Introduction
Since the 1990s, new forms of work organisation which have emerged in Uruguay differ from traditional labour structures in the country. One such form can be traced back to the rise of digital platforms, driven by technological advancements integrated into the economy and market. These platforms introduced informal and flexible working arrangements, where workers must meet targets or objectives within a work process that is closely measured and controlled by algorithms.
In the analysis of the transformation of work in contemporary capitalism, various critical perspectives have addressed labour precarisation and flexibility, which have been driven by neoliberalism. In this context, digital technologies, particularly platforms, have become key infrastructures in the reorganisation of work. This phenomenon, known as the platformisation of work, is closely linked to the historical trajectory of exploitation and precarisation in Latin America.
Recent studies highlight the transformative impact of digital platforms on labour dynamics, noting that these companies redefine employment relationships by shifting both production costs and risks onto workers through algorithms that allocate and supervise tasks. Furthermore, they promote an entrepreneurial culture that deepens deregulation and the fragmentation of work. Within this framework, digital technologies are seen to enable new forms of labour exploitation while perpetuating income instability and uncertainty for workers. According to Amorim et al. (Reference Amorim, Bridi and Moreira Cardoso2022), these transformations also reinforce the invisibility of employment relationships and abstract forms of control. From the perspective of platform business models and their impact on labour relations, the intrinsic characteristics of these platforms—such as their reliance on network effects, algorithmic management, and regulatory arbitrage—shape both working conditions and the possibilities for collective resistance (Vandaele Reference Vandaele, Haidar and Keune2021).
A common aspect of analyses on digital platforms is that work organisation takes on specific forms that distinguish it from both classical models of work organisation and the so-called new forms of labour organisation. Algorithmic management plays a central role in this process, as it assigns, optimises, and evaluates workers’ tasks through automated systems. Abílio (Reference Abílio2020) argues that this system reinforces the concealment of employment relationships through codified organisational structures, while Woodcock (Reference Woodcock2016) highlights the role of algorithms in the continuous surveillance and assessment of workers, creating an illusory sense of autonomy.
Other analyses focus on workers’ countervailing power, that is, the ability of platform workers, such as delivery couriers, to organise and challenge the inequalities inherent in this business model. Although platforms present themselves as neutral technological intermediaries, they, in fact, operate as actors with a high degree of control over the workforce. This control is primarily exerted through algorithms designed to optimise operations but which simultaneously precarise work by fragmenting it into individual tasks, making it more difficult for couriers, for example, to build solidarity networks (Vandaele Reference Vandaele, Haidar and Keune2021).
Regarding working conditions, studies such as those conducted by the global Fairwork Project (2023) assess key dimensions such as pay, contracts, management, and representation in digital labour platforms, advocating for minimum standards to ensure fairness and dignity in employment. In Uruguay, a recent report evaluated five platforms, revealing significant findings: while SoyDelivery stood out with a score of 7 due to its efforts to improve working conditions, Rappi and Cabify scored only 1 point, and PedidosYa and Uber received no points. These findings highlight the need for stricter regulations, improved labour standards, and greater worker representation.
Another highly relevant issue is the challenge of collective action and labour mobilisation in the context of the platformisation of work. Johnston and Land-Kazlauskas (Reference Johnston and Land-Kazlauskas2018) highlight the importance of organisational experiences in a transformed labour market, while Míguez and Diana Menéndez (Reference Miguez and Diana Menéndez2023) emphasise visibility as a key aspect of collective organisation. In Latin America, the response of traditional trade unions to the emergence of platform workers’ demands has shown different trends, depending on trade union traditions and the national political context (Salas et al Reference Salas, Delfino and Véras de Oliveira2024; Amorim et al Reference Amorim, Bridi and Moreira Cardoso2022; Neffa Reference Neffa, Neffa, Kohen, Henry, Korinfeld, Lualdi and Padrón2020).
Some studies that significantly contribute to the field of collective action among platform workers address, albeit from different perspectives, the challenges and possibilities of organisation in platform capitalism (Srnicek Reference Srnicek2018). Within this framework, structural barriers faced by platform workers in organising are recognised, including labour precariousness, spatial and legal fragmentation, and algorithmic control, aspects that limit the possibilities for collective action and exacerbate labour inequalities (Grohmann et al Reference Grohmann, Mendonça and Woodcock2022; Dif-Pradalier et al Reference Dif-Pradalier, Jammet, Tiberghien, Bignami and Cuppini2023; Vandaele Reference Vandaele, Haidar and Keune2021). These studies agree that digital platforms use these dynamics to reinforce workers’ isolation, making it difficult to create strong solidarity bonds. They emphasise that, despite these limitations, workers have developed new forms of collective organisation, adapted to the digital and globalised environment. Examples include the use of social media to coordinate protests (Grohmann et al Reference Grohmann, Mendonça and Woodcock2022), the construction of urban community networks (Dif-Pradalier et al Reference Dif-Pradalier, Jammet, Tiberghien, Bignami and Cuppini2023), and the exploitation of structural vulnerabilities in platforms to push for changes (Vandaele Reference Vandaele, Haidar and Keune2021).
Another relevant aspect is the centrality of cities as spaces where the dynamics of platform work and collective action converge. Both Grohmann et al (Reference Grohmann, Mendonça and Woodcock2022) and Dif-Pradalier et al (Reference Dif-Pradalier, Jammet, Tiberghien, Bignami and Cuppini2023) emphasise the role of urban spaces as places of physical gathering and resistance, while Vandaele (Reference Vandaele, Haidar and Keune2021) highlights how urban economies shape both the expansion of platforms and opportunities for organisation. Although there are some divergences, particularly in terms of the scope of the studies, these analyses agree in pointing out that collective action must not only adapt to the specificities of platform work but must also consider the intersections between the digital, urban, and political spheres.
In the case of Uruguay, the changes in the productive sector associated with digital platforms have generated forms of collective action and labour identities that are embedded in the country’s institutional context, which has also changed in recent years (Márquez et al Reference Márquez, Escoto, Gonsales and Mariatti2022). The end of the so-called ‘progressive era’ (2005–2019) and the rise to power of a multiparty bloc dominated by the ‘herrerist’ faction of the National Party, with a clear neoliberal inspiration, introduced changes in labour relations and collective bargaining that aligned with the productive changes. This new institutional framework negatively affects the collective action possibilities of digital platform workers, exacerbating the tensions inherent in these new forms of work organisation.
Following the health crisis caused by Covid-19, research on platform work in Latin America, particularly on platforms like Rappi, Glovo, PedidosYa, iFood, among others, has grown significantly. Most of this research has focused on the study of delivery workers (Haidar et al Reference Haidar, Diana Menéndez and Arias2020; Braga and Santana, Reference Braga and Santana2020; Bridi et al Reference Bridi, Véras De Oliveira and Mora2024; Delfino and Claussen Reference Delfino and Claussen2023; Díaz Reference Díaz2022; Míguez and Diana Menéndez Reference Miguez and Diana Menéndez2023; Ortega Reference Ortega2023; Sánchez and Maldonado Reference Sánchez, Maldonado, Kruskaya and Salazar2020). In contrast, the present study focuses on the processes and working conditions of platform workers who do not engage in delivery tasks. Rather, it focuses on workers in the operational and support sectors of the platform PedidosYa, a platform company defined as a leader in delivery and quick commerce, owned by the German multinational Delivery Hero. The study will examine the union experience of the Unión de Trabajadores de PedidosYa (UTP), focusing on the specific characteristics of the work organisation forms, the institutional framework in which collective actions take place, and the strategies employed by the UTP. The convergence of these dimensions poses significant limitations and challenges to the possibilities of union organisation for this collective.
Research methodology
The results presented were developed within the framework of the R&D Project ‘La construcción de identidades laborales en el trabajo no clásico’ approved in 2022 by the Sectorial Commission for Scientific Research of the University of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay (CSIC, UDELAR).
The research design was open, based on a qualitative methodology that gathered information from non-directed or unstructured interviews, applied for exploratory purposes, and in-depth or semi-structured interviews, conducted to guide a logical discourse based on a fixed framework of minimally ordered and formulated questions. This design was chosen based on the research objectives: describing work processes from the workers’ experience, analysing the processes of their subjective configuration, and describing their collective practices.
The fieldwork focused on conducting interviews aimed at addressing different dimensions according to the following themes:
-
Description of work and labour conditions: The interviews explored the nature of the work performed, the type of contract, the relationship between workers and employers, and experiences of control in the work environment.
-
Conflicts and individual and collective strategies: The perceived conflicts were examined, along with individual and collective responses to them and actions taken to address these issues.
-
Labour identities and social relations: The research investigated the perception of a labour collective, union membership, relationships with colleagues, and common identifications.
-
Impact of working conditions on subjectivity and the body: There was reflection on how discomfort, conflict, and work pressure affect workers’ identities.
-
Solidarity and cooperation: The interviews considered supportive relationships between workers, identifying potential gender differences.
-
Impact of political and regulatory changes: Finally, the research delved into how recent government policies influence the work environment and relations with workers.
Within the framework of the research, 25 interviews were conducted in 2022 and 2023, through which information was gathered on the mentioned dimensions. The sample selection criterion was intentional, aiming for representativeness within the operational sector of PedidosYa. The interviews were mostly conducted virtually with workers from the following areas of the company:
-
Back office, content loading for the pages of businesses affiliated with PedidosYa
-
Back office supervisor
-
Customer support (commercial establishments)
-
Operations sector
-
Support for riders
-
Data analysis
The opinions of union representatives were also gathered, having been identified through informal meetings with trade union organisations. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using the Atlas.ti software based on the following codes: productive organisation; spontaneous conflict; individual strategies; collective strategies; institutionalised conflict; role of the union actor (impulses and brakes in socio-political contexts, legitimacy of the union actor, claims platform, relationship with companies, relationship with outsourcing, among others).
In this paper, we present the main findings of this empirical research, which allows us to compare and establish comparisons with the realities of other Latin American countries and to integrate this comparison into the broader theoretical discussion on this topic.
The organisation of work in the company PedidosYa
Like most Latin American countries, Uruguay has undergone processes of productive restructuring aimed at adapting its economy to the transformations of international markets. These transformations, driven by foreign investments and changes in production models, led to the emergence of new forms of labour organisation, among which the development of digital platforms such as PedidosYa stands out.
Founded in Uruguay in 2009, PedidosYa developed autonomously, supported by public authorities such as the Ministry of Industry and Energy and national innovation and development agencies, until 2014, when it became part of the German multinational Delivery Hero. It has since consolidated itself as one of the leading intermediary platforms in Latin America, dominating the quick commerce segment. Its business model is based on connecting consumers, affiliated businesses, and delivery workers through digital technologies, promoting a fast and efficient consumer experience. However, its nature reflects the characteristics of platform capitalism, which combines technological innovation with dynamics of labour precariousness and outsourcing of risks.
Through its integration with the German multinational Delivery Hero in 2014, PedidosYa adopted a global operational model that prioritises territorial expansion and service diversification but also deepens labour segmentation based on costs and risks. While areas such as technology and development concentrate on skilled work with higher labour guarantees, sectors like logistics are fully outsourced. This means that delivery workers, a key component of the service, bear operational costs, face pressures from control algorithms, and work under precarious conditions. While PedidosYa promotes a corporate culture called #CoolturaPeYa, presenting it as an innovative and collaborative corporate identity, this culture conceals tensions inherent in the model. On the one hand, it promotes values such as transparency, teamwork, and continuous learning; on the other hand, it perpetuates a work organisation based on versatility, where employees are required to take on multiple predefined tasks, with little room for creativity, and always under algorithmic control. It also erodes horizontal communication among workers through the platform’s functioning designed to inhibit any resistance process. In this framework, relations of subordination and exploitation are presented in a depersonalised manner, masked by metrics of productivity and efficiency. The analysis of the different interviews carried out shows that the company structures its internal activities in several areas, with differentiated roles that allow the execution of its business model. The main ones are:
-
Technology and development: This sector is essential for the maintenance and improvement of the digital platform, including the mobile app and website. It is composed of engineers, programmers, and software design specialists. Their main task is to ensure that the technological interface is efficient and supports the intermediary functionalities and other services.
-
Marketing and commercial: This team is responsible for acquiring new customers and bringing in affiliated businesses. Roles in this area include digital marketing specialists, sales executives, and commercial representatives, whose role is to consolidate the company’s presence in local markets.
-
Operational and support tasks (online and offline): This group of salaried employees has basic labour rights guarantees (holiday pay, leave, etc.) supported by the contract between the company and the workers. Regarding tasks, there is a wide range of service-related duties: entering content on websites, creating product campaigns indicating prices, delivery areas, etc. In this case, algorithm-mediated work is involved in performing these tasks on a platform that organises the work, called Backoffice. Two groups can be distinguished within this sector:
-
Customer support: This group manages complaints from users and businesses through chats and digital channels. These workers must handle not only technical tasks but also intense ‘emotional management’ by responding to dissatisfied customers.
-
Supervisors or team leaders: They act as intermediaries between strategic and operational areas, with relative autonomy in organising their time, though they are subject to performance metrics.
-
-
Finance and Business Intelligence: These strategic areas are responsible for financial management and data analysis. They involve activities such as budget planning, market analysis, and process optimisation, enabling data-driven decision-making.
-
Human Resources: This area centralises policies regarding recruitment, training, and supervision of direct employees. According to collected testimonies, this area faces particular challenges due to the variety of working arrangements, including both dependent relationships as well as temporary contracts and outsourced services.
-
Logistics: Outsourced workers contracted through RepartosYa. Their tasks involve physical movement and face-to-face interaction with customers. This group faces more precarious working conditions, with limited access to benefits, payment based on specific tasks, and constant pressure to meet algorithmic metrics.
Within the activities carried out for the platform, some require higher qualifications, such as the programming processes related to the development of the application interfaces, while others are less qualified and more precarious, such as the operational support for clients (retail outlets), application users, and workers associated with the platform who are dedicated to making deliveries.
In labour relations where consumers of services are directly involved, as is the case in the operational and support sectors, interactions with them are mediated by the platform’s back office, although communication occurs directly through chats. This often involves managing complaints related to service quality. In this context, the emotional management dimension becomes relevant due to the treatment workers receive from customers. Those responsible for resolving complaints must face situations where the goal is not only to solve an issue but also to manage the emotions of the customer, such as anger, frustration, or rage, which often accompany the complaint. Although managing these emotions is a fundamental part of the task, it is not formally recognised as a necessary skill for the job, despite its decisive influence on the customer’s evaluation of the service.
The presence of various platforms in the management and organisation of work within PedidosYa creates a versatile worker who is responsible for performing multiple tasks simultaneously in different digital environments. In this regard, the greatest transformations occur in the area of work organisation and management. However, this versatile worker figure reflects the multiple demands that contribute to the precarisation of work, as was confirmed in the interviews conducted. Despite the differences and specificity of the tasks, what they have in common is that they are predefined, involve simple resolutions, and leave little room for creativity. The direct point of contact is the customer, while the most apparent control is exercised by a supervisor who works with small teams, communicating with them to organise the work, respond to unforeseen events, and ensure that the work is completed on time. In this sense, performance evaluations are based on specific productivity criteria. Thus, it is a work organisation characterised by the abstract control of digital, anonymous, and impersonal mechanisms, where relationships of subordination and exploitation are masked by algorithms.
Algorithmic control and its flaws
Service platform companies capture and utilise large volumes of data (from workers, consumers, and businesses), using algorithmic codes as fundamental elements for their operation and reproduction. A central component in the organisation of work on these platforms is the implementation of algorithmic management. In the field of labour relations, aspects such as performance evaluations, automated decision-making, and the acceptance or rejection of tasks, among other actions, are mediated by this type of management. Lee et al (Reference Lee, Kusbit, Metsky and Dabbish2015) define ‘algorithmic management’ as a system in which workers are assigned, optimised, and evaluated through codes and data tracking. This process conceals labour control under a new form of organisation.
Woodcock (Reference Woodcock2016) points out that platform work combines the application of strict control and supervision mechanisms with the denial of formal recognition of the employment relationship, thus deepening class divisions and granting greater power to capital. The automation of supervision mechanisms gives rise to an ‘electronic panopticon,’ in which workers are aware that their actions are being recorded and analysed by algorithms. However, they remain unaware of both the specific functioning of these mechanisms and their implementation, and they have no rights over the information they generate.
Among workers, there is a shift from external control to its progressive internalisation. This gives rise to a disciplined worker who individually manages the frustration and anxiety that come with working under pressure. These processes develop in the characteristic solitude of their working days, where virtual interactions prevail, and experiences become increasingly individualised. The latter are turned into an exclusive ‘responsibility’ of the worker, thus transcending the classical concept of ‘consent’ proposed by Burawoy (Reference Burawoy1979) to become internalised as a disciplinary mechanism that permeates the worker’s life.
Algorithmic control reinforces the classic technical control described by Edwards (Reference Edwards1979), with the particularity of being fully embedded in technology. This makes it a mechanism perceived as dehumanised and absolute, leaving little room for negotiations or updates to agreements - common aspects of traditional labour relations. However, these forms of control have cracks that workers can identify or create through their work experience. These spaces of resistance, though limited, emerge as responses to the exhausting nature of control. Thus, the perception of this ‘absolute and dehumanised’ control creates specific conditions for the emergence of fissures that allow workers to challenge the regulated exercise of their labour.
In this context, according to Palermo et al (Reference Palermo, Radetich and Reygadas2020), workers are not only subjects of production but also objects of a digital control system that monitors their behaviour, detects and records transgressions, tracks delays, and measures their productivity. This control also includes the pressure to meet predefined metrics based on production units linked to assigned tasks. The constant demand for productivity, measured and supervised by algorithms, conceals the direct exercise of power and accelerates production times in a less confrontational manner than traditional control methods. The depersonalisation of control shifts responsibility onto the workers, who, at least initially, regulate the pressure to meet targets individually rather than negotiating with a direct supervisor.
Some interpretations that see these forms of control solely as obstacles to collective action overlook their potential to generate conflict. In fact, the strengthening of control can drive the emergence of resistance and collective organisation. The experience of PedidosYa’s technical workers illustrates how resistance can arise even in restrictive contexts. However, such resistance must adopt innovative practices, moving away from traditional forms of organisation and protest. Within this framework, it is important to highlight a series of trade union struggles led by the UTP, which have resulted in significant achievements for workers, as detailed later.
According to De Stefano (Reference De Stefano2016), trade union organisation in platform work has emerged at a global level in contexts where the activity is not entirely digital but includes physical and geographically localised dimensions. These spatial dimensions provide specific conditions that facilitate trade union organisation. Factors such as face-to-face encounters between workers, the existence of interaction spaces, and the development of shared consciousness and identity are identified by the author as elements that strengthen collective action. While De Stefano acknowledges that this hypothesis has not been sufficiently investigated, in this article we will analyze how these dimensions operate in the Uruguayan case, taking into account a political and institutional context that also imposes limitations and challenges.
Under these conditions, the organisation and unionisation of digital platform workers represent a significant challenge, especially considering the further changes in work organisation brought about by the pandemic. As a result, collective agreements in this sector are virtually non-existent. However, there is a growing number of struggles led by these workers, and a range of trade union actions that promote self-organisation (Köhler Reference Köhler2020, Reference Köhler2022). In this regard, the trade union experience of PedidosYa workers is particularly relevant. Before analysing that experience, it is necessary to contextualise the institutional and political framework in which these actions have occurred.
The institutional and political context
In 2005, following the economic crisis of 2002, the Frente Amplio took office in Uruguay for the first time. This left-wing coalition, formed in 1971, has remained united to the present day. The left-wing government implemented a series of measures to revitalise labour relations, including the reactivation of the Superior Wage Council as a representative body for business and trade union leadership, the reinstatement of Wage Councils – which had been abolished since 1990 – and the establishment of a Tripartite Council for the Rural Sector, which had never before had a forum for discussing labour issues in this key sector of the country’s economy.
The collective bargaining framework implemented from 2005 onwards overcame many of the historical limitations of previous models. The enactment of new laws, most notably Law No. 18566 on Collective Bargaining, which replaced the old 1943 Wage Councils Law, created the conditions for developing a more robust and lasting system of labour relations. The wage negotiation process initiated in 2005 encouraged trade union organisation and allowed for better regulation of their participation in wage negotiations, also incorporating rural workers and domestic employees into the process. It also strengthened business and professional organisations by fostering the development of participatory spaces for the election of legitimate representatives of these sectors’ interests (Pucci Reference Pucci, Neffa and de la Garza2020). While this model of labour relations improved regulation and historical functioning, it remained vulnerable to political changes and the potential return of neoliberal policies, as occurred in the 2019 presidential elections.
The government that took office in 2020 did not dismantle centralised collective bargaining abruptly, as had happened in 1990, but instead chose a gradual approach through the enactment of two laws. The first was Law 19.899 on Urgent Consideration, which in Article 392 prohibits occupations in workplaces by guaranteeing the right of non-striking workers and company management to access work establishments freely. This provision inhibits the ability of the labour movement to use an important tool of struggle in contexts where employers do not recognise the trade union movement, a situation common in rural sector workplaces. The second legal mechanism was the enactment of Law 20145 on 17 May 2023, which reformed the collective bargaining law, No. 18566 of 11/09/2009, enacted by the progressive government of the Frente Amplio. This modification addressed the concerns raised by the International Labour Organization (ILO) following complaints made by Uruguayan business sectors, aiming to replace tripartite wage negotiations with a form of bilateral negotiation involving only employers and workers, excluding the State.
In this general institutional context, an attempt was made to enact specific legislation for the digital platform sector. In September 2022, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security submitted to Parliament a Bill aimed at regulating the activity of digital platforms in response to the legal gap recognised in this new form of labour activity (Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social 2022). The Bill sought to establish minimum levels of protection for labour activities in these productive spaces without addressing the core issue of the debate: whether platform work is autonomous or dependent. In line with the business discourse, the Bill acknowledges the coexistence of these two forms of employment in digital platform companies.
Article 2 establishes that ‘digital platforms are the computer programmes and procedures of companies that, regardless of their place of establishment, connect clients with workers, facilitating the delivery of goods or urban and paid passenger transport services, carried out within the national territory, and may participate in setting the price or the methods of service execution.’ (Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social 2022). Meanwhile, Article 3 states that ‘This Law applies to any worker who performs tasks via digital platforms that facilitate the delivery of goods or urban and paid passenger transport services, regardless of the legal classification of the relationship they establish with the companies owning such platforms (dependent or independent work relationship). For the purposes of this Law, the term ‘worker’ refers to the individual who provides the underlying services, including both those who do so within the framework of a dependent employment relationship (where the general regulations governing such work apply), as well as those who do so autonomously or independently. (Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social 2022). This provision, unlike other legal precedents globally that define platform work as dependent work, avoids addressing the core issue of its nature. By not establishing the dependent nature of platform work, platform workers lose the labour rights granted by the legal framework, which exacerbates their precariousness under the assumed autonomy of the activity they perform.
A novel aspect of the Bill on digital platforms is that it recognises the right of workers to obtain an explanation from the platform owner regarding any decision made or supported by an automated decision-making system that significantly affects the working conditions of the platform worker. It also acknowledges the workers’ right to the inviolability of their digital reputation, which, according to Article 8 of the Bill, ‘is a private and portable asset of the worker, who will be able to access all the data collected by the company about them, during the employment relationship and up to one year after its termination. (Ministerio de Trabajo y Seguridad Social 2022).
It also recognises the right of workers to disconnect from the algorithms that govern their work during their rest time, but only for dependent workers. Furthermore, it does not impose any limitations on the working hours for workers defined by the Law as autonomous, who in most companies are the overwhelming majority. The lack of definition regarding the dependent or autonomous nature of platform work, in addition to undermining workers’ rights, results in a regulatory framework that pressures companies to reduce traditional dependent contracts as a cost-cutting mechanism and to increase work intensity, which is imposed on those referred to by the law as autonomous workers.
Finally, Article 19 of the Bill recognises the right of autonomous workers to exercise trade union freedom and to engage in collective bargaining with the platform owner for which they perform their tasks. However, Article 19 also establishes that agreements will apply exclusively to the signing workers or those who are part of the representative workers’ associations, thereby inhibiting the participation of these workers in tripartite negotiations by sector, referring instead to bilateral negotiations. With these regulations, the neoliberal orientation in labour relations is indirectly reinforced, creating a regulatory context that pressures unions and employers to conduct their negotiations at the company level, disconnecting them from the traditional tripartite forums for collective bargaining.
This Bill, although it has not yet been approved by Parliament, reflects the perspectives of the governing political group regarding the characteristics of work in digital platforms and the areas of negotiation to which it confines them. Platform workers maintain a precarious, dependent employment relationship and are subject to the company’s algorithmic logic while being deprived of a formal space for negotiating wages and working conditions, as they are, in practice, considered autonomous. On the other hand, this Bill has received partial approval in Parliament to date, which creates an uncertain space regarding its enactment, especially following the electoral results of November 2024, which marked the return of the left to power and a change in the group of legislators.
This lack of regulation mainly affects delivery workers, as the rest of the workers who have dependent relationships are included in the general labour regulations. Nevertheless, this regulatory context also influences the possibilities for the development of collective action in this sector, as it fragments the workers’ collective and encourages companies to outsource work processes to cut costs and reduce the possibilities for trade union or collective action.
The union experience of the PedidosYa Workers Union
The Unified Union of PedidosYa Workers (UTP) was formed in 2019 in response to a context of vulnerability due to precarious working conditions, the high deregulation of the sector, and the expansion of outsourcing, particularly within the operational sector. The union does not have official data on its membership levels. The interviewed leaders estimate that in 2023, the union had 80 members. The Covid-19 pandemic, which began shortly after the union was formed, exacerbated these conditions, making it crucial for workers to have a space for collective organisation. Additionally, the adverse conditions imposed by remote work, such as isolation, individualisation, and the fragmentation of workers, were some of the catalysts for union demands. The organisational, spatial, and social fragmentation imposed by digital companies makes it difficult, as noted in other contexts (Heiland, Reference Heiland2020), to organise unions and express the concerns of their workers.
The implementation of remote work played a role contrary to the interests and objectives of the union, as it deepened the individualisation of work and made it impossible to strengthen union tools through means outside digital environments. In this regard, a leader of the UTP union stated:
“It’s very difficult for the union in a time of remote work because we don’t know who the people working in the company are. […] The other day [someone] told me: ‘Oh, I used to work at PedidosYa.’ And I said to her: ‘Didn’t you join the union?’ She replied: ‘I didn’t know there was a union.’ Of course, because she joined after the pandemic. So, how are these people going to find out there’s a union in the company if we don’t see each other? We don’t know each other’s faces, it’s very difficult to reach the workers and get them to join.” (Interview with PedidosYa worker, UTP representative).
It is important to consider the particularities of the UTP union, which brings certain complexities to collective organisation. Firstly, it is a dispersed, predominantly virtual, and unknown collective, as not only do they not share a physical workspace due to the virtual nature of their tasks, but their knowledge of the company is limited to the small teams that workers form with their supervisors. In this regard, they mention:
There are like three main sectors, at least within the Contacts Operations area, which would be the contact operations. Within this large area, there are three other major areas, which are Rider (delivery), Partner (stores), and then there’s Customer […]. Within Rider, I don’t have much knowledge, I’m pretty much focused on my area only. But I have no knowledge at all about whether, for example, Customer or Partner have any specific group like that [groups participating in the union]. I also don’t know much about the conditions because within Rider I handle after-hours support, and then there’s the support during office hours… (Interview with a support worker Pedidos Ya).
Secondly, each work area within the company has its own operating rules and a relative degree of autonomy. While there is interconnection focused on resolving the issues that arise in production, it is often unknown to workers how other areas are organised, what their structure is, what their labour agreements are, etc.
Thirdly, workers’ demands vary according to their work area. While some commonalities can be identified, the specific characteristics of each area do not necessarily have reach or a voice within the union, especially in a context of low levels of membership.
Another critical situation for the union is the increase in the outsourcing of certain tasks within the production process. For example, the company, as a compensatory strategy for the increased demand for services on Saturdays and Sundays and the lack of in-house staff to work those days, hires outsourced companies that employ workers from other countries in South and Central America under precarious conditions, to take on the work that Uruguayan dependent workers had previously managed to limit through prior struggles. The coexistence of locally dependent work and outsourced, regionalised work within the same work area creates specific configurations where the working conditions of one group of workers advance at the expense of others, who, due to their form of insertion into the company, find themselves in more vulnerable conditions.
In this context, since its creation, UTP has implemented various strategies to improve working conditions: from the formation of health committees to address the multiple issues arising with remote work during the health crisis to organising strikes and public demonstrations in protest against the layoffs carried out by the company. As the union is made up of company-dependent staff, its demands tend to focus on the regularisation of labour regulations both in the PedidosYa offices and in remote work, as well as the improvement of working conditions. However, from the beginning, they have shown a willingness to collaborate with the collective of outsourced workers from RepartosYa in Uruguay, that is, those providing the delivery service (Cutro Dumas Reference Cutro Dumas2021).
From the perspective of the broader union organisation, workers in the digital platform sector are part of the Uruguayan Federation of Employees in Commerce and Services (FUECYS), a union that organises and brings together workers in various services, ranging from those employed in supermarkets to professional consultants, among others. However, despite being part of a sectoral union, the platform sector does not have a specific subgroup, meaning its participation in collective bargaining is practically non-existent. On the other hand, workers who perform their tasks as sole contractors are excluded from this group within the platform sector, even though this type of employment relationship is widely promoted by most companies in the sector, as is the case with delivery services.
The construction of union identity, understood as a subjective configuration, is in constant tension in the case studied. The absence of a specific category for this type of work is reflected in the lack of agreements and the extent of labour flexibility, expressed through various modalities that hinder the creation of collective spaces for debate. However, within the union, there is ongoing discussion about the labour identity of these sectors, with the goal of ensuring that this reflection has an impact on negotiations and collective action, as noted in this interview:
For me, ideally, for the union actually, because this is something we’ve already discussed within the union, it would be to have a new category of platform workers, of app workers in general, that wouldn’t be just PedidosYa, but would include PedidosYa, Uber, Mercado Libre, everything that’s app-based. But it’s a very, very, very big step in relation to how apps are viewed in Uruguay today. Because, of course, what are we? I don’t know, we’re not call centre workers, we’re not IT workers, we’re nothing, we’re a new modality that hasn’t been named. (Interview with PedidosYa operational sector worker and UTP representative).
In spite of this adverse scenario, the UTP union, within the operational area, has managed to consolidate certain demands focused on improving working conditions. In this regard, during the Covid-19 pandemic, one of the workers’ demands was to have basic office supplies to carry out their tasks. The demand centred on access to ergonomic supplies suitable for office work during long hours. The company responded positively and agreed to provide these supplies to the workers who requested them. However, it is interesting to note that this mechanism, where workers must request supplies from the company for their work, deepens the precariousness of labour in the context of remote work; it represents a step back from achievements that had already been secured and consolidated through previous struggles of the working class, but which the company reverses by preventing the exercise of these rights.
Another achievement refers to the provision of computer equipment and internet access for virtual work, which was initially negotiated directly by each worker with the company. However, today, due to union demands and struggles, this has been regularised for all workers. These basic work supplies were not always provided and reflect certain assumptions that seem to operate when the worker performs their tasks remotely. One of them is ‘the worker will make do,’ meaning they adapt to working conditions that may not be considered acceptable under the threshold of decent work. Associated with this is the assumption that ‘workers are easily replaceable,’ so that complaints and demands cannot lose sight of the inherent fragility of their jobs.
UTP also raised demands regarding productivity requirements. The work activity in some positions involved handling multiple chats simultaneously to address complaints from various customers. A certain number of open chats translates into a specific response capacity within a given timeframe. In this regard, a worker described:
Even though it’s just a chat, it’s like talking to four people at once. All four people could be really angry, especially with a food delivery app where if your order arrives wrong, obviously you’re going to write and you’re never going to do it in a polite way. (…) But yes, at the beginning it was very stressful. Then they reduced the number of chats, they lowered the metrics too, because they were very demanding. (…) It’s a job that’s quite difficult if you don’t have tolerance to pressure, because you’re constantly pressured by the chats, and then they come and evaluate you, saying ‘look, something happened and you spent too long on this chat, so I’m lowering your metrics.’ That’s really complicated. (Interview with a customer service worker, Pedidos Ya).
In this case, the metrics system appears as a central mechanism of control, where response times and customer satisfaction are key indicators. This points to the concept of algorithmic management, which regulates work through data and constantly evaluates performance. From the testimony, it becomes clear how the company structures labour relations, fostering a highly individualised environment where the worker must meet quantitative goals within a framework of constant surveillance, which generates pressure.
In this work context, a collective demand from workers is concentrated around the excessive number of chats that the company required to be open simultaneously, creating highly stressful conditions. Union action succeeded in reducing the number of open chats, which directly led to an improvement in working conditions concerning the pressure of high productivity. Another aspect discussed is the pressure exerted by peers to meet collective metrics; therefore, in addition to the platform and client controls, there is a control that operates among peers based on the collective improvement of productivity. These factors work against the formation of networks of solidarity and trust in peer relationships. The following quote illustrates this:
It was a pretty difficult moment because they were working with many chats simultaneously, and well, actually, that was a collective achievement, reducing the number of simultaneous chats to three. And at that time, in the middle of the pandemic, there was a huge surge in outsourcing. So, when the union somehow set the limit by saying, ‘Well, no more than three chats at once,’ there was also someone behind the scenes whispering and asking to close the chat. I mean, it wasn’t just the number, there were also colleagues pressuring others to close the chat. (Interview with a technical area worker from PedidosYa).
In some cases, active participation in the union means its leaders must confront business strategies of retaliation, such as reducing the tasks assigned, shifting to more monotonous and less ‘specialised’ duties, increasing pressure on metrics, etc. These mechanisms aim to erode the daily lives of workers internally, making the work environment more exhausting through ‘disguised sanctions’ that have no other purpose than to discourage union activity and penalise those who engage in it.
On January 5, 2024, the fear already present in the workers’ subjectivities materialised when PedidosYa fired 250 workers from the company’s technical support area. The news was delivered virtually in a brief meeting where the company communicated its decision to the workers. The mass dismissal of employees exposed the ongoing conflict between the workers and the company. On the one hand, the company, in a press release, stated: ‘The layoffs are part of a shift in customer service strategy aimed at ensuring the best service experience for users in the 15 countries where the platform operates, which led to the closure of the contact centre based in Uruguay, where 250 people were employed’ (El Observador, January 6 2024).
On the other hand, the workers received the news of their dismissal virtually, in a brief meeting where the company communicated the decision and proceeded to disconnect, leaving no room for dialogue. This type of corporate action reinforces the subjugation of workers, who are not recognised by the company as having a legitimate voice, by denying them the opportunity for conversation. A significant element in this situation is the fact that a large portion of the dismissed workers were affiliated with the union, forming its core and having led the organisational process. Therefore, the measure was anti-union in nature, dismantling the active organisational base of the union, which is part of FUECYS, a member of the PIT-CNT, the country’s central workers’ union.
The tension between the union organisation and the company’s intention to consolidate a base of loyal workers constitutes the central scenario of the conflict surrounding the mass layoffs affecting an entire area of the company. This process explicitly aims to drive the outsourcing of tasks, relocating them to contexts where working conditions can be further precarised and where collective ties between workers are less developed. The ability of these companies to operate in diverse contexts (even across different countries), with essentially absent leadership, automated controls, and tasks reduced to the extreme for most employees, makes them a paradigm of the volatile, lightweight, yet simultaneously fierce and dehumanising nature of capital.
In parallel, the union initiated a confrontational struggle, which comprised a mobilisation outside the MTSS (Ministry of Labour and Social Security) with delegates from UTP and their base, as well as representatives and members of other unions from the PIT-CNT, showing support for the workers and their protest measures. A key aspect of the mobilisation was visual communication, as through banners and other visual means, the workers’ demands were expressed using the codes of the company’s so-called ‘Cooltura PeYa’: ‘Being part of Cooltura PeYa is about being aligned with everything that is new, nice, and shiny. The building itself is like that, it’s intelligent. I mean, working as a team, making an impact’ (Interview with a operational worker, Pedidos Ya). To these corporate values, we can add being visible in communication through internal chats, postponing improvements, and adhering to the demands of being a worker available to ‘wear the company’s shirt’.
In this conflict, we can observe innovative strategies from the union, aimed at reversing the values of the company’s official culture to delegitimise it on social media and other communication channels. The public image of such a company, which relies on the choice of customers who may be receptive to it, is used as a resource by the union’s action, questioning its legitimacy in one of its most sensitive areas. The experience of the UTP union, developed within the framework of the conflict surrounding the mass dismissal of workers from the operational area, is an example of both old and new forms of union action, where collective organisation is revitalised and infused with new ways of expressing conflict. One manifestation of this is the public visibility the conflict gained in various press outlets and in the campaign denouncing the conflict, promoted by the union under the name ‘Des-PidosYa’ on social media and in public spaces.
The conflict remains unresolved, and the outsourced company is currently hiring third-party workers without adhering to the priority list established in negotiations between the company and UTP based on the layoffs carried out by PedidosYa. In this regard, the breach of the agreement with the MTSS has been raised, particularly regarding the requirement that the company now outsourcing the service should hire women with children or pregnant workers as a priority. However, there appears to be no response that opens up space for effective negotiation, let alone one that resolves the underlying conflict. From the UTP base, efforts have been made to keep the conflict visible through actions that bring it to the public agenda, yet these face the difficulty of quickly losing their relevance due to the lack of substantial backing in the public sphere to support their circulation and sustainability.
Conclusions
The duality of PedidosYa as a technological leader and a perpetuator of precarious dynamics reflects the contradictions of platform capitalism: while it provides immediate consumer experiences and expands the possibilities for affiliated businesses, it also consolidates labour inequalities and creates a technological and economic dependency that limits the autonomy of the involved parties.
In the operational and support sector of the company studied, we find a productive context characterised by the abstract control of anonymous and depersonalised digital mechanisms, where relations of subordination and exploitation are masked by interactions between individuals considered independent and autonomous with precarious and temporary contracts. The incorporation of PedidosYa into the German multinational Delivery Hero has standardised its labour processes, replicating patterns of precarisation observed in other platforms across Latin America and globally.
The case of the Unión de Trabajadores de PedidosYa (UTP) in Uruguay highlights both the structural challenges and the possibilities for collective action in digital platform work. Throughout its existence (2019–2024), the union reached a level of organisational maturity that allowed it to actively fight for better working conditions in a sector marked by precarisation and fragmentation. Unlike other union experiences in platform work across Latin America, where organisation has been more diffuse or dependent on traditional structures (Míguez and Diana Menéndez Reference Miguez and Diana Menéndez2023; Bridi et al Reference Bridi, Véras De Oliveira and Mora2024), UTP managed to establish itself as a relevant actor within Uruguayan trade unionism, despite the limitations imposed by the existing institutional framework and labour policies.
A distinctive feature of UTP was its composition, largely led by young people and women, which not only challenged the traditional structure of Uruguayan trade unionism but also generated innovative strategies for organisation and recognition. While in other countries, the resistance of platform workers has relied on spontaneous protests and informal solidarity networks (Haidar et al Reference Haidar, Diana Menéndez and Arias2020; Köhler Reference Köhler2022), UTP managed to articulate a trade union strategy that combined classic mechanisms of struggle with new ways of highlighting the conflict, such as the redefinition of ‘CoolturaPeYa’ in the symbolic dispute against the company.
However, as in other contexts, the company’s response was decisive: the implementation of mass layoffs and the outsourcing of tasks reflect trends observed in companies like Rappi in Colombia or Uber in Brazil (Díaz Reference Díaz2022; Salas et al Reference Salas, Delfino and Véras de Oliveira2024), where the reorganisation of work has served as an effective anti-union strategy. The dissolution of UTP in 2024 marks a turning point in labour conflict in platforms in Uruguay, but it does not signify the end of resistance. Despite the structural defeat represented by the disintegration of the union, the organisational experience accumulated and the solidarity built among the workers can become the seed for future collective initiatives in the sector.
The Uruguayan case shares with other countries the precarisation of platform work, algorithmic management, and labour fragmentation, but it differs in the degree of institutionalisation achieved by its union and the forms of dispute developed. While in countries with stricter labour regulations, such as Spain, there have been legislative advances that have redefined the employment relationship in platforms, in Uruguay, the regulatory gap has allowed the consolidation of business models that deepen labour insecurity.
Ultimately, the trajectory of UTP demonstrates that even in highly unfavourable conditions, it is possible to build spaces for organisation and collective struggle within platform capitalism. Its experience not only highlights the difficulties faced by workers in this economic model but also provides insights into how trade union action can adapt, resist, and fight for rights in scenarios of precarisation.
Francisco Pucci is a PhD in Sociology and Anthropology, Université Lumière Lyon 2. Full professor in the Department of Sociology at the Faculty of Social Sciences, UDELAR, Constituyente 1502, Montevideo, Uruguay. ZIP Code 11.200. Specialization: Sociology of Work and Organizations.
Camila Cutro Dumas has a bachelor’s degree in Sociology from the National University of Villa María, Córdoba, Argentina. Master’s Candidate in Sociology at the Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay. Researcher at the Faculty of Social Sciences, UDELAR, Constituyente 1502, Montevideo, Uruguay. Assistant professor at the Faculty of Information and Communication, UDELAR, San Salvador 1944. ZIP Code 11200, Montevideo, Uruguay. Specialization: Sociology of Work and Labor Conflict.
Victoria Menéndez is a PhD in Sociology from the Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay. Assistant professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences. Constituyente 1502, Montevideo, Uruguay. ZIP Code: 11200. Specialization: Sociology of Work and Rural Sociology.
