English (pdf)
Article in xml format
Article references
Automatic translation
Send this article by e-mail
Cited by SciELO 
Cited by Google 
Similars in
SciELO 
Similars in Google 
Permalink
Introduction
Several recent studies show that digital platforms profit from migrant labor while undermining workers’ rights (Stiglich 2022; Velez Osorio 2020). However, for migrants themselves, these platforms often represent one of the few viable employment options, particularly in contexts where rising discrimination and exploitation in the workplace push them out of more stable jobs (Jiménez 2022). Migrants’ decisions about how to access employment and generate income thus remain a central concern (Hidalgo et al. 2019). Platform labor is therefore understood as both a site of degradation and a source of opportunity (van Doorn et al. 2023).
Most research on digital labor platforms and migration has focused on Europe and North America, overlooking South-South dynamics. This paper turns attention to South America, a region from which more than 7 million Venezuelans have been forced to flee. Most have migrated to countries such as Colombia and Peru, where labor markets are highly precarious and difficult for migrants to access.
This study examines comparative issues in Colombia and Peru1, given their central role in emerging patterns of intraregional migration in South America. Together, these countries have received more than half of the displaced Venezuelan population in the region. Colombia has received over 2.8 million Venezuelans, while Peru hosts 1.6 million (R4V 2025). Both countries have implemented various regularization programs granting Venezuelans access to basic rights, including the right to work.
Following the pandemic, the Colombian government introduced a Temporary Protection Status (Estatuto Temporal de Protección para Migrantes Venezolanos [ETPV], Decree 216/2021), which grants Venezuelans a 10-year permit to reside regularly in the country with the possibility of obtaining permanent residency thereafter. Additional recent policies include a new migration law (Law 2136/2021) and a ten-year policy for the socioeconomic and cultural integration of Venezuelan migrants (Conpes 4100). In contrast, Peru granted Venezuelans regular status for one year through Supreme Decree n.° 010-2020-IN (Ministerio del Interior 2020), with the possibility of transitioning to other immigration categories thereafter. The country is currently developing an integration policy, although successive changes in government have created political instability and slowed its progress. These regularization processes in both countries have been subject to criticism due to their temporary nature, particularly given that many Venezuelans intend to remain permanently (Blouin 2021; Palma-Gutiérrez 2021).
In the initial years of displacement, some Venezuelans began working through delivery platforms, which allowed them to do so without a legal work permit and for as many hours as they wished. These platforms benefited from the absence of effective regulatory mechanisms governing their operations. In some instances, the requirements to register as a delivery worker were minimal: background checks were not always conducted, and migrants were not systematically required to hold a legal work permit. As a result, migrants in irregular situations were those most likely to turn to these platforms, using them as means of circumventing exclusionary border and labor policies. As Ambrosini and Hajer note,
their irregular border crossing in itself is the best example of irregular migrants expressing their agency through transgressing exclusionary border policies. Moreover, within their daily lives as irregular migrants, they can use their agency to find ways around the restrictions imposed on their irregular presence. Thus, they can achieve inclusion through social interaction with citizens and participation in society. (2023, 133)
Recent studies indicate that Venezuelan migration in Latin America could increase the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of most countries by between 0.1% and 0.25% (Alvarez et al. 2022). Nevertheless, the labor conditions Venezuelans face across the region remain precarious, marked by informality, gender gaps, exploitation, and abuse. Venezuelan migrants have arrived in Colombia and Peru-countries whose labor markets exhibit persistent structural problems, including high levels of informality, temporary positions, short-term contracts, and freelance work. This segment of the labor market operates within an economic sector where workers are not protected by labor laws and lack formal employment. As a result, this sector has absorbed a significant share of migrant workers. One study found that more than 60% of Rappi2 couriers in Colombia and over 50% in Peru were Venezuelan (Dinegro Martínez 2021). For this reason, the relationship between delivery platforms and migration constitutes a key dimension of the present analysis and cannot be overlooked.
This paper examines labor precarization, migrant agency, resistance, and resilience by analyzing how Venezuelan delivery workers confront precarious labor conditions on delivery platforms in both countries. It also considers their fragile socio-economic inclusion, as well as limited progress in these platforms’ regulation. In addition, it analyzes claims and proposals advanced by leaders, civil society, and trade unions for establishing more robust social and legal frameworks to enhance migrants’ access to social protection and labor market.
To that end, the article is structured as follows. Section I presents the theoretical and methodological frameworks that guide the research. Section II analyzes the general labor market context in Colombia and Peru, focusing on the main structural challenges as well as the barriers Venezuelan migrants face in accessing the formal labor market. Section III introduces the analytical framework, drawing on key assumptions from Labor Market Segmentation (LMS) theory. This section also engages with current debates on the precarity-migration-agency nexus, emphasizing the role of collective organizing as a form of resistance. It also examines the work options available to Venezuelan migrants through delivery platforms such as Rappi and PedidosYa, which operate within the secondary labor market in Colombia and Peru. Finally, in Section IV, the article explores the claims and proposals put forward by trade union leaders, experts, and civil society organizations to reduce precarization and enhance social protection for Venezuelans working through delivery platforms in Peru and Colombia.
Section I. Theoretical and Methodological Frameworks
Theoretical Framework
To understand why some Venezuelan migrants engage in economic activities related to delivery platforms in Colombia and Peru, we must consider the key elements of the theoretical framework guiding this analysis. This framework draws on the structural theory of LMS, which provides analytical tools to explain the mechanisms shaping migrants’ insertion into labor markets. In the context of increasing labor market flexibilization (e.g., subcontracting, home-based work, delivery), migrant workers face significant uncertainty linked to economic conditions, capital, and employers. As a result, their entry into the labor market is shaped both by the employment opportunities available to them and by their willingness to accept prevailing working conditions (Villa 1990)-that is, their bargaining power.
This approach aligns with the perspectives of Cachón Rodríguez (1995), Piore (1983 a, 1983b, 1983c) , and Portes and Börocz (1992), who argue that destination economies structurally rely on foreign labor to fill jobs that are formally unregulated, socially undervalued, and poorly paid within specific productive sectors. It is important to note that LMS theory forms part of the broader framework of the Dual Labor Market (DLM), developed by Doeringer and Piore (1983, 1985) . While Villa (1990) draws on the DLM approach to explain LMS, the concepts of labor market segmentation and dualism are understood as outcomes of the functioning of internal labor markets (Doeringer and Piore 1985) ).
From this theoretical perspective, the labor market is divided into primary and secondary sectors. As Gimeno explains, “the secondary sector generally offers low-paid jobs: employees (often women, young people, and members of ethnic and racial minority groups) are low-skilled, have limited opportunities for advancement and maintain highly personalized relationships with supervisors”3 (2004, 194). This contributes to favoritism and arbitrary work disciplines conducive to job instability and “frequent turnover” (Doeringer and Piore 1985, 13).
In contrast, the primary sector offers jobs with relatively high wages, favorable working conditions, opportunities for advancement, fairness, established procedures for enforcing labor standards, and job stability (Piore 1983b). As Gimeno states, “the primary sector of the labor market is generally identified with official and formal state jobs, while the secondary sector is composed of dirty or menial activities of the marginal or informal economy” (2004, 194). Furthermore, within this secondary sector, there are sub-markets in which employment is concentrated in small firms or in activities dominated by specific occupations, such as unskilled work in construction, agriculture, and fast-food chains (e.g., pizzerias, McDonald’s, KFC, VIPS) (Recio 1997).
Similarly, migrants who tend to occupy jobs in the secondary sector constitute some of the most vulnerable social groups within the working population, performing tasks assigned to them in line with the structural demands of the labor market. These jobs often involve unstable and short-term employment relationships between firms and workers. Workers in these segments typically receive lower wages and experience reduced social prestige, as such positions tend to offer poorer working conditions. Among these groups, young people, migrants, and married women tend to predominate.
At this level of analysis, the LMS theory provides a useful conceptual framework to explain the patterns of labor market insertion among Venezuelan migrants. As Villa argues, “on the one hand, the migrant community constitutes the social unit of labor reproduction; on the other hand, the construction site, with its interrelation of companies and crews working through the subcontracting system, constitutes the unit of production” (1990, 299). Within this dynamic, labor market flexibility is reproduced, and the deregulation of labor contracts is reinforced as a structural feature of the dual labor market.
Focusing specifically on the employment situation of this group, Recio (1999) adopts a gender perspective, highlighting the persistence of deep divisions between men’s and women’s work. In sum, labor market flexibilization-operating within the framework of labor market segmentation-provides key insight into why a significant portion of Venezuelan migrants engage in platform-based delivery work in Colombia and Peru.
Now, in order to integrate a Latin American perspective into global debates on migrants’ labor market insertion, it is important to note that, in Latin America, the concept of the secondary labor market-derived from labor market segmentation theory-can be interpreted through the tradition of structural heterogeneity associated with Latin American structuralism. Within ongoing theoretical discussions on the functioning of labor markets and the dynamics of digital platforms-spaces in which Venezuelan migrant workers have become highly visible-the notion of structural heterogeneity becomes particularly relevant, as it helps to better understand migrants’ experiences within Latin American labor contexts. In fact, this notion refers to the coexistence, within a single economy, of sectors that display markedly different levels of productivity, technology, capital, productive organization, and working conditions. Developed within Latin American structuralism by authors such as Pinto (1970), Prebisch (1981) and Furtado (1982), the concept explains the persistence of structural and economic inequalities that give rise to segmented-or fragmented-labor markets and large low-productivity sectors in developing economies in general, and in Latin America in particular. It is worth recalling that this notion emerged within the intellectual tradition of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).
In the case under study, structural heterogeneity is closely linked to labor market segmentation, the precarization of migrant labor, and downward social mobility-three analytical concepts employed throughout this text. On the one hand, companies such as Rappi operate using cutting-edge technologies (algorithms, big data, and AI) characteristic of the high-productivity stratum. On the other hand, the delivery work they generate is situated in the low-productivity stratum, marked by precarious working conditions and limited opportunities for workers to improve their economic position.
In contemporary interpretations of Latin American structuralism, several scholars have revisited the concept of structural heterogeneity to analyze platform economies, urban informality, and productive inequality under globalization. For example, the Argentine economist Chena (2015) argues that income distribution does not depend solely on market variables or redistributive policies, but is deeply shaped by the economy’s productive structure. From this perspective, income distribution is significantly influenced by technological asymmetries across sectors. In other words, inequality is not merely a matter of redistribution but also one rooted in the economic structure itself. Similarly, the Colombian economist Ocampo (2011) has developed a structuralist approach that has been central to rethinking the role of global economic institutions in promoting inclusive growth, emphasizing structural change as a key pathway to development. Finally, the work of the Mexican economist Bárcena (2012) is also noteworthy. During her nearly fourteen years of leadership at ECLAC, she promoted a development agenda that placed equality at the center of sustainable development.
At this stage of the analysis, it is important to clarify that migrants’ agency should not be understood simply as an individual response to poverty or as a reaction to economic deprivation, but rather as a form of action shaped by broader social and structural conditions. It is produced within specific structural contexts in which migration decisions are mediated by unequal opportunities, institutional constraints (Giddens 1984; Castles and Davidson 2000), transnational social networks (Portes and Rumbaut 2001), and labor market dynamics (Doeringer and Piore 1983, 1985). In this sense, migration can be interpreted both as a survival strategy and as a form of strategic action in response to economic and social structures that constrain possibilities for social reproduction in the country of origin. For this reason, migrant’s agency4 can also be understood as a way of navigating the social structures that have historically limited upward mobility, particularly for the working classes and foreign workers.
In advancing the discussion on the significance of availability and its connection to migration in platform-mediated social reproduction tasks, Andersen et al. (2024) identify three key analytical dimensions: (a) mobilities, rhythms, and social reproduction; (b) the rhythms of gig work; and (c) migrant labor as urban infrastructure. The concept of mobilities is used to analyze how migration regimes, legal statuses, and digital infrastructures shape migrants’ access to platform work and condition their movements across transnational, national, and urban spaces. The second dimension, which focuses on the rhythms of gig work, highlights the temporal organization of platform labor, as migrant gig workers often experience alternating periods of inactivity and intense activity while responding to tasks distributed via algorithms. Finally, the third dimension conceptualizes the migrant workforce as urban infrastructure, emphasizing how migrant gig workers play a central role in sustaining urban life. By providing essential reproductive services-such as food delivery, house cleaning, or transportation-they enable other urban residents to save time and maintain their daily routines. Overall, the authors argue that the gig economy should not be understood as an entirely new form of work, but rather as a digital reconfiguration of longstanding migrant labor regimes characterized by precarious employment, informal labor arrangements, and structural inequalities within labor markets.
In this regard, Fernández-Trujillo and López Calle (2026), drawing on more than 50 interviews conducted with workers across different segments of the logistics chain-including Spanish migrants employed in logistics warehouses in the Netherlands, migrants truck drivers operating throughout Europe, and delivery riders (mostly Latin American migrants) in Madrid-analyze the spatial and temporal implications of the platformization of logistics work. Their study shows how platformization reconfigures the spatial and temporal organization of work within contemporary supply chains from a transnational perspective. It argues that platformization should not be understood merely as a technological innovation, but as a new stage in the reorganization of labor under digital capitalism. The authors further emphasize that, by shifting risks, costs, and temporal uncertainty onto workers, platform logistics intensifies precarious employment while enabling consumers and businesses to benefit from faster delivery services.
To incorporate recent debates on informality and precarious work-understood in this manuscript as part of the secondary sector of the labor market-it is important to consider recent research that examines the links between informality and the vulnerability of certain groups of workers, as well as emerging dynamics such as digitalization (particularly digital platforms), the internationalization of the economy and its relationship to employment, and broader transformations in global labor-market structures that increasingly promote the individualization, fragmentation, and informalization of the working class. In this regard, the study coordinated by Riesco-Sanz (2020) is especially relevant.
The edited volume examines how globalization, digitalization, and new organizational forms are reshaping the traditional model of wage labor, producing hybrid employment statuses, deepening precarity, and blurring the boundaries between salaried and non-salaried forms of work. It explores the profound transformations affecting wage labor in contemporary capitalism, as the classical employment model is increasingly replaced by more fragmented and precarious forms of work. Its central argument is that contemporary labor markets are experiencing a proliferation of “atypical” forms of employment-including false self-employment, temporary contracts, internships, subcontracting, zero-hour arrangements, and platform-based labor such as crowdwork or delivery services. These forms coexist with conventional salaried employment and contribute to blurring the institutional and legal boundaries between wage labor and other employment statuses. Overall, the volume argues that contemporary capitalism is not eliminating wage labor but reconfiguring its institutional and social contours. The result is a more heterogeneous and precarious labor landscape in which employment statuses, worker identities, and mechanisms of labor regulation have become increasingly fluid and contested. It also addresses, from both theoretical and empirical perspectives, the global rise of digital platform workers, particularly with regard to what is known about unionization and resistance on such platforms.
With regard to migrants and unionization, research by Gorodzeisky and Richards (2020) challenges the common assumption that migrants are indifferent or wary of trade unions. Their findings show that migrants often express higher levels of trust in trade unions than native-born workers, particularly during the first decades following their arrival in the host country. However, actual union membership among migrants often remains lower than among native workers. This gap is frequently explained by structural barriers such as labor market segmentation, precarious employment, legal constraints, and limited access to union networks. From this perspective, the findings suggest that established unions in countries such as Peru and Colombia should not necessarily face major difficulties in engaging platform workers, nor should significant tensions arise between these emerging organizing initiatives and traditional unions.
The interest in analyzing migrant unionization and resistance on digital platforms leads to an examination of the existing literature, which reveals a broad and expanding field of study with numerous contributions, including those by Maffie (2020), Vandaele (2018), Hijab et al. (2025). Maffie (2020) demonstrates how online worker communities-such as Facebook groups, forums, and messaging applications-can foster solidarity among platform workers, increase their interest in joining unions, and support unionization through sustained interaction within digital networks. Vandaele (2018) examines emerging forms of platform worker unionism and highlights the development of hybrid organizational structures, including driver associations and worker collectives.
Similarly, Hijab et al. (2025) identify new forms of organization among platform workers, including the coordination of strikes through WhatsApp groups, digital petitions, and the emergence of platform-based unions, while drawing on Gramsci’s theory of hegemony to analyze workers’ resistance strategies. The authors argue that, while the gig economy represents a reconfiguration of labor relations in the digital age, it is not immune to organized dissent. In this regard, Gramsci’s conceptual tools help explain not only how platform capitalism sustains ideological dominance but also how resistance is articulated by marginalized labor groups.
Dufresne and Leterme (2021) contend that the gig economy should not be understood as a “post-labor” environment, but rather as a new terrain of labor struggle in which workers develop innovative strategies to defend labor rights within digitally mediated workplaces. Their analysis highlights the emergence growing waves of mobilization and demonstrates that, even in fragmented and algorithmically managed work environments, collective action remains possible and increasingly visible. In this context, the authors also engage with discussions on digital labor movements and collective resistance in the Global South (Novianto 2025), emphasizing that workers continue to organize despite the precarious conditions in which they operate.
Dufresne and Leterme (2021) also argue that digital platforms-such as ride-hailing and delivery services-rely on structural mechanisms that keep labor cheap, flexible, and easily disposable, while transferring risks and operational costs to workers. In this context, platform labor is organized through flexible, on-demand arrangements that minimize labor costs by externalizing risks, fragmenting employment relations, and relying on a surplus workforce managed through algorithmic systems. From this perspective, platform capitalism operates through what is described as a cheap labor regime, which systematically produces forms of super-exploitation among gig workers, particularly in the Global South.
Methodological Framework
This article forms part of the research project, “The case of Venezuelan migrants working for delivery platforms in Colombia and Peru.” Fieldwork in Peru benefited from the support of Equilibrium CenDE’s research team5. In Colombia, fieldwork was conducted between January and June 2023. This article is one of the direct outputs of this research.
This study adopts a mixed-method approach, combining data analysis with a literature review on labor markets, available information from delivery platforms such as Rappi and PedidosYa, and recent efforts to regulate these platforms. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with two leaders from civil society and trade unions in both countries. Participants were informed about the confidentiality of their testimonies to protect their identities6, particularly in cases involving irregular migratory status7. In Peru, the think tank Equilibrium CenDE provided contacts from migrant-led organizations. Likewise, the Observatorio de Plataformas Digitales (OPD), part of the FairWork project, connected researchers with delivery platform leaders. In Colombia, researchers were advised by a member of the Escuela Nacional Sindical involved in ongoing labor reform debates, who also facilitated access to relevant within their networks. Experts from various civil society organizations were also interviewed, including representatives from migrant-led and academic organizations working on labor law, labor markets, digital platforms, and economic migration in each country. These interviews were conducted both in person and virtually between January and June 2023. Data collection continued until saturation was reached (Berteaux 2005), and no additional interviews were deemed necessary. Gender heterogeneity was not explicitly incorporated into the interview sample, given the predominantly male composition of the Venezuelan migration population. Interview questions were designed in line with the research objectives and its theoretical framework, and are now integrated into the analytical process.
The method used to systematize the collected data combines discourse analysis of interview material with theoretical insights from labor market segmentation. It also examines how digital infrastructures shape migrants’ access to platform work and condition their mobility across transnational, national, and urban spaces, while analyzing processes of unionization and resistance among migrant workers on digital platforms.
Section II. Venezuelan Migrants’ Legal and Social Conditions in Labor Markets in Colombia and Peru
In Latin America, where more than half of the workforce is employed in the informal sector, labor flexibility is often associated with precariousness, limiting informal workers’ access to social protection (Alaimo et al. 2022). Labor precarity entails new forms of organization based on social insecurity and instability, which can lead to exclusion from the formal labor market (Guadarrama Olivera et al. 2012). Given that many Latin American countries face constraints in generating formal employment (Maurizio 2021), this section reviews key structural problems in the labor markets of Peru and Colombia, including high rates of informality. It then examines the situation of Venezuelan migrants within these labor markets and analyzes how structural factors exacerbate existing barriers to accessing formal employment.
In Colombia, although the definition of informal employment is not particularly strict (Guataquí et al. 2010), informality rates remain high. According to the National Administrative Department of Statistics of Colombia (DANE 2022), the rate stood at 57.8% during the October-December 2022 quarter. DANE also reported an unemployment rate of 10.3%, with a gender gap of 2.3%. In Peru, informality rates have been rising, reaching 76.1% in the second quarter of 2022, according to the Peruvian National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI 2022b). Labor informality has been further exacerbated by economic incentives embedded in the frameworks governing social protection and labor relations (Ñopo 2022). A key difference between the two countries is that unemployment in Peru has remained significantly lower than in Colombia, at around 4% in the second quarter of 2022 (INEI 2022b).
In contrast, informality rates in both countries exceeded 50% during that same period, highlighting a persistent structural problem in their labor markets that contributes to social inequality (Abramo 2022). The most recent INEI survey on the living conditions of Venezuelans residing in Peru in 2022 shows that 82% are part of the economically active population (EAP). However, 80.8% of those employed do not have an employment contract. The survey also indicates that 55% of Venezuelans work in service-sector businesses, such as restaurants, hotels, bars (INEI 2022a). In Colombia, Venezuelans in the EAP also exhibit high employment rates8. In 2022, 56.2% had been living in the country for the last five years. Their unemployment rate reached 11.2%, approximately one percentage point above the national average (DANE 2022) (See Table 1). It is important to note that the common claim that migrants “steal jobs” from locals has been extensively examined in both countries (Asencios and Castellares 2020; Bahar et al. 2018; Bahar et al. 2020; Bonilla-Mejía et al. 2020; Valencia et al. 2020). These studies consistently demonstrate that Venezuelans contribute positively to the economic performance of their host countries.
Table 1. Labor indicators for Colombia and Peru (2022)
| Colombia | Peru | |
| Informality rate | 57.8% | 76.1% |
| Unemployment rate | 10.3% | 4.0% |
| Venezuelan in the EAP | 56.2% | 82.0% |
| Venezuelans in the EAP without an employment contract | N/A | 80.8% |
| Unemployment rate among Venezuelan population | 11.2% | N/A |
Source: Author, based on DANE (2022) and INEI (2022b) data.
Furthermore, Venezuelan migrants in Peru and Colombia face multiple barriers to accessing the labor market. These obstacles stem not only from structural conditions but also from administrative constraints. The primary barrier concerns migrants’ legal status, particularly the lack of documentation certifying their residence and granting them the right to work. Other common challenges include xenophobia and discrimination, the non-recognition of credentials, misinformation, and limited knowledge of labor regulations and social protection systems (Graham et al. 2020; Guerrero Ble et al. 2020).
In 2020, due to COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent border closures and mandatory quarantines, many Venezuelans were left without the means to provide for their families. The restrictions coincided with increased demand for delivery services, prompting a large number of Venezuelan migrants to join digital platforms as a result of their precarious economic situation in both countries. Social protection systems proved insufficient to meet the needs of irregular migrants, who were excluded from most emergency measures implemented to mitigate the effects of the pandemic (López Villamil 2022; Vera Espinoza et al. 2021). As a result, many were compelled to accept informal jobs, as noted above and in other studies (Graham et al. 2020; Guerrero Ble and Graham 2020; Vera Espinoza et al. 2021). Moreover, gender inequalities constituted a significant barrier to labor market access. These disparities were shaped by the nature and precariousness of available jobs, deep segmentation between men’s and women’s work, gender-based violence, workplace discrimination, domestic responsibilities, labor exploitation, and persistent stereotypes about Venezuelan women (Woldemikael et al. 2022).
Venezuelan migrants in Colombia and Peru face significant challenges in accessing social health protection, largely due to their limited access to work permits. In Colombia, access to the subsidized health system generally requires a regularized migration status, meaning that those without valid documentation must first regularize their status in order to benefit. According to the Observatorio Nacional de Migraciones from the National Planning Department, 799,757 of the Venezuelans (34% of the of the Venezuelan population in the country) were affiliated with the social health protection system in 2022. However, only 254,364 were enrolled in the contributory regime, representing just 31.8% of those affiliated. Colombia also operates a subsidized scheme, Sisben. In 2022, more than 148,000 Venezuelans were registered in this system, of whom over 16,800 were independent workers (Observatorio Nacional de Migraciones n.d.a, n.d.b).
In Peru, the situation was similar. Only 27% of the Venezuelan refugee and migrant population had some form of health insurance, leaving 73% completely uninsured. Among those with coverage, 20% were enrolled in the Seguro Integral de Salud (SIS), the country’s subsidized health insurance scheme. Meanwhile, only 5.4% were covered by EsSalud-the contributory system-, and 1.6% held private insurance.
Section III. Regulatory Initiatives, Precariousness, and Social Security in Delivery Platforms: Agency, Resistance, and Resilience
A key economic sector relevant to this study operates on the basis of unregulated jobs. In other words, these positions fall outside the scope of labor legislation. As a result, employment conditions are not standardized and regulatory oversight is limited, meaning that workers are often not protected by labor norms.
The effects of market flexibilization are closely linked to processes of labor precarization. Working conditions on digital platforms have been widely debated across several countries. For instance, a study in Ecuador provides an overview of emerging forms of precarization on delivery platforms (Hidalgo et al. 2019). Similarly, research in Argentina shows that precarity worsened for delivery platform workers during the COVID-19 pandemic (Elbert and Negri 2021). However, the effects of digital platform regulation on migrant labor remain less explored in the region.
This raises key questions for the present analysis: What role does the lack of regulation play in migrant labor on digital platforms in Colombia and Peru? How does it affect their access to social protection systems? To better understand how Venezuelan migrants resist and navigate precarious labor conditions, this section examines platform-related regulations in both countries and analyses their implications for Venezuelan workers’ access to social protection.
Before analyzing current regulations and their potential effects on precarity, it is important to first examine the discourse promoted by the delivery platforms addressed in this study. The largest delivery platform in Colombia, Rappi, was created in 2015 and rapidly became a “unicorn.”9 It has since expanded to nine countries and more than 250 cities across Latin America, diversifying its services from delivery to financial products. Although the exact number of individuals working through the app has not been disclosed, it is estimated that there are more than 200,000 “collaborators,” as the company refers to them. Rappi’s public discourse is grounded in the idea that it provides a service that contributes to national development. This notion of development has been widely criticized, as it obscures the employment relationship and the labor conditions of its so-called “collaborators” (Stiglich 2022). A study in Colombia concluded that, in a conservative scenario, these platforms could contribute 0.2% to GDP and generate additional positive economic effects (Fernández and Benavides 2020). Rappi also operates in Peru, where several other platforms share similar characteristics (OIT 2021; Dinegro Martínez 2021). In the Peruvian market, the largest platform is PedidosYa, a Uruguayan company established in 2009 that operates in 15 Latin American countries and primarily offers delivery services.
In Colombia, several attempts have been made to regulate digital platforms. This issue has been on the congressional agenda since 2016, one year after Rappi was launched. The first bill, presented that year, was rejected twice. It defined digital platforms as “Digital Intermediation Companies” (EID) and referred to their collaborators as economically dependent digital workers. Accordingly, it proposed measures to extend social protection and guarantee these workers’ freedom of association. In total, 12 bills have been presented to the Colombian Congress, but none have successfully passed the required debates for approval10.
Analyses of platforms’ responses to regulation in Colombia indicate that they “have assembled a techno-legal network which translates discussions about workers’ rights into the less regulated arena of information and communication technologies” (Sánchez Vargas et al. 2022). The authors highlight this strategic use of legal frameworks, suggesting that understanding these dynamics could help overcome the obstacles platform workers face in organizing collectively. Another obstacle is the recently established industry association, led by a former minister of technology, which advocates for platform regulation while denying the existence of an employment relationship. Despite these challenges, in early 2023, the Colombian government announced a labor reform that could regulate more than 700 platforms. The reform would potentially recognize an employment relationship and expand access to social protection.
Similarly, in Peru, the lack of regulation persists despite several initiatives. In 2019, the Ministry of Labor established a working group to analyze labor conditions of platform workers and issued a set of recommendations (Ministerial Resolution n.° 272-2019-TR). Between 2019 and 2021, seventeen bills on this matter were presented to Congress, addressing labor regulation, workers’ rights, access to social protection, and the regulation of delivery and mobility services (Dinegro Martínez 2022).
One interviewee from a migrant-led organization noted that the regulation imposing a 30% cap on foreign workers hired by a company in Peru may be one of the factors hindering the approval of platform regulation. Since foreigners represent more than 50% of Rappi’s workforce, platforms would be compelled to reduce personnel. This is “concerning because it would reduce the income of people who are already vulnerable simply because they are migrants” (interview conducted in May 2023).
During interviews, an activist leader who works as a delivery worker also noted that some workers fear the proposed regulation due to this hiring cap. They worry that only 20% or 30% of foreign workers would receive contracts, while the rest might be dismissed. This situation aligns with the theoretical assumption that the secondary labor market is characterized by job instability, high turnover, and highly personalized relationships with supervisors. The interviewed leader also explained that there was significant misinformation surrounding the proposed regulations and attempted to clarify the situation through social media and other communication channels:
We’re working on that-trying to make them understand what the law actually says. It’s not really about only 20% being on the payroll. It´s more about having a contract or at least some form of contractual relationship with these companies. From there, we can negotiate issues such as base tariffs or waiting times, which used to be paid but no longer are. (Interview conducted in May 2023)
This constitutes a form of resistance that emerges as new regulations are negotiated in Congress. In this context, social media plays a key role in informing delivery workers about current and proposed regulatory changes, enabling them to exercise their agency collectively.
Ensuring social security for digital platform workers is essential to reducing their precarity. These workers often lack access to social protection or are subject to significant gaps in coverage (Behrendt et al. 2019). In Peru, labor conditions for these workers remain highly precarious. A qualitative study found that their relationship with platforms is characterized by subordination to companies and their algorithms, resulting in persistent job instability and the absence of non-monetary employment benefits (González 2021). Another study conducted two surveys among platform workers in Lima in 2019 and 2020, revealing that more than 50% of platform workers were foreigners. The 2020 survey further showed that 80% of these foreign workers were Venezuelan and 84% were men (Dinegro Martínez 2021).
Simultaneously, in Colombia, delivery platform workers have experienced abuse and exploitation. Many work seven days a week and more than fourteen hours a day (Jiménez 2022). This situation aligns closely with LMS theory, particularly in terms of poor working conditions such as long working hours, low wages, and the lack of social security. Similarly, in Peru, workers typically work more than thirteen hours a day, and some have reportedly been victims of sexual harassment or violence by clients (Boza Pró and Briones Zegarra 2022). Some authors argue that solutions must address the specific challenges faced by platform workers in Peru, including excessive working hours, the need for digital disconnection, and fair remuneration, while ensuring the protection of fundamental rights (Arce Ortiz 2021).
Although these platforms claim to offer autonomy, the structural issues outlined above give rise to a dependent working relationship in which the platform, acting as de facto employer, exercises significant control over workers. These characteristics of the secondary labor market make resistance both necessary and urgent.
Section IV. Venezuelan Migrants on Delivery Platforms: Collective Resistance and Organizing Practices (Claims, Demands, and Bargaining Dynamics)
Both Peru and Colombia have relatively robust legal frameworks governing migrants and refugees’ access work. In both countries, regularization initiatives have indeed granted Venezuelans the right to work. However, they continue to face multiple barriers when attempting to enter the formal labor market. Platform workers confront specific obstacles stemming from the absence of regulatory frameworks governing their labor relationship with platforms-an issue that directly affects their access to social protection. This section examines how these workers navigate and overcome these overlapping constraints.
The increasing precarity faced by migrants, and their responses to these conditions, have led them to assert their labor rights from various positions, notably through trade union activity. In both Colombia and Peru, migrants across different sectors have organized collectively or unionized to counteract labor market flexibilization and growing job insecurity. These negative transformations in the labor market have been met with resistance from workers in general, and migrant in particular. Examples of migrants’ collective action include the formation of Utraven.co11 in Colombia. In 2018, Venezuelans and Colombian returnees established a state-recognized union to defend their labor rights. This initiative aligns with the Colombian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of association and collective bargaining under Article 38. According to the most recent census, Colombia had 3,174 active unions with over 1.3 million affiliates, most of whom belong to the country’s three largest confederations (Ministerio del Trabajo 2018). By contrast, trade unions in Peru wield significantly less influence. A 2018 report found that only 8% of the formally employed economically active population (EAP) were union members. As a result, the trade union sector’s capacity to negotiate and exert pressure has progressively declined in recent decades (PLADES 2019).
This contrasting context is crucial for understanding the forms of agency and resistance adopted by Venezuelan migrants working on delivery platforms in both countries. Migrant struggles are shaped by multiple factors, including the structural opportunities available in each national context and migrants’ capacity to leverage them, whether individually or collectively.
Colombia: Unionization and Negotiation
In Colombia, delivery workers have established two unions as a form of collective resistance to abuses associated with Rappi: the Unión de Trabajadores de Plataformas (Unidapp) and the Unión de Trabajadores de Plataformas Digitales y Mensajería (Unimedp). Unidapp emerged during global protest of digital workers in 2020, amid the COVID-19 pandemic. During this period, many members demanded access to sanitation measures and improved labor conditions. The union was officially registered with the Ministry of Labor in October 2021 and has since gathered over 1,200 affiliates. In 2022, the workers’ organization Unidapp formally presented a comprehensive set of demands to Rappi, structured in a document addressing multiple dimensions of platform-mediated labor. Although the proposal was organized into several chapters, its demands can be analytically understood around three central axes of struggle: wages and income stability, access to social protection and health, and the governance of algorithmic management.
First, wages and bonuses constituted a core point of contention. Platform workers demanded clearer remuneration schemes, fairer bonus structures, and greater predictability in their earnings. In the context of platform labor-where income is shaped by opaque pricing systems and fluctuating incentives-these demands reflect an effort to reintroduce collective standards into a labor regime characterized by individualized contracts and variable pay. From the perspective of collective action, particularly through unionization and resistance among migrant workers on digital platforms, this struggle over remuneration can be understood as an attempt to construct shared economic grievances among workers whose experiences are otherwise fragmented by the individualized logic of platform work.
The second axis of struggle concerned access to social security, occupational health, and safe working conditions. Unidapp’s claims emphasized the need for protections related to accidents, health coverage, and broader working conditions in public space. These demands underscore the structural vulnerability of platform workers who, despite performing essential logistical functions in urban economies, remain formally classified outside standard employment protections. In this sense, the struggle for health and social protection represents a broader attempt to redefine the boundaries of labor rights in platform capitalism, linking everyday risks-such as traffic accidents, exposure to violence, and precarious working environments-to claims for institutional recognition and protection.
Finally, the third axis focused on the governance of algorithms and the use of data within the platform. Workers called for greater transparency in algorithmic management, including the criteria used to allocate tasks, evaluate performance, and carry out deactivations. These claims also included demands related to data protection, privacy, and worker training. On digital labor platforms, algorithmic systems function as a central mechanism of control, organizing work while simultaneously obscuring the criteria that guide decision-making. Thus, contesting algorithmic management has become a key arena of labor struggle, as workers seek to challenge the profound asymmetries of information and power embedded in platform infrastructures.
Taken together, these axes-wages, health and social protection, and algorithmic governance-illustrate how collective action can emerge within contexts of digital fragmentation. Platform workers are geographically dispersed, interact primarily through apps, and experience high turnover, all of which complicate traditional forms of labor organizing. Yet organizations such as Unidapp seek to transform these fragmented experiences into collective claims by articulating shared grievances across economic, social, and technological domains.
The subsequent investigation initiated by the Colombian Ministry of Labor later that year, following allegations that Rappi was unwilling to negotiate, further illustrates how these struggles can move from dispersed worker demands to institutional scrutiny. One study described Unidapp in the following terms:
The movement’s greatest achievement has been to make its problems and demands visible across all three levels of government and to position itself to demand recognition as workers. The communication strategy developed through the media has enabled the movement and the union to remain present in public debate and gain ground, much like companies do, in order to take part in decision-making processes and press their demands. (Picasso Cerdà et al. 2022, 78)
In contrast, Unimedp was founded in 2021 and, according to its union representative, has more than 500 affiliates across 12 departments in Colombia. The union has actively supported Venezuelans in regularizing their legal status and has maintained ongoing dialogue not only with the migration authority but also with the Ministry of Transport (regarding driver’s licenses), the Bogotá Mayor’s Office, and the Ministry of Labor. A Unimedp representative explained during an interview in February 2023: “Social security is important for us. Rappi initially set a minimum payment of COP $ 3,500 (USD $0.82), but instead of increasing it, the rate has been reduced to COP $ 2,300 (USD $0.54). We want to find a solution.” This statement clearly highlights the central issue of social security, which is closely linked to poor working conditions and declining delivery payments. The representative further elaborated:
The issue is that we filed a complaint-we told the Fundamental Rights Delegate at the Ministry of Labor that we felt our human rights were being violated, as migrant workers are often mistreated. For example, when we go to a restaurant to pick up a delivery order, we are mistreated […]. When we hand over the delivery package, we are mistreated for being migrants. Women do not have access to restrooms. We do not have a place to eat, so we have to use public spaces, which in some parts of the city is not well received by residents. (Interview conducted in January 2023)
This statement is significant, as it shows union members’ determination to continue defending their labor and human rights through strategic engagement with government institutions. It also reveals their concerns about mistreatment as migrant workers-mistreatment that arises from negative perceptions among local populations and from the structural precarity embedded in delivery platform work. Furthermore, it underscores the gender segmentation evident in these workspaces. As mentioned above, access to adequate restrooms and eating facilities for workers at food pickup locations remain limited.
Regarding discrimination against migrant workers, it is evident that such prejudice also extends to law enforcement, as police officers often target delivery workers simply for wearing Rappi’s distinctive orange jacket or backpack. Additionally, our interviewee recalled:
Helpdesk’s personnel verbally mistreat us. There is not an internal code of conduct governing sanctions, so any customer service agent can penalize workers according to their own criteria. We are proposing that this staff receive training in fundamental human rights, particularly non-discrimination, equality and freedom. (Interview conducted in January 2023)
In this context, Unidapp’s demand for human rights training for both police officers and helpdesk staff is particularly significant. It calls for the respectful treatment of all individuals-particularly workers-regardless of their differences.
In early January 2023, following mediation by the Minister of Labor, Unimedp’s leaders successfully established communication with Rappi to initiate negotiations on working conditions and labor rights. The interviewee emphasized the significant progress achieved through the Ministry’s mediation, noting that it reflected a clear political willingness to engage both Rappi and the union in formal negotiations. This development represents an important step forward in advancing labor rights protection and advocacy. It also underlines the representative’s legitimacy as the elected president of a union with more than 500 members. As he explained:
We were very surprised that a representative of these platforms was present. That day, something remarkable happened. The representative said, “We do recognize you are workers, and from now on, we are going to acknowledge you as such.” Never before had a company called us workers! (Interview conducted in January 2023)
Consequently, the union was invited to roundtables organized by the Ministry of Labor to discuss key issues in the labor reform, including social security, wages, and worker recognition. However, the representative emphasized: “You are not going to work for a minimum wage, and you are not going to have a fixed work schedule, but those who work more than 48 hours a week will be regulated12. You have the right to social security and other benefits.”
Unimedp’s claims can be summarized as a comprehensive set of demands centered on recognition as workers, access to social security, and wage increases. Both Unidapp and Unimedp in Colombia articulate similar demands; however, they have adopted distinct resistance strategies. While Unidapp has maintained a strong public presence through media appearances and interviews, Unimedp has prioritized direct negotiation through government mediation, particularly after numerous unsuccessful attempts to engage Rappi directly.
Peru: Legislative Advocacy Amidst Organizational Challenges
In Peru, a group of Venezuelans is advocating legislative reform to address the regularization of migrants working through digital platforms. Their proposal includes the creation of a new specific permit for delivery workers, formulated in response to a draft law aimed at reforming the existing migration framework. This bill seeks to modify the grounds for expulsion, explicitly adding: “Using delivery transport without accrediting permission and authorization from the competent authority” (Congreso de la República del Perú 2020). Furthermore, it proposes to bar expelled foreigners from re-entering Peru for 25 years.
Leadership among digital workers in Peru has been limited and fragile, partly because individuals engaged in defending workers’ rights are simultaneously involved in broader national political struggles. As a result, the limited time available for union activism undermines the potential for organizing efforts that could foster cooperation and mobilization among platform workers-most of whom are migrants-and ultimately lead to the formation of an effective union. Additionally, unlike the substantial support received by Colombian workers from larger and established unions, Peruvian platform workers lack similar union backing and have largely been unable to organize collectively to resist abuses associated with Rappi.
During an interview with a young leader and platform worker in June 2023, he described a widely reported mobilization that took place in May, when delivery workers mobilized in response to Rappi’s unannounced decision to lower their base payment per delivery. He shared the content of their discussions and his impressions from the meeting with the Labor Commission aimed at establishing a negotiating table:
They [the state] told us: “We cannot help you because there is no applicable law on this matter.” Why? “Because you are not employees!” The Peruvian state itself does not recognize us as workers for these apps-that is what they told us. So, I think this is precisely the legal gap the companies take advantage of to commit violations. Therefore, I think the solution we are looking for is at least a regulation that prevents these companies from continuing to engage in these abusive practices. (Interview conducted in June 2023)
He also stated that other individuals had attempted to request a negotiation table with Rappi, but “they [the managers] simply closed the door and did not want to listen.” Consequently, some platform workers are now collaborating with members of Congress on legislative proposals, as well as with the Ministry of Labor, in an effort to reach an agreement with the company. This initiative is supported by the Observatorio de Plataformas Digitales (OPD) team, an organization that provides information on the working conditions of platform workers in Peru. The OPD is linked to the Fairwork project, which conducts research on digital labor platforms and artificial intelligence.
However, another group of delivery workers did not support the proposed law. The activist interviewed attributed this opposition to misinformation circulating on social media regarding the content of the bill. Consequently, the prevailing strategy of resistance has taken the form of public protests aimed at reaching a broader audience, combined with lobbying efforts within Congress to regulate the labor relationship between platforms and delivery workers.
The OPD team has collaborated with platform workers since 2020, participating in their mobilizations and providing spaces for them to better understand company practices and engage with members of Congress. In an interview, the OPD team leader discussed their role in engaging with trade unions in Peru. He explained that he had tried to build a common agenda to raise awareness among the unions about the profile of these workers, noting that “they think it’s only a job for foreigners.”
Regarding the organization of delivery workers, one common characteristic is remigration-the forced return of migrants to their countries of origin. Since 2019, two organizations have been created, but their leaders have since left the country. As a result, there has been a lack of sustained leadership on this issue, which represents a significant barrier to collective organizing. The OPD also identified additional factors that hinder platform workers from organizing collectively in Peru:
The first issue is that when workers protest, platforms can track their location through GPS. They know where you are, so if there is a protest at their offices, they can identify exactly who is present. Second, workers risk losing their jobs. Without formally dismissing them, platforms can block or deactivate their accounts. For workers whose income depends entirely on platform work, losing access to an account means starting from scratch on another platform. (Interview conducted in March 2023)
The OPD has also found that, for over 70% of these workers, platform work is a full-time activity, often exceeding 12 or 13 hours per day. The OPD leader interviewed also noted that some individuals use platform work as a means of saving money with the intention of migrating to another country. This dynamic further discourages participation in collective organizations. Although platform work may offer certain benefits, increasing inequality persists among workers. The apparent autonomy and independence associated with this type of work often foster individualization among platform workers in Peru, hindering the formation of collective ties (Carrión Chulluncuy and Fernández Dávila 2020). Another characteristic identified in studies on platform workers in Peru is the combination of high educational attainment and unemployment among many of them. As a Venezuelan interviewee from a migrant-led organization in Peru explained:
You see them having lunch and eating in the parks, regardless of the weather or the traffic rules. They receive no training. Many work with a borrowed or rented motorcycle. They spend all day on the streets, exposed to both cold and the heat, but that is how they generate income. And it is regrettable, yes, regrettable, because those professionals should not be doing Rappi. Not because it is not a decent job, but because their skills could be better utilized and would contribute more meaningfully to this country’s progress and development. (Interview conducted in February 2023)
In both Peru and Colombia, Venezuelan workers have been organizing collectively to defend their labor rights as platform workers, demonstrating a clear form of resistance. The key distinction lies in the structure and strength of their organizations: while those in Colombia tend to be more consolidated and combine negotiation strategies with government mediation, organizations in Peru are comparatively weaker, partly due to the strong individualization that characterizes digital platform work. This contrast corroborates the theoretical assumption that migrants occupying secondary sector jobs are among the weakest and most vulnerable social groups in the labor market. They tend to face limited capacity to resist adverse working conditions and possess weak bargaining power (Villa 1990).
Nevertheless, workers in both countries pursue similar goals regarding labor regulations. Their claims converge around access to social protection and formal recognition as workers. This struggle is rooted in the precarious nature of platform labor and the urgent need to improve access to social protection. More broadly, they seek to curb labor market flexibilization and promote initiatives that combat discrimination in both the workplace and society at large.
Conclusions
Millions of Venezuelans have fled their country, primarily to other South American nations such as Colombia and Peru, in search of protection and improved opportunities. However, even when regularization mechanisms are available, access to the formal labor market remains far from guaranteed. Barriers linked to factors beyond legal status are often not adequately addressed through socioeconomic inclusion policies. Moreover, both host countries exhibit structural labor-market challenges, including high levels of informality and unemployment, which in turn exacerbate existing inequalities.
This paper has presented findings on the interplay between migration, precarity, agency, resistance, resilience, and survival among Venezuelan migrants working through delivery platforms in Colombia and Peru. The study shows that these workers have experienced precarious forms of integration: they lack adequate access to social protection systems, work significantly longer hours than the average employee, and, in many cases, face discrimination.
The proliferation of delivery platforms in both countries largely coincided with the onset of the mass exodus from Venezuela in 2015. With limited opportunities to enter the formal labor market without legal documentation, many Venezuelans became reliant on the income generated through these platforms. Their insertion into this secondary labor market intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic, as demand for delivery services increased while other sectors contracted. Although these platforms provide immediate income-generating opportunities, working conditions remain precarious. The pandemic thus became a crucial moment for platform workers globally to mobilize collectively and demand improved labor conditions. From that point onward, collective action has played a central role in making these claims visible to the broader public, while also pushing for negotiation through government mediation and confronting platform management. This trajectory highlights the diverse forms of resistance employed by Venezuelan migrants working on delivery platforms in Colombia and Peru, where collective organizing has often prevailed over individual actions or interests.
In Colombia, consistent with a long-standing tradition of unionism, platform workers have organized into two unions and have successfully initiated a negotiation process with the government regarding their demands. They are also actively seeking to engage with platform companies to present their claims. The political opportunity created by the support of larger unions and a new administration has enabled them to elevate their claims and gain hearing. These actions constitute a significant form of resistance. Their agency has been facilitated by multiple stakeholders with converging interests, even in the face of opposition from the platform guild. In Peru, by contrast, and in response to aggressive immigration reforms specifically targeting migrant platform workers, a group that included Venezuelans proposed an alternative reform aimed at securing regular status and access to social protections. Nevertheless, platform workers remain largely invisible to the state, and their rights to collective organization and bargaining are effectively denied due to their lack of legal recognition as employees. As a result, they are often denied a hearing by the public authorities. Even so, some workers have engaged in protests and collective organizing in response to the precarious conditions imposed by labor platforms-actions that clearly constitute forms of resistance.
In both host countries, Venezuelan workers have organized collectively as a form of resistance to challenge their vulnerability and the precarious labor conditions to which they are subject. However, while Colombia’s political context has enabled greater opportunities for agency and collective mobilization, the Peruvian context has created significant barriers that constrain migrants’ capacity for collective action.
Indeed, Venezuelan platform workers have demonstrated considerable resourcefulness in organizing and advocating for their rights while confronting various forms of discrimination within the delivery platform sector, which constitutes a segment of the secondary labor market. They also experience the adverse effects of labor market flexibilization, in line with LMS theory.
By advocating for their rights and organizing to demand better working conditions, these workers play a critical role in improving their livelihoods. Their collective efforts underscore the importance of empowering migrant workers and ensuring they have a voice in matters that directly affect their working lives. In doing so, they contribute to shaping policies and regulatory frameworks that govern platform labor. This agency is exemplified by the unionization processes and protest actions led by deliverer workers in both Colombia and Peru.
