The Labor Order and Duty Boundaries of Rural Grid Workers

Taking Village S In Beijing as An Example

Abstract

Against the backdrop of the country's efforts to modernize grassroots governance, grid-based governance, as an innovative practice model, faces the dual challenges of blurred boundaries of responsibilities and alienation of labor order. This study takes Village S in Beijing as the field point and systematically examines the labor characteristics and duty dilemmas of rural grid workers in the rural acquaintance society through methods such as in-depth interviews and participatory observations. The findings are: (1) Institutional failure of the duty list, and widespread phenomena such as publicization of private affairs, responsibility of public affairs, and subjectivization of assessment standards; (2) Grid workers are trapped in the role paradox of "all-rounder", and the boundaries between public and private labor are dissolved by the double squeeze of the network of personal connections and administrative pressure; (3) The flexible working mechanism leads to the dynamic extension of duty boundaries, creating a vicious cycle of "task absorption - resource dependence - assessment alienation". Based on this, a three-dimensional reconstruction path of "system - process - culture" is proposed: define the boundaries of rights and responsibilities through the "Guidelines for the Performance of Duties by Urban and Rural Community Grid Workers", and establish a task access mechanism of "three reviews and three preparations"; Promote the process reengineering of "professionalization of public affairs + integrated online and offline platform"; Build an incentive system of "basic salary + performance bonus + project allowance" and foster a governance culture of "everyone is responsible". Research shows that the improvement of rural grid governance efficiency requires breaking through the structural conflict between bureaucratic logic and local logic, embedding emotional governance in institutional reconstruction, retaining humanistic care in technological empowerment, and ultimately achieving the transformation of grassroots governance from campaign-style governance to institutionalized governance.