starting to see pushback. Working people are demanding more transparency. Some are organizing. New models are emerging that promise fairer pay and more control.
But these changes are happening because people are speaking up — not because companies chose to act.
So what needs to happen next is clear. If companies are going to use algorithms to shape pay and access to work, those systems should be transparent. People should know how their pay is calculated.
Working people should be able to see how much of each transaction goes to them — and how much the company keeps. There should be rules that prevent companies from using personal data to quietly lower pay for some people while others earn more for the same work. And working people should have the ability to organize and push back.
Because this isn’t just about gig work. It’s about whether we allow companies to rewrite the rules of the economy — or whether we demand a system that works for the people in it.
Technology should make work more stable, more fair, and more predictable. Right now, it’s doing the opposite. And that’s not inevitable.
It’s a choice.
