The terms “precariat” and “precarity” are often used in sociological discourse, although they have neither precise analytical definitions nor clear empirical indicators. The fault lies with their promoters, such as Guy Standing or Jarosław Urbański, who use the terms incoherently in their works. The authors attempt to systematize these concepts. They claim that “precariat” and “precarity” are variously understood and correspond to three related but separate levels of sociological analysis: (1) employment of the precariat as a macrosociological category; (2) the precariat as a framework for the mobilization of social movements; and (3) precarity as an experience. Different tools are used for each of these levels and each level makes it possi...