8 ms·

There's constant arguments about this, whether a driver for Lyft / Uber, or a delivery driver of Grubhub, Doordash, UberEats, is either an employee or contracto

There's constant arguments about this, whether a driver for Lyft / Uber, or a delivery driver of Grubhub, Doordash, UberEats, is either an employee or contractor. And yet, I haven't seen talk of the creation of a new type of worker, one for the gig economy. I get that there's a big difficulty in creating these laws, with politicians who don't know exactly what the solution is, but someone needs to start by saying look, these gig economy workers are neither "employees" or "contractors" with the current law definitions, so we're going to create a new definition of worker geared towards these cases which makes sure employees aren't being taken advantage of, but also makes it possible for these companies to continue.

djrogers 7y ago
That would require legislators who are independent of the interests on both sides of the problem - something we rarely see here.
- eternalban 7y ago
  That is the general condition. It is possible that e.g. FLSA was passed due to the political calculations of the capitalist class, but it did happen. Incidentally, the "Gig Economy" has all the necessary features to serve as the Corporate Neoliberal version of pseudo-Communist China's Social Credit System. Possibly that may serve as motivation to address GP's excellent point regarding a new class of workers and the necessity to craft new laws. [FLSA]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_19...
b_tterc_p 7y ago
Well that’s probably not possible because each gig market is different. Healthcare is the biggest item but seems unlikely to budge. Payments for, say, a driver vs. a dog walker are going to vary significantly due to different scheduling expectations, different time values, etc. It’s not clear what is meant by making it possible for these companies to continue either, as most of these companies are not currently running a profitable business.
RobertoG 7y ago
>>"[..] makes sure employees aren't being taken advantage of, but also makes it possible for these companies to continue. " Sounds good to me. Only that, maybe, the most important innovation of those companies, is that they found a way around the existing laws. If that is the case, both, protecting the employees and making possible for these companies to exist are contradictory goals.
Mathnerd314 7y ago
>also makes it possible for these companies to continue. Taxi companies have been following worker laws for forever, it's not impossible at all. These companies are just spreading FUD, like big ISPs did back when net neutrality was imposed: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151001/12131332412/hey-remember-how-net-neutrality-was-supposed-to-destroy-internet.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151001/12131332412/hey-r...
- makomk 7y ago
  Taxi companies have been treating their drivers as contractors in the state of California for forever. It seems like some of them have been having legal trouble lately because of it too: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/california-cab-driver-was-independent-contractor.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/...

djrogers 7y ago

That would require legislators who are independent of the interests on both sides of the problem - something we rarely see here.

eternalban 7y ago
That is the general condition. It is possible that e.g. FLSA was passed due to the political calculations of the capitalist class, but it did happen. Incidentally, the "Gig Economy" has all the necessary features to serve as the Corporate Neoliberal version of pseudo-Communist China's Social Credit System. Possibly that may serve as motivation to address GP's excellent point regarding a new class of workers and the necessity to craft new laws. [FLSA]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_1938 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Labor_Standards_Act_of_19...

b_tterc_p 7y ago

Well that’s probably not possible because each gig market is different. Healthcare is the biggest item but seems unlikely to budge. Payments for, say, a driver vs. a dog walker are going to vary significantly due to different scheduling expectations, different time values, etc. It’s not clear what is meant by making it possible for these companies to continue either, as most of these companies are not currently running a profitable business.

RobertoG 7y ago

>>"[..] makes sure employees aren't being taken advantage of, but also makes it possible for these companies to continue. " Sounds good to me. Only that, maybe, the most important innovation of those companies, is that they found a way around the existing laws. If that is the case, both, protecting the employees and making possible for these companies to exist are contradictory goals.

Mathnerd314 7y ago

>also makes it possible for these companies to continue. Taxi companies have been following worker laws for forever, it's not impossible at all. These companies are just spreading FUD, like big ISPs did back when net neutrality was imposed: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151001/12131332412/hey-remember-how-net-neutrality-was-supposed-to-destroy-internet.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151001/12131332412/hey-r...

makomk 7y ago
Taxi companies have been treating their drivers as contractors in the state of California for forever. It seems like some of them have been having legal trouble lately because of it too: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/california-cab-driver-was-independent-contractor.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/...