Among Baemin couriers, there exists a belief that food delivery work rewards fairly—despite the obscure algorithms—compared to other types of work. As an online business owner, Minsu’s income depends on unpredictable demand from customers. Delivering with Baemin at least lets him earn money as much as he ‘burns his time [as in burning wood guarantees heat’. He added, ‘this also means that if you don’t move, you get nothing’. Jihoon also commented that ‘you get paid precisely by the amount of time and bodily efforts you’ve invested in’. This perception can partly be related to Koreans’ extremely strong preference to hyper-meritocratic values. Getting paid for the efforts and movements made, as perceived by couriers, is an ideal realisation of meritocracy. In K-Meritocracy, Kwonil Park (2021) claims that for Koreans, inequality based on talent and efforts is fair; it would be unfair if talent and efforts did not make a substantial difference in the distribution of wealth. Strikingly, Koreans’ attitude towards income inequality is opposite to that of people in other East Asian and European countries, as shown in the World Value Survey (2017–2020) referenced in Park (2021). Park further notes that the inclination to favour unequal income distribution persists regardless of age, income level, educational background, and political orientation. There are historical and political-economic foundations on which this collective mentality has developed. In short, Park views the firm belief in meritocracy endures as the most reasonable individual survival strategy in a neoliberal society where collective solutions are not viable.[1]
References:
Park, K. (2021). 한국의 능력주의: 한국인이 기꺼이 참거나 죽어도 못 참는것에 대하여 [K-Meritocracy: On what Koreans willingly accept and what they would rather die than approve of]. Idea.
[1] According to Park’s (2021) analysis, Korean meritocracy is deeply rooted in testocracy (test-based meritocracy, i.e., a system where an individual’s merit is determined by their performance in official tests) originated from the medieval period. Meritocracy, combined with trust in test scores, is often suggested as the fairest counter-value system to nepotism and elitism. The antagonism towards equal distribution has been developed from anti-communism campaigns post-Korean war. Neoliberalism advanced particularly during the financial crisis in the 1990s engendered a strong inclination towards individualistic and meritocratic values.