#etui

As all of this was underway, Reversing Works was conducting its own research into Glovo/Foodinho's app, running it on a simulated Android handset inside a PC so they could peer into app's data collection and processing. They discovered a nightmarish world of pervasive, illegal worker surveillance, and published their findings a year ago in November, 2023:

https://www.etui.org/sites/default/files/2023-10/Exercising%20workers%20rights%20in%20algorithmic%20management%20systems_Lessons%20learned%20from%20the%20Glovo-Foodinho%20digital%20labour%20platform%20case_2023.pdf

That report reveals all kinds of extremely illegal behavior. Glovo/Foodinho makes its riders' data accessible across national borders, so Glovo managers outside of Italy can access fine-grained surveillance information and sensitive personal information – a major data protection no-no.

Worse, Glovo's app embeds trackers from a huge number of other tech platforms (for chat, analytics, and more), making it impossible for the company to account for all the ways that its riders' data is collected – again, a requirement under Italian and EU data protection law.

All this data collection continues even when riders have clocked out for the day – its as though your boss followed you home after quitting time and spied on you.

The research also revealed evidence of a secretive worker scoring system that ranked workers based on undisclosed criteria and reserved the best jobs for workers with high scores. This kind of thing is pervasive in algorithmic management, from gig work to Youtube and Tiktok, where performers' videos are routinely suppressed because they crossed some undisclosed line. When an app is your boss, your every paycheck is docked because you violated a policy you're not allowed to know about, because if you knew why your boss was giving you shitty jobs, or refusing to show the video you spent thousands of dollars making to the subscribers who asked to see it, then maybe you could figure out how to keep your boss from detecting your rulebreaking next time.

All this data-collection and processing is bad enough, but what makes it all a thousand times worse is Glovo's data retention policy – they're storing this data on their workers for four years after the worker leaves their employ. That means that mountains of sensitive, potentially ruinous data on gig workers is just lying around, waiting to be stolen by the next hacker that breaks into the company's servers.

Reversing Works's report made quite a splash. A year after its publication, the Italian data protection agency fined Glovo another 5 million euros and ordered them to cut this shit out:

https://reversing.works/posts/2024/11/press-release-reversing.works-investigation-exposes-glovos-data-privacy-violations-marking-a-milestone-for-worker-rights-and-technology-accountability/

As the report points out, Italy is extremely well set up to defend workers' rights from this kind of bossware abuse. Not only do Italian enforcers have all the privacy tools created by the GDPR, the EU's flagship privacy regulation – they also have the benefit of Italy's 1970 Workers' Statute. The Workers Statute is a visionary piece of legislation that protects workers from automated management practices. Combined with later privacy regulation, it gave Italy's data regulators sweeping powers to defend Italian workers, like Glovo's riders.

Italy is also a leader in recognizing gig workers as de facto employees, despite the tissue-thin pretense that adding an app to your employment means that you aren't entitled to any labor protections. In the case of Glovo, the fine-grained surveillance and reputation scoring were deemed proof that Glovo was employer to its riders.

Reversing Works' report is a fascinating read, especially the sections detailing how the researchers recruited a Glovo rider who allowed them to log in to Glovo's platform on their account.

As Reversing Works points out, this bottom-up approach – where apps are subjected to technical analysis – has real potential for labor organizations seeking to protect workers. Their report established multiple grounds on which a union could seek to hold an abusive employer to account.

But this bottom-up approach also holds out the potential for developing direct-action tools that let workers flex their power, by modifying apps, or coordinating their actions to wring concessions out of their bosses.

After all, the whole reason for the gig economy is to slash wage-bills, by transforming workers into contractors, and by eliminating managers in favor of algorithms. This leaves companies extremely vulnerable, because when workers come together to exercise power, their employer can't rely on middle managers to pressure workers, deal with irate customers, or step in to fill the gap themselves:

https://projects.itforchange.net/state-of-big-tech/changing-dynamics-of-labor-and-capital/

Only by seizing the means of computation, workers and organized labor can turn the tables on bossware – both by directly altering the conditions of their employment, and by producing the evidence and tools that regulators can use to force employers to make those alterations permanent.

Image: EFF (modified) https://www.eff.org/files/issues/eu-flag-11_1.png

The most common type of etui was a flat box in a variety of shapes and made from materials including wood, leather, mother-of-pearl and tortoiseshell. Another popular design in the second half of the nineteenth century was a cube-shaped box (usually in tooled leather) containing scissors, a needlecase and a thimble and a few other small accessories. This was called a "Lady's Companion", and was often shaped like a small book, with the name embossed on the spine.

20294, exterior and Rachel label

This etui measures just 8.5 x 4cm, and was donated in 1945 by Rachel Kay-Shuttleworth. It is made from solid ivory with gilt hinges and has recesses in the bottom half and in the lid to house a tiny pair of gilt scissors and a matching thimble. It is typical of those made from 1840 onwards. Although this style of etui was manufactured in England as well, the decoration on the scissors would suggest that this one is possibly French.

Both the scissors and thimble have obviously been well used, as the gilt is very worn in places and one of the tips of the scissors has broken off.

20294, scissors

The exterior of the etui is very smooth and highly polished with an ivory push-button fastening. Being small and neat and taking up very little space, it would have been slipped into an embroidery work-bag and carried by the owner when out visiting.

This ivory etui is quite an early design, as acknowledged by the label. And as Rachel was not born until 1886, it is most likely that it had belonged to someone else before her. It may have been given to her by an older relative or friend, or she might simply have found it in an antique shop...

Rachel with her embroidery frame. Note one of the hangings from the Huntroyde bed is on the right. (GTC Archives)

In the photograph above , you can see that there is a fabric case next to Rachel, together with her scissors and the case for her thimble - a protective case was needed for this as it was inlaid with turquoises. Fabric cases like these were known as "hussifs", and they were often homemade as personal gifts. They folded or rolled up and had several internal stitched pockets and loops and typically contained a pair of scissors, together with needles, pins and threads.

Rachel always carried her needlework tools with her, as she liked to be able to work on her projects at every opportunity. She recorded that the Huntroyde bedspread, pelmet and hangings had been completed in "largely odd minutes and some midnight oil".

Jane H.

REFERENCES:

Antique Needlework Tools and Embroideries: Nerylla Taunton, Antique Collectors Club, 1997

Sewing Accessories: An Illustrated History: Victor Houart, Souvenir Press, 1984