The rise in the last decade of major global companies like Amazon and Uber has redefined our expectations of employment. These online giants are not bound by the same standards as brick-and-mortar employers once were, and this is beginning to spread from industry to industry. 

Rights such as sick pay, holiday pay, maternity and paternity pay — or even being paid for all of the hours completed — are being undermined by a new business model. We’re often told this model relies on ‘flexibility’ — but what it really means is workers on beck and call, increasingly out of control of their working lives, while employers enjoy greater and greater freedom to do as they wish. 

Take a look at Amazon. It has made Jeff Bezos the richest man in the world while, in the UK, there are reports of ambulances called to warehouses on a near-daily basis responding to work related injuries. Stories have also hit the national press of workers sleeping in tents outside warehouses in numerous locations across Britain. 

What hasn’t been reported in as much detail is that this is often to ensure first choice and instant availability for work by desperate staff whose lives are dictated by zero-hour contracts. It’s a situation akin to workers a century ago standing at the gates of a dockyard trying to raise your arm the highest at sunrise. And that’s not even the end of it: earlier this year there were reports of workers carrying empty drink bottles on their hips to urinate, so as not to trigger a warning on their productivity monitor while making the trip to the toilet.

Amazon might be the business that poses the biggest threat to standards as it expands at an unprecedented pace, but there are many more like it. Often these same companies will offer very different terms and conditions for headquarters staff, with onsite bars and gyms, more control over working patterns and package holiday rewards in a bid to attract and retain those who are in charge of managing the company.

This is the two-tier employment model that is being pioneered by the new corporate giants, and it is facilitated by new technologies. Workers are increasingly becoming devalued while the companies who own the algorithms and the data, and the managers who run the systems, are in total control. When you consider that automation will soon replace many jobs altogether, the picture is bleak.

 And this model is spreading across the economy. We have recently seen staff members at ASDA, a long-established company, be held to ransom with an ultimatum: sign away your terms and conditions with a new contract, or be fired. The background to this is the rise in online shopping, self-checkouts and even hand-held ‘smart-scanners,’ all technologies which threaten shop workers’ jobs. Meanwhile well-paid corporate executives in Sainsbury’s and WalMart play games over the future of the company.

The latest employer in the UK to face the wrath of technology is, of course, Royal Mail. The Communications Workers Union are balloting 110,000 postmen and women for industrial action in a bid to hold off the tidal wave of data capture, which the newly installed senior management believe they can use to dictate a postal worker’s speed and round size. The new CEO, Rico Back, was previously in charge of Royal Mail’s European parcel business, GLS, which is alleged to have introduced bogus self-employment and gruelling fourteen-hour days as part of its employment model.

Royal Mail’s new management are also looking to cut down on the number of workers, while simultaneously making moves to dissect the company for franchising. This will introduce a two-tier workforce in Royal Mail, too: those on the original terms and new employees on lesser, more ‘flexible’ terms. If companies such as Royal Mail, who have a history of providing jobs with respectable terms and conditions in the UK, follow this trend, then that leaves very few places where future generations might be able to access decent jobs that could support a family.

The speed with which this change is happening in our workplaces demands a rethink about employment — and decisive action. A motion being put to the Labour Party Conference by the CWU this weekend looks in part to address this. The motion argues that ordinary working people can benefit from automation by cutting the full-time working week in the UK from 5 days to 4, or to 32 gross hours, with no loss of pay. 

This would of course demand tax increases on new technology and machinery introduced by multinationals, but it should not be considered too radical when considering the rapid change in the world of work and financial capacities of these organisations. The shorter working week must also be supported by legislation restricting the use of data against workers. This is a time when we need a comprehensive approach to ensuring new technologies improve the lives of everybody, not just corporate executives and economic elites. 

Think tanks like the New Economics Foundation and Autonomy have made strong cases that cutting the working week could increase productivity, by securing a greater work life balance and ensuring a healthier, happier workforce. Countries like Germany, the Netherlands and the Nordic states, which enjoy some of Europe’s best productivity rates, already have some of the continent’s shortest working weeks.

 YouGov data suggests 63% of Britons support the introduction of a four-day working week. And believe it or not, even corporate giants like Amazon have put a four-day week into practice — but only for their senior staff and managers. If we are to make sure that the benefits of the modern economy go to all workers, we’ll need a Labour Party that fights for a fundamentally different model of employment.