Who participates in the gig economy?

Gig and non-standard workers are men and women, young and old, live across the country, and reflect the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity of the country. Although there are some patterns in the demographic makeup of this population, there are also a lot of discrepancies between surveys. Much of this inconsistency stems from differences in how each survey defines non-standard work, since different groups are disproportionately represented in different types of arrangements.

Age

Overall, people who engage in non-standard work are slightly more likely to be younger than traditional workers.1 Examining different work arrangements, independent contractors tend to be older, whereas temp-agency workers2 and online-platform workers3 tend to be younger.

Gender

Breakdowns of the gig workforce by gender vary by survey; some report that there are more men than women,4 and others that there are more women than men.5 This inconsistency stems from the fact that men and women participate in different types of non-standard work and in different ways. Men are substantially more likely than women to participate in online labor platforms, and to rely on non-standard work full-time. Women, on the other hand, are more likely to earn supplemental income and to work part-time than men, matching patterns of employment more generally.6 Women are also particularly likely to engage in multi-level or direct marketing7 and to sell goods online.8

Race

In aggregate, the racial composition of the non-standard workforce is similar to that of the overall workforce.9 As with gender, though, examining the different types of non-standard work tells a more nuanced story. Agency temps, on-call, and contract company employees are more likely to be African American or Hispanic, whereas freelancers, consultants, and independent contractors are more likely to be white.10 People of color, then, are more likely to be in non-standard arrangements that are lower paid and offer less flexibility to workers.

Education levels

On most surveys, the non-standard workforce as a whole is slightly more educated than the overall workforce. However, educational attainment varies by specific arrangement. Freelancers are more likely than traditional workers to have a postgraduate degree. Conversely, temp-agency and on-call workers are substantially less likely to have even a high school diploma.11

Geography

Non-standard workers are more likely than traditional workers to live in an urban area.12 There is a higher concentration of these workers in Western states,13 with a particularly high portion in the San Francisco Bay Area, where many online platform companies got their start.14 15

• 1. Edelman Intelligence, “Freelancing in America: 2017,” (New York: Upwork and Freelancers Union, 2017), https://www.upwork.com/i/freelancing-in-america/2017/; MBO Partners, “The State of Independence in America” (Herndon, VA: 2017), https://www.mbopartners.com/state-of-independence. More information about each of these studies in the Research section  of the Data Hub.
• 2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Contingent and Alternative Employment Arrangements – May 2017” (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, 2018), https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/conemp.pdf; Gitis, Ben, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, and Will Rinehart, “The Gig Economy: Research and Policy Implications of Regional, Economic, and Demographic Trends” (Washington, DC: American Action Forum and Aspen Institute’s Future of Work Initiative, 2017), https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/gig-economy-research-policy-implications-regional-economic-demographic-trends/.
• 3. Farrell, Diana, Fiona Greig, and Amar Hamoudi, “The Online Platform Economy in 2018: Drivers, Workers, Sellers, and Lessors” (New York: JPMorgan Chase Institute, 2018), https://www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/institute/document/institute-ope-2018.pdf.
• 4. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Contingent and Alternative Employment Arrangements – May 2017;" Gitis, Holtz-Eakin, and Rinehart, “The Gig Economy;” MBO Partners, “The State of Independence;” Farrell, Greig, and Hamoudi, “The Online Platform Economy."
• 5. Robles, Barbara and Marysol McGee, “Exploring Online and Offline Informal Work: Findings from the Enterprising and Informal Work Activities (EIWA) Survey,” Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2016-089 (Washington, DC: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 2016), https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2016.089; Katz, Lawrence and Alan Krueger, “The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995–2015,” Working Paper 22667 (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2016), http://www.nber.org/papers/w22667.
• 6. Manyika, James, Susan Lund, Jacques Bughin, Kelsey Robinson, Jan Mischke, and Deepa Mahajan, “Independent Work: Choice, Necessity, and the Gig Economy” (Washington, DC: McKinsey Global Institute, 2016), http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/independent-work-choice-necessity-and-the-gig-economy; GAO, “Contingent Workforce.”
• 7. Hyperwallet, “The Future of Gig Work is Female” (San Francisco: 2017), https://www.hyperwallet.com/resources/ecommerce-marketplaces/the-future-of-gig-work-is-female/.
• 8. Etsy, “Crafting the Future of Work: The Big Impact of Microbusinesses” (New York: 2017), https://extfiles.etsy.com/advocacy/Etsy_US_2017_SellerCensus.pdf.
• 9. Edelman Intelligence, “Freelancing in America;” Robles and McGee, “Exploring Online and Offline Informal Work;” Emergent Research, “Dispatches From the New Economy.”
• 10. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Contingent and Alternative Employment Arrangements – May 2017."
• 11. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Contingent and Alternative Employment Arrangements – May 2017;" GAO, “Contingent Workforce;” See also Gitis, Holtz-Eakin, and Rinehart, “The Gig Economy.”
• 12. Edelman Intelligence, “Freelancing in America.”
• 13. Gitis, Holtz-Eakin, and Rinehart, “The Gig Economy;” Edelman Intelligence, “Freelancing in America;” Robles and McGee, “Exploring Online and Offline Informal Work.”
• 14. Farrell, Greig, and Hamoudi, “The Online Platform Economy;" Hathaway, Ian, and Mark Muro, “Tracking the gig economy: New numbers” (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2016), https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-the-gig-economy-new-numbers/.
• 15. Interactive graphs/maps modeling age, race, gender, education level, and geography data from the 2017 Contingent Worker Supplement, May 2017 Current Population Survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics can be found here.

Many of the concepts we use to measure and think about earnings do not neatly apply to non-standard arrangements. By definition, many gigs are paid by the task or project, meaning the idea of an hourly wage does not necessarily apply. In addition, many non-standard workers are responsible for deducting expenses, making their gross earnings incomparable to W-2 wages, on which living wage calculations are based.

Since people turn to non-standard work for vastly different reasons, their financial needs and expectations similarly differ. It’s hard to know when low monthly earnings are the result of low pay and poor work conditions, or the choices of workers who may not rely on gig income to meet basic needs. Furthermore, some forms of non-standard work provide low wages and contribute to financial instability, while others provide much-needed income to smooth volatility from low-quality traditional jobs.1

Despite the challenges of measuring gig-work income, we do have some information about how earnings vary between non-standard arrangements. Freelancers' earning are similar to or above traditional workers, whereas temp-agency and on-call workers tend to have lower earnings.2 In addition, people who work independently to supplement another source of income tend to make more than those who rely entirely on independent work.3

• 1. Farrell, Diana and Fiona Greig, “Paychecks, Paydays, and the Online Platform Economy: Big Data on Income Volatility” (New York: JPMorgan Chase Institute, 2016), https://www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/institute/document/jpmc-institute-volatility-2-report.pdf; Koustas, Dmitri, "Consumption Insurance and Multiple Jobs: Evidence from Rideshare Drivers," Job Market Paper (Berkeley, CA: University of California, January 2018).
• 2. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Contingent and Alternative Employment Arrangements – May 2017;" GAO, “Contingent Workforce;” See also Gitis, Holtz-Eakin, and Rinehart, “The Gig Economy.”
• 3. Prudential, “Gig Workers in America – Profiles, Mindsets, and Financial Wellness” (Newark, NJ: 2017), https://www.prudential.com/media/managed/documents/rp/Gig_Economy_Whitepaper.pdf; Samaschool, "The Future of Work is Independent: How Low-Income Jobseekers Use Independent Work" (San Francisco: 2018), https://www.samaschool.org/future-of-work.

Taken together, these demographic data suggest that the non-standard workforce is deeply segmented. Some work pays particularly well, offers high levels of flexibility and control, and tends to be held by advantaged groups, often on a supplemental basis. Other non-standard work provides low wages, and tends to be held disproportionately by disadvantaged groups, who often rely on it for their primary livelihood.

The gig workforce is not one homogeneous group. Examining the differences of experiences and needs within this population is as important as understanding its significance in relation to traditional workers.