Labor Safety of Multiple Jobholders Focusing on Motivation and Time (2024)

Lee Ha-eun, Principal Investigator (Department of Anthropology, Seoul National University)

Jang Ji-hye, Co-researcher (Independent Researcher)

2024 Independent Research Grant Program

Korea Institute of Labor Safety and Health

Translated by Jaehyun Oh

1. Background and Significance of the Study

The existence of “multi-jobbers,”[1] inferred from various surveys, continues to be identified through existing indicators such as ‘side job workers,’ despite the lack of clear social consensus on the concept. Their numbers are estimated to range widely from approximately 2% to 17% of the total employed population, but the clear trend is that their numbers continue to increase. However, the concept of these “multi-jobbers” or a concrete understanding of their lives remains limited. Therefore, there is a need for further research and discussion commensurate with their scale.

Behind the rapid increase in “multi-jobbers” lies changing labor conditions and values. The labor issues raised by the younger generation, represented by terms such as “MZ” —a term that combines Millennials (born 1981-1996) and Generation Z (born 1997-2012) – are constantly evolving. The changes in their values and social conditions are interdependent, and it is unclear which factor precedes the other. However, there is a need to conduct specific research on the realities and demands of these individuals, which remain unclear despite the publicly acknowledged motivation of “secondary income sources.”

As unstable labor conditions and self-managed, entrepreneurial subjectivity expand, the very nature of “labor time” is undergoing significant changes. How should labor time and non-labor time be distinguished today? This study aims to bridge this gap by exploring the boundaries of what is sometimes referred to as “work that doesn’t feel like work.”

2. Previous Research

The concept of “multi-jobbers” is often used interchangeably with “side jobs” in statistical surveys, but Statistics Korea’s “Economic Activity Survey” uses questions such as “Did you engage in any work other than your main job last week?” to define the scale of side jobs, which tends to narrow the scope of the target population. The term “multi-jobber” was introduced by Hong Jina (2019) to refer to individuals who proactively pursue their own work. However, existing concepts such as multiple jobholding (MJH) provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the motivations and safety concerns associated with holding multiple jobs. Within such discussions , the motivations for multiple jobholding can be broadly divided into two categories: 1) career development or increased autonomy for highly skilled workers, and 2) economic necessity (Campion et al., 2020). In this context, the term “multi-jobber” in South Korea refers to the former meaning in its etymology or academic discussions (Hwang Se-won, 2023), while its definition encompasses both the former and latter meanings. However, its popular usage in newspaper articles includes both meanings.

Literature addressing the safety of these individuals focuses on subjective health issues, overwork, and psychological burnout experienced by those with multiple jobs. Existing analyses of their safety or time utilization tend to discuss these issues comprehensively without distinguishing between types based on motivation. According to Shin Sun-ok’s 2023 analysis based on the 2022 Korea Labor Panel Survey, their weekly working hours were approximately 54.6 hours; however, it was difficult to determine the specific details of their work types or actual time utilization.

This study is divided into two main parts: 1) an analysis of the motivations of “multi-jobbers,” and 2) an analysis of their specific time utilization practices. The discussion on time utilization addresses the safety issues of “multi-jobbers” who work extremely long hours in situations where the boundaries between work, rest, and daily life are unclear. The analysis of motivations aims to discover whether such situations or new forms of labor can be simply reduced to “voluntary choices” or resolved through promises such as lifetime employment, and what risks these individuals truly face in the workplace.

3. Research Method

This study is based on interviews with 12 “multi-jobbers” and an analysis of their time logs. Here, “multi-jobbers” are defined as individuals who engage in multiple jobs under self-realization or self-directed motivations, excluding those motivated solely by economic reasons. To minimize subjective distortions based on memory, participants were asked to record their specific time usage daily over a one-week period.

4. Research Results

○ Motivations of “multi-jobbers”

Even if they are freelancers, they inevitably have to spend long hours in an “organization” to make a living, and they discover risks within the organization. First, for them, a workplace can be filled with chronic uncertainty about its very existence. This instability is not simply the risk of being laid off from a single workplace, but a chronic sense of insecurity that has been experienced and witnessed firsthand by those who have actually experienced the survival of an entire industry hanging in the balance. On the other hand, the risk of mental harm caused by the hierarchical power or authority that uncontrollable others wield over individuals within the workplace organization becomes apparent. This negative impact includes not only personal harassment but also the violation of values or beliefs that one wishes to uphold, or a sense of injustice and inequality. This risk is experienced in a dual manner, as long-term affiliation and economic stability are necessary for livelihood.

Due to these risks, work is redefined as a comprehensive entity with separate aspects, such as a means of income or a means of self-realization. Sometimes, individuals may downgrade their primary occupation to a mere means of income for survival, or flexibly reconfigure occupations outside their primary field as their main occupation from an identity perspective. Through this process, they seek to discover a divided identity—“the self working outside the company”—that reduces uncertainty and enhances control over themselves, using it as a new safe haven.

At this point, the life they wish to live or the goals they seek to achieve are experienced not as mere choices but as critical issues of self-preservation and self-worth. This is not merely an individual characteristic but carries a temporal and generational context and discourse. It demonstrates that the motivations to avoid the negative aspects of multiple job holding and to pursue positive incentives are not disconnected individual motivations but rather integrated and continuous aspects.

○ Time management of “multi-jobbers”

When analyzing the specific time utilization of these “multi-jobbers” over a week, it was found that none of them worked five days or fewer per week, with all working six or seven days per week. When combining the total working hours over a week, the “multi-jobbers” who participated in the study worked an average of 58.7 hours per week, with the shortest working hours being 31 hours and the longest being 96.7 hours. When considering the categories of “rest time,” “work time,” and “time for desired activities”—a slogan from the 1886 labor movement—and the regulations on time utilization revealed in the history of the labor movement, desired activities or rest are physical and personal time distinct from “multiple-job” time. This provides a new point of discussion regarding the effectiveness and direction of policy and legal approaches that currently define labor.

5. Conclusion

“Multi-jobbers” thus reveal the intersection of various phenomena: shifting labor values, diversifying desires for security, and simultaneously undermining existing policies. For them, risk is dual. While “multiple-job” work, which induces long working hours, is inherently risky, it also serves as a strategy to offset the risk of losing oneself to organizational dependency or the frustration of an unfulfilled self. Their choices resonate with broader social phenomena. This study’s significance lies in its ability to provide clues about the fundamental political and structural changes of the future, as it succinctly illustrates the direction of the evolving labor landscape and offers insights into the future from those who reject connection and seek personal means of security.

[1] Often called “N-jobbers” in South Korea.