6 ms·

> Plenty of part time employment is like that. For example, many people that work retail or service part time have very flexible schedules. They typically have

by lbotos 7y ago

> Plenty of part time employment is like that. For example, many people that work retail or service part time have very flexible schedules. They typically have an availability chart and then if they need a day off last minute, they are often required to find someone else to cover for them. I think you are missing a large part of it. The "gig" economy is "on-demand" labor. There is no schedule to coordinate at the "worker level". Just a network of demand and a worker pool that grows and shrinks to meet demand. "Oh, I'm free for the next 3 hours, maybe I'll make some money" vs. "I need to let my boss know I'm not coming in tomorrow so we have coverage" That marketplace effect is "freedom".

jashmatthews 7y ago
This is exactly what casual/zero hours job contracts are for in the UK and other common law countries. Treating casual employees as contractors bollocks in a large part of the work.
jlarocco 7y ago
That's orthogonal to whether the workers are contractors or employees. Most companies don't let their employees work such flexible hours, but there's no reason why they couldn't.
- Zak 7y ago
  > there's no reason why they couldn't. Yes there is. Workers compensation insurance and other benefits have significant fixed costs per employee. If someone is treated as an employee, they'll be required to work a minimum number of hours to cover those costs.
  - cortesoft 7y ago
    That seems like a failure of the insurance market more than anything else. It seems like insurance companies are using employee count as a proxy for hours worked... is there really that much of an increase risk for 4 people working 2 hours each vs one person working 8? Maybe, but we should be able to price that risk and allow a company to insure people per hour.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - pishpash 7y ago
      Or, you can just pay them what their market salary is in cash including what would have gone into insurance, and let them figure it out themselves. Why are you trying to overcomplicate things?
    - CryptoPunk 7y ago
      >>Maybe, but we should be able to price that risk and allow a company to insure people per hour. In many states regulations prevent customizing employee insurance packages to that extent. There are cookie cutter obligations that employers have to meet regardless of the hours an employee works. Gig economy jobs get around the inefficiencies imposed by labor regulations.
  - supercanuck 7y ago
    Worker's compensation in Washington state is paid by the hour. it is a unit cost, not a fixed cost.
    - pishpash 7y ago
      And what is a unit of work? Is it the CPU time of the app? Good luck defining it.
  - jlarocco 7y ago
    Ideally, yes, but that's not how it works in general. It's not unusual for some departments (like HR) to operate at a loss, with the costs covered by other parts of the business, or for one product to be a loss leader that guides customers to more profitable products and services. In any case, the problem of covering those costs doesn't go away by making the employee a contractor, but it pushes the cost off to the worker.

by lbotos 7y ago

jashmatthews 7y ago

This is exactly what casual/zero hours job contracts are for in the UK and other common law countries. Treating casual employees as contractors bollocks in a large part of the work.

jlarocco 7y ago

That's orthogonal to whether the workers are contractors or employees. Most companies don't let their employees work such flexible hours, but there's no reason why they couldn't.

Zak 7y ago
> there's no reason why they couldn't. Yes there is. Workers compensation insurance and other benefits have significant fixed costs per employee. If someone is treated as an employee, they'll be required to work a minimum number of hours to cover those costs.
- cortesoft 7y ago
  That seems like a failure of the insurance market more than anything else. It seems like insurance companies are using employee count as a proxy for hours worked... is there really that much of an increase risk for 4 people working 2 hours each vs one person working 8? Maybe, but we should be able to price that risk and allow a company to insure people per hour.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - pishpash 7y ago
    Or, you can just pay them what their market salary is in cash including what would have gone into insurance, and let them figure it out themselves. Why are you trying to overcomplicate things?
  - CryptoPunk 7y ago
    >>Maybe, but we should be able to price that risk and allow a company to insure people per hour. In many states regulations prevent customizing employee insurance packages to that extent. There are cookie cutter obligations that employers have to meet regardless of the hours an employee works. Gig economy jobs get around the inefficiencies imposed by labor regulations.
- supercanuck 7y ago
  Worker's compensation in Washington state is paid by the hour. it is a unit cost, not a fixed cost.
  - pishpash 7y ago
    And what is a unit of work? Is it the CPU time of the app? Good luck defining it.
- jlarocco 7y ago
  Ideally, yes, but that's not how it works in general. It's not unusual for some departments (like HR) to operate at a loss, with the costs covered by other parts of the business, or for one product to be a loss leader that guides customers to more profitable products and services. In any case, the problem of covering those costs doesn't go away by making the employee a contractor, but it pushes the cost off to the worker.