4 ms·

On Day One, the entire workforce of every company becomes "contractors". Labor does not have the leverage in most industries as it does in large tech. Even in

On Day One, the entire workforce of every company becomes "contractors". Labor does not have the leverage in most industries as it does in large tech. Even in tech it is cyclical. Younger readers here, who missed out on the 2001 and 2008 crashes, are going to have an eye-opening experience when the next recession gets here.

signal11 7y ago
> On Day One, the entire workforce of every company becomes "contractors". This is going to be increasingly difficult in Europe as they focus on “disguised employees” or “perm-tractors”. The UK has already implemented this rule (IR35) for the public sector, with the private sector set to follow suit in 2020. And the EU are beginning to consider how to clamp down on the practice.
- gubbrora 7y ago
  It seems a lot of Americans think well the rich will just find loopholes let's just give up. I don't get it.
  - smacktoward 7y ago
    The rich here spend an awful lot of money encouraging us to think that way.
  - munificent 7y ago
    Cynicism is one of the most effective tools of the powerful.
- MiroF 7y ago
  if employee representatives are on the board, these sort of unilateral decisions by management become a lot harder
- rahimnathwani 7y ago
  Nitpick: IR35 was announced in 1999, and came into force in 2000.
  - pja 7y ago
    There has been a recent tightening of the interpretation of IR35 by HMRC which has been applied to the public sector first. I imagine it’s to this that the comment you’re replying to is referring. (Essentially as I understand things they’re no longer allowing contractors to make the decision as to whether they’re inside IR35 or not, but making the companies paying them make that decision & bear the liability for getting it wrong.)
  - signal11 7y ago
    I don’t believe the new rules around perma-contracting were ever applied to the private sector. Even the public sector guidance is dated 2017[1]. [1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/off-payroll-working-in-the-public-sector-reform-of-intermediaries-legislation https://www.gov.uk/guidance/off-payroll-working-in-the-publi...
velcrovan 7y ago
There are laws that determine who is and who isn't a contractor. The entire workforce of every company will not be reclassified. Under the proposal, the employees will thus get board representation and thus a big piece of leverage that you correctly say they currently do not have. On a broader note, your comment falls into one of the very annoying category of constructing a hip-shot theoretical model to explain why something won't work when it has actually already been implemented for decades in some places. YOUNGER READERS may not remember that Germany required codetermination for all companies over 2000 employees back in 1976.
- DenisM 7y ago
  References: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codetermination_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codetermination_in_Germany https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/opinion/warren-workers-boards.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/opinion/warren-workers-bo...
bongobongo 7y ago
Labor always has leverage. The question is whether or not it is organized enough to use it.
- Ericson2314 7y ago
  Atomation does fundamentally change this, even if it's only by a little so far.
  - billy_beef 7y ago
    Perhaps, but someone still has to build and maintain the automation, no?
    - Ericson2314 7y ago
      Oh sure, but as many people as before?
  - bongobongo 7y ago
    Automation shifts labor; it does not eliminate it.
    - Ericson2314 7y ago
      Sometimes that happens, but why always? And that's a bug not a feature in my book to the extent it is true.
goobynight 7y ago
Not sure it will be the same. 2008 was not just a regular business cycle recession. That was a huge event that I agree would be devastating. Tech work is much more diversified now, right? Did capital one, starbucks, nordstrom, Walmart, Target, car makers and just about everyone have a sizable SWE team in 2001? They do now and a lot of those are probably in profit center roles. That sets aside that big tech really got even more cemented into daily lives after both of those crashes. 2013 onward IMO. Just looks at how Tinder has changed relationships. That said, I'm still proceeding with caution and don't have a self-assurance that I'm correct. I've set myself up to be able to peace out for a year in Vietnam or another cheap place if, somehow, the floor falls out.
- acdha 7y ago
  > Did capital one, starbucks, nordstrom, Walmart, Target, car makers and just about everyone have a sizable SWE team in 2001? Yes - and 1991 for that matter. They weren’t building mobile apps and the trend has become stronger but almost every large organization has been building software for decades.
  - goobynight 7y ago
    Building software wasn't what I was talking about. They've obviously done that. I'm talking about the sheer amount of software and people that support those efforts now, in addition to how much profit comes from it. Surely it has grown by more than say...5x.
r00fus 7y ago
This would have major consequences, and some not good possible outcomes for the companies. The concept of a salaried workforce is embedded in our society at a fairly deep level, and upending that to prevent workforce representation might not be that easy.
skinnymuch 7y ago
You can’t just be a contractor. There’s rules for who is a contractor. No one except the smallest companies would be able to get away with it.

signal11 7y ago

> On Day One, the entire workforce of every company becomes "contractors". This is going to be increasingly difficult in Europe as they focus on “disguised employees” or “perm-tractors”. The UK has already implemented this rule (IR35) for the public sector, with the private sector set to follow suit in 2020. And the EU are beginning to consider how to clamp down on the practice.

gubbrora 7y ago
It seems a lot of Americans think well the rich will just find loopholes let's just give up. I don't get it.
- smacktoward 7y ago
  The rich here spend an awful lot of money encouraging us to think that way.
- munificent 7y ago
  Cynicism is one of the most effective tools of the powerful.
MiroF 7y ago
if employee representatives are on the board, these sort of unilateral decisions by management become a lot harder
rahimnathwani 7y ago
Nitpick: IR35 was announced in 1999, and came into force in 2000.
- pja 7y ago
  There has been a recent tightening of the interpretation of IR35 by HMRC which has been applied to the public sector first. I imagine it’s to this that the comment you’re replying to is referring. (Essentially as I understand things they’re no longer allowing contractors to make the decision as to whether they’re inside IR35 or not, but making the companies paying them make that decision & bear the liability for getting it wrong.)
- signal11 7y ago
  I don’t believe the new rules around perma-contracting were ever applied to the private sector. Even the public sector guidance is dated 2017[1]. [1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/off-payroll-working-in-the-public-sector-reform-of-intermediaries-legislation https://www.gov.uk/guidance/off-payroll-working-in-the-publi...

velcrovan 7y ago

There are laws that determine who is and who isn't a contractor. The entire workforce of every company will not be reclassified. Under the proposal, the employees will thus get board representation and thus a big piece of leverage that you correctly say they currently do not have. On a broader note, your comment falls into one of the very annoying category of constructing a hip-shot theoretical model to explain why something won't work when it has actually already been implemented for decades in some places. YOUNGER READERS may not remember that Germany required codetermination for all companies over 2000 employees back in 1976.

DenisM 7y ago
References: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codetermination_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codetermination_in_Germany https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/opinion/warren-workers-boards.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/opinion/warren-workers-bo...

bongobongo 7y ago

Labor always has leverage. The question is whether or not it is organized enough to use it.

Ericson2314 7y ago
Atomation does fundamentally change this, even if it's only by a little so far.
- billy_beef 7y ago
  Perhaps, but someone still has to build and maintain the automation, no?
  - Ericson2314 7y ago
    Oh sure, but as many people as before?
- bongobongo 7y ago
  Automation shifts labor; it does not eliminate it.
  - Ericson2314 7y ago
    Sometimes that happens, but why always? And that's a bug not a feature in my book to the extent it is true.

goobynight 7y ago

Not sure it will be the same. 2008 was not just a regular business cycle recession. That was a huge event that I agree would be devastating. Tech work is much more diversified now, right? Did capital one, starbucks, nordstrom, Walmart, Target, car makers and just about everyone have a sizable SWE team in 2001? They do now and a lot of those are probably in profit center roles. That sets aside that big tech really got even more cemented into daily lives after both of those crashes. 2013 onward IMO. Just looks at how Tinder has changed relationships. That said, I'm still proceeding with caution and don't have a self-assurance that I'm correct. I've set myself up to be able to peace out for a year in Vietnam or another cheap place if, somehow, the floor falls out.

acdha 7y ago
> Did capital one, starbucks, nordstrom, Walmart, Target, car makers and just about everyone have a sizable SWE team in 2001? Yes - and 1991 for that matter. They weren’t building mobile apps and the trend has become stronger but almost every large organization has been building software for decades.
- goobynight 7y ago
  Building software wasn't what I was talking about. They've obviously done that. I'm talking about the sheer amount of software and people that support those efforts now, in addition to how much profit comes from it. Surely it has grown by more than say...5x.

r00fus 7y ago

This would have major consequences, and some not good possible outcomes for the companies. The concept of a salaried workforce is embedded in our society at a fairly deep level, and upending that to prevent workforce representation might not be that easy.

skinnymuch 7y ago

You can’t just be a contractor. There’s rules for who is a contractor. No one except the smallest companies would be able to get away with it.