In this article, I query whether participation in the labour market
can hinder neo-republican freedom as non-domination. I briefly
present the view of Philip Pettit on the topic, based on the distinction
between offering a reward and threatening a punishment. I compare it
to the analysis of labour republicans, recently reconstructed by Alex
Gourevitch, according to whom, the exclusion of a group of individuals
from the control of productive assets represents a form of structural
domination. Then, I explain why I take a position that is different from
both. I hold that capitalist structural domination leads only to exploitation,
not interpersonal domination. In doing this, I consider two objections
that might be raised against my argument. The first one is based on
incomplete contracts and on a possible ideal benchmark for job offers.
The second one challenges the supposed arbitrariness of unequal property
relations within the capitalist social system.