3 ms·
I think this 'protects workers' in the same way as "right to work" laws 'protect workers', by diminishing the workers rights to enter into contracts and organiz
by ltbarcly3 7y ago
I think this 'protects workers' in the same way as "right to work" laws 'protect workers', by diminishing the workers rights to enter into contracts and organize on their own terms. In time gig workers would have formed one or more unions and forced companies into negotiations for better wages and benefits. While companies are making a big show of being against this law, it will discourage to the point of eliminating the conditions necessary for the formation of the types of worker organizations that would have allowed them to force companies to give them a significant share of the revenues they are generating.
You might say "well yea, it will improve their lives so they won't have to organize", but finding the minimum pay necessary to avoid unionization is closer to a strategy Uber might attempt than it is a boon for workers in the long run.
- abraae 7y ago> In time gig workers would have formed one or more unions and forced companies into negotiations for better wages and benefits. That is a heroic assumption. If it's hard to unionize from inside a company, what sort of power does a worker have when they aren't even allowed into the office and can be instantly swapped out by an algorithm?
- ltbarcly3 7y agoIt would require serious organizing, but keep in mind there were unions formed in mill towns hundreds of years ago, when unions were basically illegal and union busting was encouraged. Mill workers have the advantage of physical proximity to each other, modern gig workers have maybe more of an advantage due to the existence of the internet. While Uber can replace some fraction of it's workers, it would horribly damaged if 75% of their workers just didn't log in next Friday. If it was made clear that every Friday would be a 'no drivers sign into Uber' day, and instead logged to Lyft to pick up rides, Uber would have no choice but to come to the table, and drivers wouldn't even pass up any work. Unlike the huge capital investment of a mill in 1840, which was impossible to sidestep, Uber's value is basically that people have the app installed and tend to click on it, and by not logging into Uber but still logging into Lyft, the drivers would be putting that at a huge risk. I'm sure there are more and better ideas than this, but the ability to organize worldwide without requiring access to something like paper newspapers which are owned by the same group of people you are trying to organize against is a huge game changer.