In Austria we have a third kind of employment type that is hourly allows the employer to set hours. It can be used eg. for a weekly teaching position. The employer needs to withhold social security taxes but not actual federal taxes. The employee can technically send a substitute qualified to do the job. But I think right there it usually breaks down in reality and moves into an attempt to get rid of the ton of onerous legislation you fall under with real employees.
The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
131–140 of 155 posts
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
3. What happens, when we find out that everybody's job can be hyper-specialized and broken down so robots can do them... which leads to >95% unemployment? In such a society, 95% of the people will get to do whatever they want, rather than working for a living. I don't see the problem. Too often, the assumption that near-100% employment is desirable goes unchallenged. We're people, not ants.
But in our current schema of society, it would indicate that 95% of the people would be on some sort of subsistence form of government aid. In that case, they will do what they want, as long as it doesn't include costs. That seems like a very dead society, with people depressed about no work and no money.
I feel like I would be far more productive doing a variety of helpful things for society if I didn't have to worry about making money.
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the very, very few proven formulas for rapidly generating concentrated wealth is: centralize (privatize) the profits, distribute (socialize) the risks and costs. Once you start looking for this meta-pattern, you'll see it a lot. A chemical company concentrates the profits from synthesizing a useful compound, but diffuses the risks and costs of pollution and disease into the commons. A social network distribute…
In the context of this article, a big portion of the risks and costs are supported by national health care (Obamacare). If these gig workers had to acquire health care via the old means (i.e. benefits from a corporation, or hoping an insurance co will accept you), they would not have the luxury to work as contractors.
ACA/Obamacare is not national health care - it's national health insurance, and despite it being better than before (i.e., no pre-existing condition rescissions), the plans offered by carriers even with subsidies are still too pricey for many.
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#134Here's the IRS's basic test for "employee"[1]: * Behavioral: Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job? * Financial: Are the business aspects of the worker’s job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.) * Type of Relationship: Are there written cont…
Your interpretation of "behavioral" is flawed. Uber drivers are not told "when and where" to go. They are offered the opportunity to go somewhere and pick someone up. It is completely at their convenience and option to do this; they will suffer no privation if they fail to pick up the offered lead. It's not like a traditional employer-employee relationship, where the employer buys time from the employee and directs it as he sees fit. The employer is buying the execution of a discrete task, not a large chunk of the employee's time.
Your analysis of "Type of Relationship" is also flawed. Uber does not supply any employee-style benefits, and they do not rely on specific drivers to carry out "key aspects" of the business beyond the discrete work units they've wilfully contracted to perform at their convenience. There is no ongoing expectation that any particular driver will drive at any point in the future.
There is no boss to call Uber drivers and say "Please, you are killing us by not picking up your shift tonight".
I think the differences between traditional employment relationships and gig providers are pretty clear. I expect these lawsuits are just from people trying to get big settlements, since it's pretty obvious opting to bring someone a Jamba Juice on TaskRabbit once every 2 months is a lot different than a 9-5.
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely! Glad to see that most commenters here see that this gig economy is really bsed on exploitation.
Is it really based on exploitation? Take for instance one of my best friends who lives in the D.C. area. He was just raving to me about how he made of $300 in one night driving for Uber. Now, of course he has to pay for his own gas and wear and tear on his car, but he did not feel exploited. Not saying that every "gig economy" company pays well, but I don't think you can say it is all based on exploitation. I think t…
>> but he did not feel exploited.
That is an egregiously poor litmus test for determining whether or not exploitation occurs.
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the root of the problem is companies that want staff who they can work like employees but who they don't have to pay like employees, provide benefits to like employees, or accept liability on behalf of like employees. There's nothing remotely new or novel about that; it's a dodge that companies have been trying to get away with for as long as labor law has existed.
The premise of Uber is that there were tremendous and ill-gotten gains being nefariously produced by taxi cartels. By busting them up, they could provide people with better service at an equal or lower price - all while ridding cities of a nasty bunch of operators in the process. Behold the righteous cleansing power of creative destruction! Turns out that their case was a bit overstated (to put it politely). Sure, th…
>Sociopathic tendencies of the leadership aside, one has to wonder if the real problem isn't the VCs who poured their funds' money into a business that could only win by undermining clear, reasonable, historically necessary, and broadly popular legislation.
Well many of those VCs are ideologically opposed to the very concept of legislation being passed to regulate business in the first place, so they effectively got a double return on their investment in Uber:
* First return: actual financial gains when the business takes off
* Second return: a few more paid mercenaries elbowing their way through the rule of law
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it really based on exploitation? Take for instance one of my best friends who lives in the D.C. area. He was just raving to me about how he made of $300 in one night driving for Uber. Now, of course he has to pay for his own gas and wear and tear on his car, but he did not feel exploited. Not saying that every "gig economy" company pays well, but I don't think you can say it is all based on exploitation. I think t…
If I spend an hour or two a week driving for Uber it seems pretty fair to consider me a contractor. What if I spend 15 hours a week? Am I a contractor or a part time worker? What about 40 hours? Am I an employee yet? Now let's make it worse. I drive 60 hours a week, but I drive for Uber, Lift, and a hypothetical third rid share company. Am I an Uber employee? 'No because you drive for three services.' But what if 90%…
The length of time you work has nothing to do with being a contractor or employee. A"temp" or "contractor" in your last sentence are typically employees of a temp agency, and not 1099 contractors. The agency covers the employee benefits, and takes those costs when consideration when negotiating the contract with the company.
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
The premise of Uber is that there were tremendous and ill-gotten gains being nefariously produced by taxi cartels. By busting them up, they could provide people with better service at an equal or lower price - all while ridding cities of a nasty bunch of operators in the process. Behold the righteous cleansing power of creative destruction! Turns out that their case was a bit overstated (to put it politely). Sure, th…
>Sociopathic tendencies of the leadership aside, one has to wonder if the real problem isn't the VCs who poured their funds' money into a business that could only win by undermining clear, reasonable, historically necessary, and broadly popular legislation. Well many of those VCs are ideologically opposed to the very concept of legislation being passed to regulate business in the first place, so they effectively got…
[deleted]
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
The premise of Uber is that there were tremendous and ill-gotten gains being nefariously produced by taxi cartels. By busting them up, they could provide people with better service at an equal or lower price - all while ridding cities of a nasty bunch of operators in the process. Behold the righteous cleansing power of creative destruction! Turns out that their case was a bit overstated (to put it politely). Sure, th…
>Sociopathic tendencies of the leadership aside, one has to wonder if the real problem isn't the VCs who poured their funds' money into a business that could only win by undermining clear, reasonable, historically necessary, and broadly popular legislation. Well many of those VCs are ideologically opposed to the very concept of legislation being passed to regulate business in the first place, so they effectively got…
Weirdly enough, none of these guys has set up shop in Lagos. Or Moscow.
Re: The Gig Economy Is Being Sued to Death
#140"Gig Economy"? First it was "Sharing Economy," an equally bogus attempt to control perception by inventing language to make piece work and unsteady labor seem hip and innovative and even socially conscious. I think the "Disenfranchised Labor" or "Unprotected Workforce" economy would be more appropriate.