Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 107 posts

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#81

Post by scarface_74 »

daveguy wrote: post #71
scarface_74 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gig workers do too. Isn’t the idea behind surge pricing is that people decide whether it is worth them working or not?

It's not the workers that get to decide surge pricing or wages. The employer decides that, and they keep the extra money for themselves.

Employers don’t keep the extra amount. If that were the case, the workers would have no motivation to work or to get the supply/demand in balance.

I don’t get to “choose” how much I make. I just get to choose whether the amount of money I’m being offered per hour is worth my time.

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#82

Post by hamandcheese »

amazingamazing wrote: post #50
do_not_redeem wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of touch. Imagine trying to tell your landlord or the grocery store they'll get their money in 30 days, and by the way thanks for the food!

[deleted]

"Gig workers" have less consistent hours, and are probably much poorer than your monthly salaried friend. Picking up some extra shifts to pay for unexpected expenses is a sad but common reality. Charging them a fee to not wait 30 days is definitely exploitative.

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#83

Post by hamandcheese »

amazingamazing wrote: post #67
do_not_redeem wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your friends are not the ones I was calling out of touch. The company in the OP set up "a new payment system" without warning to their workers, and now people are getting paid 30 days later than previously agreed upon. If you think that the average person won't be impacted by not getting paid for a month, then yes, I stand by my statement.

[deleted]

> but they aren’t being charged to get their money.

They literally are. The deal was altered so that what used to be free now charges a fee.

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#84

Post by PittleyDunkin »

brightball wrote: post #72
casenmgreen wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And in many cases, e.g. healthcare, it’s unclear why we’re still bundling something into employment that properly should be separate. This, one million times over. I read an account describing how things came to be as they are. Apparently, it all started during WW2. The Government controlled wages, and so some wages were too high and some too low, and for those set too low, it became difficult to get staff. To make…

Pretty much, but what was left off is the union demands for healthcare as an employment benefit that truly entrenched the practice in the US.

> Pretty much, but what was left off is the union demands for healthcare as an employment benefit that truly entrenched the practice in the US.

This just doesn't make any sense—single payer would free up the union to fight for more. Literally just the sunk cost fallacy.

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#85

Post by scarface_74 »

burningChrome wrote: post #78
jandrese wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contractors get to negotiate how much they are paid.

While this is true, you don't control how many hours you're allowed to work. I've worked on several projects were I was promised an FTE conversion after performing really well during a project. My manager said the company wanted to keep me around and convert me to an FTE spot. Within weeks of my project being released, they dangled the conversion out in front of me while reducing my hours to 20-25 a week. I fell for…

This is another benefit of being a “gig worker”. I meet plenty of Uber drivers who do it just for extra side money and they can do it whenever they want to.

I met one lady who was from another city and came to town to spend time with her child and grand children. Her daughter was at work during the day and her grandkids were in school. She drove Uber during the day, during the week when she was bored and wanted a little extra money.

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#86

Post by JumpCrisscross »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #84
brightball wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much, but what was left off is the union demands for healthcare as an employment benefit that truly entrenched the practice in the US.

> Pretty much, but what was left off is the union demands for healthcare as an employment benefit that truly entrenched the practice in the US. This just doesn't make any sense—single payer would free up the union to fight for more. Literally just the sunk cost fallacy.

> single payer would free up the union to fight for more

Do unions in single-payer countries typically have healthcare goodies?

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#87

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #74
wvenable wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We gave less rights to part-time workers so companies just started making as many part-time as possible. If you create a loop-hole it will be exploited.

Pretty much this. The ACA that said you had to offer health insurance to employees working over 30h / wk? Well, guess what, you're now only working 29.5. We should have just expanded medicare to cover everyone, but no, that'd give too much power to the workers.

> should have just expanded medicare to cover everyone

Maybe the solution is to go piecemeal. We already have Medicaid for the poor--raise the limit on that. Expand Medicare to children and pregnant women. Et cetera.

> that'd give too much power to the workers

Medicare For All isn't popular [1]. There isn't a conspiracy, just people being cautious about a complicated and important topic.

[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/468401/majority-say-gov-ensure-...

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#88

Post by etblg »

ge96 wrote: post #66
null0pointer wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Had to prove I wasn't. How did you prove it? What is their standard of evidence? My intuition says it would be difficult to prove a negative.

Screenshot of my (gig) app history, I guess arguably that can be faked I do food deliveries primarily since my car isn't accepted as a passenger car

How come your car isn't accepted as a passenger car? 2 door coupe or something? Delivery van?

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#89

Post by JumpCrisscross »

daveguy wrote: post #71
scarface_74 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gig workers do too. Isn’t the idea behind surge pricing is that people decide whether it is worth them working or not?

It's not the workers that get to decide surge pricing or wages. The employer decides that, and they keep the extra money for themselves.

> not the workers that get to decide surge pricing or wages. The employer decides that

Ridesharing seems like a relatively-efficient market. Nobody is singularly setting the rate.

We could switch to a two-sided market where every time you book a ride you enter a reserve and maximum price, and then drivers enter their reserve and minimum and the system matches for a fee. And then we can watch a competitor eat our lunch because literally nobody wants to do that.

Re: 'So immoral': gig economy workers forced to pay fee to receive their wages

#90

Post by cr125rider »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #51
whimsicalism wrote: post #17

To receive their wages within 30 days . This is basically just an inhouse bundled payday loan program. imo they should probably be required to pay out at the normal biweekly timescale, but it’s not nearly as awful as this title makes out

For my clients, I handle this simply. Payment due upon receipt of invoice. Then, I stop working until paid. Then I resume their project (re-queue it in my workflow). Resorted to this after not ever getting paid too often.

The problem is if you stop working as a gig worker you get replaced almost immediately because the barrier to work is incredibly low. The company never even feels a change.
Post reply on HN