The Gig Economy

[SunsetBengal]

(05-09-2019, 02:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote:   Without employees standing up for their fair share 90% of the country's workers would be living in poverty right now while the business owners reaped all the profits from their labor.  Union organizers were murdered by business owners.  People died for fair treatment.  And now just a few decades later we have all these people saying "**** the workers.  Let the owners make all the money.  Labor has no value."

I'll use myself as an example.  I work for a professional land surveying company.  I agreed to work for a set amount of money.  The value of the work that I produce brings in good money, many times the value of what I'm paid for performing my job.  Are you saying that I should be outraged that my company's management makes considerable amount off of the fruits of my labor?  Should I try to organize a strike?  Should I petition my congressman to pass a law saying that my employer owes me a bigger cut of his profits?

I think not.  Just the same as I think it's wrong for these drivers to complain about a situation that they were fully aware of, going into it.  I mean, I have the freedom to test and earn my Professional License, the freedom to go on my own and build my own practice.  Just the same as those drivers have the same freedom to attain their own licenses or certifications that qualify them to operate a professional taxi service.  If they are truly fed up with making those above them money, they should do just that.  As for my situation, I remain because I'm thankful for the opportunity to gain the knowledge and experience that my employer has accumulated.  I'll likely attain my PLS in the next couple years, but I'm not in any hurry to try to establish a practice from the ground up. 

[fredtoast]

(05-09-2019, 03:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'll use myself as an example.  I work for a professional land surveying company.  I agreed to work for a set amount of money.  The value of the work that I produce brings in good money, many times the value of what I'm paid for performing my job.  Are you saying that I should be outraged that my company's management makes considerable amount off of the fruits of my labor?  Should I try to organize a strike?  Should I petition my congressman to pass a law saying that my employer owes me a bigger cut of his profits?

I think not.  Just the same as I think it's wrong for these drivers to complain about a situation that they were fully aware of, going into it.  I mean, I have the freedom to test and earn my Professional License, the freedom to go on my own and build my own practice.  Just the same as those drivers have the same freedom to attain their own licenses or certifications that qualify them to operate a professional taxi service.  If they are truly fed up with making those above them money, they should do just that.  As for my situation, I remain because I'm thankful for the opportunity to gain the knowledge and experience that my employer has accumulated.  I'll likely attain my PLS in the next couple years, but I'm not in any hurry to try to establish a practice from the ground up. 

You are not the usual example.  You had enough family support to be able to completely stop working for a long time while you went to school and got your license.  That does not apply to everyone.  In fact not many people at all could just quit working once they have a home and family. Just like many of these drivers don't have the resources to get their own taxi license or compete with companies like Lyft or Uber.  


Sure, the drivers have the right to look for other work, but Uber and Lyft also have the right to pay them a fair wage instead of dealing with a strike.

Like I said before.  If everyone thought like you there would have never been a labor movement in the United States and 90% of workers would be living in poverty. 

[fredtoast]

(05-09-2019, 02:50 PM)Au165 Wrote: Side note: You mention they are being "screwed". How does one get screwed by an agreement that has no penalty for terminating and delivers exactly what both sides were promised?

You get screwed when the company negotiates from a position of power with people who have no power.  The only way the workers have any power is to organize and work together.

Did none of you ever study the history of the organized labor movement in the United States?


The coal miners who worked in deadly conditions for poverty wages were also under an agreement that had no penalty for terminating and delivered exactly what both sides promised.  You think they had not "justification" for organizing and protesting?

[Au165]

(05-09-2019, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You think they had not "justification" for organizing and protesting?

Coal miners in deadly working conditions? Yes. Uber drivers who signed up to work as contractors who simply want to be hired as employees because that's what they want? no. Again, they can do what they want in terms of protesting but it misguided. Their argument should be with the federal government who has now twice upheld these kind of services are in fact contractors. 

If I hire someone to be an exempt employee due to the government definition of an exempt employee and he then decides he'd prefer to be non exempt, I am not a bad employer because I choose not to change his status simply because he wants me to. If they want to drive for a living they could become a taxi driver, but they won't. The reason they won't is because they don't want to actually be employees they just want employee benefits. 

[fredtoast]

(05-09-2019, 05:06 PM)Au165 Wrote:  If they want to drive for a living they could become a taxi driver, but they won't. The reason they won't is because they don't want to actually be employees they just want employee benefits. 

If there is no Taxi company in the area it is very expensive to get a license.  So many of them probably don't have that option.

In fact Uber and Lyft have caused some Taxi businesses in low served areas to go out of business.

[Au165]

(05-09-2019, 05:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If there is no Taxi company in the area it is very expensive to get a license.  So many of them probably don't have that option.

In fact Uber and Lyft have caused some Taxi businesses in low served areas to go out of business.

So they basically were able to work because Uber and Lyft provided them a platform to let them make money without needing a costly license that many probably couldn’t afford? Seems like they got the benefits they were promised as a contractor. Let’s be honest there isn’t this high demand to be a Taxi driver because they are employees that have to work scheduled hours. The reason there are so many drivers is because they as contractors make their own schedules.

Their fight is with the US government classifying them as contractors. They should focus on contacting their legislators and get it changed that way. The issue is once they do this Uber is now a Taxi company and it kind of dies off, at least until self driving cars come about.

[CKwi88]

(05-08-2019, 08:52 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It’s basic contract work. They are self-employed, but I think it works much better for people looking to supplement their income. It’s perfect for that as you work when you want. Making a living seems like it would be tough though.

I’ve never used one of these services but I think they’re awesome. Pure speculation, but I think there are people alive today who wouldn’t be without these.

One of my friends made 90k last year gross. Uber and Lyft are very attractive for illegal immigrants.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-09-2019, 04:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are not the usual example.  You had enough family support to be able to completely stop working for a long time while you went to school and got your license. 

Hey, hey, hey, wait just a minute.  You're trying to paint a picture here that simply isn't true.  When I went back to school, nobody "supported" me.  My family gave me plenty of moral support, and agreed to get my books for me, which we usually bought second hand versions of, off Amazon.   I had to take lousy side jobs of some unpleasant varieties,  I mowed yards, hauled scrap metal, made furniture deliveries for habitat for humanity, and occasionally got calls from previous customers to upgrade their kitchens or baths.  I had to make a choice as to either keep my contractor's liability current, or pay my tuition.  The tuition won that battle, but it's paid off in the long run.  Basically, I did what ever it took to keep the lights on, cheap food in the fridge, and enough gas in the tank to get by. 


Don't you dare try to discount the hard work and effort that I put it, in order to have a fresh start in a new career.   It was no "helping hand" that got me over the hump, but hard work and determination.

[*bfine32*]

(05-09-2019, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You get screwed when the company negotiates from a position of power with people who have no power.  The only way the workers have any power is to organize and work together.

Did none of you ever study the history of the organized labor movement in the United States?


The coal miners who worked in deadly conditions for poverty wages were also under an agreement that had no penalty for terminating and delivered exactly what both sides promised.  You think they had not "justification" for organizing and protesting?

Dude shared all that knowledge with you and all you quoted was the side-note and asked an irrelevant question in all bold. 

It seems my first assumption was correct. These guys/girls are quasi self-employed and are threatening strike.

[Benton]

(05-09-2019, 03:18 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'll use myself as an example.  I work for a professional land surveying company.  I agreed to work for a set amount of money.  . 

And that's a big part of the issue. These drivers agreed to work for a set amount, and the companies started paying them at lower amounts. 

I think their best solution is to find another job, but there is the issue of them getting paid less than what was negotiated.

[Dill]

Reading this thread I am reminded of a point Marx makes in Vol 1, C 26, of Das Kapital.

In order for the capitalist system to work, there have to be two kinds of people:

1. People who own means of production (e.g., factories) and capital to pay people to work them. ("Job creators" as these are now sometimes called.)

2. People who own only the labor of their bodies, which they must sell to stay alive because they have no MoP or capital. No choice.

This distinction between haves and have nots is a structural requirement of capitalism as an economic system (mode of production). Or certainly was in mid-19th century Britain, France and Germany.

People in category 1 are very happy when people in category 2 don't unionize or work together to make collective demands on 1.

From the perspective of 1, it is good that people "know what they signed on for" and "stick to what they agreed to" when they take a job, but not good if they know any more than that about the larger social/economic arrangements which create people with capital and people without--i.e., not good when people in 2 know things that change what they are willing to agree to. Not good when they won't agree to less when it suits 1.

That's why it is a good idea to keep public education focused on job training "opportunities" and not on all this civics/history crap that most will never use on the job.

[Dill]

(05-09-2019, 05:06 PM)Au165 Wrote: If I hire someone to be an exempt employee due to the government definition of an exempt employee and he then decides he'd prefer to be non exempt, I am not a bad employer because I choose not to change his status simply because he wants me to. If they want to drive for a living they could become a taxi driver, but they won't. The reason they won't is because they don't want to actually be employees they just want employee benefits. 

Many people want benefits now because they have either lost ones they had or fewer employers are offering them. Part of the larger picture employers like to close out of discussion of wages benefits.

But is it possible that many Uber drivers WOULD become taxi drivers, or full time Uber drivers, if they could? That would be especially interesting to know in areas where Taxis have gone out of business because Uber was able to deploy so many "exempt employees."

[Dill]

(05-08-2019, 10:13 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Actually, the fact that they are "striking" is quite amusing, as just a short while back the news was about how the drivers were "gaming" the app to drive higher fares.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/uber-drivers-game-app-force-surge-pricing

Quote: Wrote:As University of Warwick researchers Mareike Möhlmann and Ola Henfridsson and Lior Zalmanson of New York University say in their best academese: “We identify a series of mechanisms that drivers use to regain their autonomy when faced with the power asymmetry imposed by algorithmic management, including guessing, resisting, switching and gaming the Uber system.”

Algorithmic management is, of course, the software Uber uses to control its drivers. As Mareike Möhlmann puts it: “Uber uses software algorithms for oversight, governance and to control drivers, who are tracked and their performance constantly evaluated.”

A joint statement from the authors elaborated: “Under constant surveillance through their phones and customer reviews, drivers’ behavior is ranked automatically and any anomalies reported for further review, with automatic bans for not obeying orders or low grades. Drivers receive different commission rates and bonus targets, being left in the dark as to how it is all calculated. Plus drivers believe they are not given rides when they near reaching a bonus.

Er, that "news," as I read it, is the workers are responding to surveillance and suffocating micromanagement which creates optimal efficiency at the Uber employee's expense.  

The drivers then do what (in the US) it is ALWAYS ok for employers to do--they adjust their service/time to maximize profit.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-09-2019, 07:39 PM)Benton Wrote: And that's a big part of the issue. These drivers agreed to work for a set amount, and the companies started paying them at lower amounts. 

I think their best solution is to find another job, but there is the issue of them getting paid less than what was negotiated.

As I stated previously, they should find other sources of employment.  Let the free market play itself out.  If you take the ride share companies at their word, they never intended for drivers to be attempting to make a full-time living from the app.  With that in mind, those drivers could simply just focus on their day jobs, and continue to look for another side hustle..

[SunsetBengal]

(05-09-2019, 08:16 PM)Dill Wrote: Er, that "news," as I read it, is the workers are responding to surveillance and suffocating micromanagement which creates optimal efficiency at the Uber employee's expense.  

The drivers then do what (in the US) it is ALWAYS ok for employers to do--they adjust their service/time to maximize profit.

I see that nobody is getting the real thing here, not even you.  (and I consider you one of the brightest folk on here)

The real issue is a matter of supply and demand.  When Uber and the like were in need of drivers, it paid well.  Now, that too many people are doing it, the pay goes downs.  When objects, commodities, skills, etc. are in demand, the pay is always higher.  When a particular market is flooded with people all equally capable of doing the same exact thing, their value goes down.  It's the same with any job sector.

[Dill]

(05-09-2019, 08:32 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I see that nobody is getting the real thing here, not even you.  (and I consider you one of the brightest folk on here)

The real issue is a matter of supply and demand.  When Uber and the like were in need of drivers, it paid well.  Now, that too many people are doing it, the pay goes downs.  When objects, commodities, skills, etc. are in demand, the pay is always higher.  When a particular market is flooded with people all equally capable of doing the same exact thing, their value goes down.  It's the same with any job sector.

Markets do achieve momentary and precarious balance of supply and demand at times, sure.  But your article is not about that.

It is about how workers were subjected to an algorithm which maximized their profitability, at their expense.

The title of this thread is "the Gig economy." There is an expanding gig economy because traditional jobs no longer float a family the way they used to.  This is not so much a matter of supply and demand, but a matter of how so many enterprises in the US have reorganized their business model to replace employees with "contractors" for whom they need not provide benefits, and whom they can use more efficiently as part-time labor.

It is a matter of increased productivity and stagnant or lower wages, and the resulting wage gap. 

To the degree it is a matter of supply and demand, it is a matter of crafting an economy in which labor is greater supply than demand.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-09-2019, 09:01 PM)Dill Wrote: Markets do achieve momentary and precarious balance of supply and demand at times, sure.  But your article is not about that.

It is about how workers were subjected to an algorithm which maximized their profitability, at their expense.

The title of this thread is "the Gig economy." There is an expanding gig economy because traditional jobs no longer float a family the way they used to.  This is not so much a matter of supply and demand, but a matter of how so many enterprises in the US have reorganized their business model to replace employees with "contractors" for whom they need not provide benefits, and whom they can use more efficiently as part-time labor.

It is a matter of increased productivity and stagnant or lower wages, and the resulting wage gap. 

To the degree it is a matter of supply and demand, it is a matter of crafting an economy in which labor is greater supply than demand.

I understand the point you're making, and will reflect back to my own example, once again.  Prior to the last "big recession", I had a semi-successful career as a self-employed contractor in the skilled trades.  I did quality work, I climbed up the ladder of shops to subcontract from, and was pretty much near the top.  I worked in Beach Houses, people's retirement palaces on Golf Courses, did store renovation work for good name brands.  When the recession hit, it was like someone pulled the plug on a light.  I toughed it out for a few years, hoping the work would come back.

Along the way, I blew every dollar I had stashed away, had to cancel health insurance, allow student loans to go back into delinquency, was falling behind on simple truck and house payments.  All that, just hoping that the work would come back, the way it used to be.  Finally, my father sat me down and told me it was time to think about doing something different.  He said "You've already got a degree that you don't use (Mass Comm), why don't you think about going back and studying something that gives you a better skill set?  Being 40 at the time, this seemed most daunting, the idea of going back to school at 40 sounded more like a joke than a solution.  But, I took a couple weeks and started checking out options.  I eventually settled upon Land Surveying Technology, as the nature of the profession appealed to me, and the folks I asked around the community told me that Surveyors had work, even in tough times.

Along the way to getting where I am currently, the work from my previous profession started to come back.  However, I noticed a stark difference.  The work that I used to do for "X" amount of dollars per square foot, was now cut in half.  When I took a look around, I quickly saw why.  The Latino crews had taken all of the work, at a much lower price, just to secure the work.  They would flood a job with bodies, and get it done in half the time, and move onto the next one.  I don't dog them for that, they work hard.  But, the motto of construction is still;  Cheap, fast, good.  Pick any two..  I took pride in high quality work, and could not compete with lower cost, "speed crews", so I am glad that I chose to learn a skill that less people are capable of doing.

I guess the moral of my story is that even though I was studying a new profession, my old work did come back.  I took a look around and saw how flooded the market was, and decided to stay the new course.  Perhaps those ride share drivers should consider doing something similar?

[*michaelsean*]

(05-09-2019, 05:47 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: One of my friends made 90k last year gross. Uber and Lyft are very attractive for illegal immigrants.

$90,000 after expenses and employer half of social security? I don’t think it’s impossible but that’s working some long ass hours.

[Belsnickel]

(05-09-2019, 10:11 PM)michaelsean Wrote: $90,000 after expenses and employer half of social security? I don’t think it’s impossible but that’s working some long ass hours.

He said it was $90k gross, which would be before all of that.

[*bfine32*]

(05-09-2019, 05:47 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: One of my friends made 90k last year gross. Uber and Lyft are very attractive for illegal immigrants.

driving or riding?