A recent study examining gig drivers in Finland suggests that platform-based transport work may be perceived as fair more often than commonly assumed.

The findings are based on a peer-reviewed study published in Social Justice Research (2026), conducted by researchers from Tampere University and the University of Jyväskylä. The study focuses on a transport platform operating in Finland (referred to as Biila in the research).

The research, based on a survey of drivers working in car transfer services, found that 85% of drivers felt they were treated fairly or somewhat fairly by the platform company, while 15% reported feeling somewhat or completely unfairly treated .

On a four-point scale, the average fairness rating was 3.3 out of 4, with a median of 4, indicating generally high perceived fairness among respondents.

How platform work is used in Finland

To understand these findings, it’s important to look at how platform work is used in practice.

In Finland, platform work is most commonly used as a source of supplementary income rather than a primary occupation.

How fair do drivers feel treated?

Fairness linked to how work is structured

The study found that drivers’ perception of fairness was strongly associated with specific operational factors rather than employment status or dependency on platform income.

Statistically significant factors influencing fairness included:

• Satisfaction with income

• Freedom and influence over income

• Support in the event of problems

• Sufficient communication

• A platform application that streamlines work

These factors were all linked to the concept of organizational justice, which examines fairness through distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational dimensions.

Freedom rated highest, income satisfaction lowest

Freedom and influence over income received the highest rating, 3.5 out of 4, with 88% of drivers agreeing or somewhat agreeing that they had control over their work and earnings.

By comparison:

• Communication: 3.2 / 4

• Platform usability: 3.2 / 4

• Support in problem situations: 3.0 / 4

These results indicate that autonomy plays an important role in how drivers experience fairness.

While flexibility scored highly, income satisfaction showed more mixed results:

• 47% satisfied or somewhat satisfied

• 33% neutral

• 21% dissatisfied or somewhat dissatisfied

This makes income the largest source of dissatisfaction, even in an otherwise positive overall experience.

Employment status does not determine fairness

One of the study’s most notable findings is what does not affect fairness.

The analysis shows no significant relationship between fairness perception and:

• Full-time vs part-time work

• Dependence on platform income

• Age or education

• Length of time on the platform

This challenges a common assumption that gig work is perceived as unfair primarily because of employment structure.

Who are the drivers?

The study also provides insight into who gig drivers are and how they use platform work. The results show that most drivers engage in platform work on a part-time basis and primarily use it as a source of supplementary income.

Most drivers are not financially dependent on platform work. A majority report that platform income accounts for only a small share of their total earnings, and the largest group works only occasionally on a part-time basis.

In addition, almost all respondents reported that working as a driver was their own choice, rather than a result of a lack of alternative employment. 

These findings suggest that, in this context, gig work is primarily used as a flexible income source rather than a full-time occupation.

Here’s the summarized insight into the profile of respondents:

• 98% work as drivers by choice

• 76% work part-time, typically 1–10 hours per week

• Most use platform work as supplementary income

The typical driver is a young adult with secondary or vocational education

Implications for platform work

The results contribute to a broader understanding of fairness in the gig economy.

While previous discussions have often focused on challenges such as income instability and lack of transparency, this study shows that platform work can be perceived as fair when key conditions are met.

These include:

• Clear and transparent processes

• Reliable communication

• Access to human support

• Real control over work and income

• Technology that simplifies rather than complicates work

At the same time, income satisfaction remains a central challenge, particularly in balancing flexibility with stable earnings.

A broader perspective on the gig economy

The findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of gig work, which is often characterised by debates around precarity and fairness.

The study suggests that fairness in platform work is not determined by whether work is traditional or gig-based. Instead, it is shaped by how the work is structured and experienced in practice.

When designed effectively, platform-based work can provide a flexible and viable way to earn income, particularly alongside other employment or studies .

However, the researchers note that further studies across different countries, platforms, and driver profiles are needed to better understand how these findings apply more broadly.