Between protection and flexibility: Uber drivers’ perspectives on regulating platform work in Johannesburg, South Africa

Debates over the regulation of platform work often hinge on the tension between worker protection and labour flexibility, yet little is known about how platform workers themselves navigate this trade-off in Johannesburg. This study examines Uber drivers' perspectives on the regulation of platform work in Johannesburg, South Africa, a context marked by high unemployment, migrant precarity, and heightened safety risks. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 20 Uber drivers, the study uses thematic analysis informed by algorithmic management and precariat theories to interpret how drivers understand, value, and negotiate the conditions of platform labour. The findings reveal a dual position: many drivers support regulation as a means to improve safety, ensure fair earnings, reduce market oversaturation, and gain access to benefits such as pensions and due-process mechanisms for deactivation disputes. Others remain sceptical, expressing concern that formalisation may undermine the flexibility they value, increase deductions from already unpredictable earnings, and introduce additional oversight on top of existing algorithmic control. Across participant accounts, algorithmic opacity, fluctuating operational costs, and income instability emerged as core sources of precarity. The study suggests that drivers' varied attitudes are rational responses to digital control and ongoing feelings of insecurity, rather than being inconsistent. It concludes that context-sensitive hybrid regulatory models, combining flexibility with enforceable protections, may be better suited to the realities of digital platform labour in South Africa.