4 ms·

Self-employed gig workers aren't protected against illness or unemployment. No paid time off, no sick days, no pension, no maternity leave. And on top of that t

Self-employed gig workers aren't protected against illness or unemployment. No paid time off, no sick days, no pension, no maternity leave. And on top of that the majority earn below minimum wage. Gig work is understandable for students or people who want extra income but it shouldn't be someones main source of income.

malcolmgreaves 3y ago
> it shouldn't be someones main source of income. Interesting, because as companies continue to find ways to pay less for their labor by moving folks from W-2 to 1099s, gig work will become a larger portion of the only kind of work available for people's main source of income. If you feel like our economy should not force folks to have gig work be their main source of income, have you ever thought about how to shape society to ensure that people have jobs with stable sources of income?
- systemtest 3y ago
  I have to admit that I lack political knowledge for a good solution. In my opinion, if your main source of income is from one company, you should be employed and have paid sick days, paid time off, disability, unemployment and all other employee protections.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  As long as we're shaping society, we might as well go all the way: Shape it so people don't have to perform this work ritual and earn their right to merely exist and survive.
- nathan_compton 3y ago
  It is easy. Tax the wealthy more, make sure workers and the state own stock and receive dividends from publicly traded companies, establish a generous social welfare program, and create a job guarantee from the state at the minimum wage.
  - jsbg 3y ago
    > make sure workers and the state own stock and receive dividends from publicly traded companies and also lose money when those public companies lose value?
    - nathan_compton 3y ago
      We already lose tax revenue when companies profits go do. I don't see what the problem is. In this scenario the government would hold a wide portfolio of stock (every publicly traded company) and so should be insulated from individual variations except in the case of a major downturn, which effects government revenue already.
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
I like how we carve out acceptable targets for exploitation, and it's always young people. Ive seen non-western societies discriminate against old and young. Western society discriminates against young people but protects the older generation. Combined with growing bon-working population, this is resulting in political disaster. Majority of working age population voted against Brexit, against current conservative government in Britain, against Trump presidency.
- jsbg 3y ago
  > I like how we carve out acceptable targets for exploitation, and it's always young people. Working is a two-way agreement, not exploitation. The job market "discriminates against" people with little or no experience. Gaining experience is valuable, that's why young people choose to take jobs with low monetary pay.
  - nathan_compton 3y ago
    This would be true if the worker could fall back on a minimum basic income or some other humane way of surviving without the work. If the worker has only the choice between penury and working for the conditions demanded by the employer, then employment amounts to coercion. I mean you could argue that literal slavery is a two wagy agreement because the slave always has the option of committing suicide. For most low income workers, employment can't be a market because they need it to survive and the companies have a major structural advantage.
    - atomicUpdate 3y ago
      > This would be true if the worker could fall back on a minimum basic income or some other humane way of surviving without the work. We do, it's their family. Young people are (typically) still living at home, so most of their large expenses are already taken care of or greatly reduced. There are exceptions, of course, but we can't fashion a society around exceptions.
      - 3y ago

malcolmgreaves 3y ago

> it shouldn't be someones main source of income. Interesting, because as companies continue to find ways to pay less for their labor by moving folks from W-2 to 1099s, gig work will become a larger portion of the only kind of work available for people's main source of income. If you feel like our economy should not force folks to have gig work be their main source of income, have you ever thought about how to shape society to ensure that people have jobs with stable sources of income?

systemtest 3y ago
I have to admit that I lack political knowledge for a good solution. In my opinion, if your main source of income is from one company, you should be employed and have paid sick days, paid time off, disability, unemployment and all other employee protections.
ryandrake 3y ago
As long as we're shaping society, we might as well go all the way: Shape it so people don't have to perform this work ritual and earn their right to merely exist and survive.
nathan_compton 3y ago
It is easy. Tax the wealthy more, make sure workers and the state own stock and receive dividends from publicly traded companies, establish a generous social welfare program, and create a job guarantee from the state at the minimum wage.
- jsbg 3y ago
  > make sure workers and the state own stock and receive dividends from publicly traded companies and also lose money when those public companies lose value?
  - nathan_compton 3y ago
    We already lose tax revenue when companies profits go do. I don't see what the problem is. In this scenario the government would hold a wide portfolio of stock (every publicly traded company) and so should be insulated from individual variations except in the case of a major downturn, which effects government revenue already.

ClumsyPilot 3y ago

I like how we carve out acceptable targets for exploitation, and it's always young people. Ive seen non-western societies discriminate against old and young. Western society discriminates against young people but protects the older generation. Combined with growing bon-working population, this is resulting in political disaster. Majority of working age population voted against Brexit, against current conservative government in Britain, against Trump presidency.

jsbg 3y ago
> I like how we carve out acceptable targets for exploitation, and it's always young people. Working is a two-way agreement, not exploitation. The job market "discriminates against" people with little or no experience. Gaining experience is valuable, that's why young people choose to take jobs with low monetary pay.
- nathan_compton 3y ago
  This would be true if the worker could fall back on a minimum basic income or some other humane way of surviving without the work. If the worker has only the choice between penury and working for the conditions demanded by the employer, then employment amounts to coercion. I mean you could argue that literal slavery is a two wagy agreement because the slave always has the option of committing suicide. For most low income workers, employment can't be a market because they need it to survive and the companies have a major structural advantage.
  - atomicUpdate 3y ago
    > This would be true if the worker could fall back on a minimum basic income or some other humane way of surviving without the work. We do, it's their family. Young people are (typically) still living at home, so most of their large expenses are already taken care of or greatly reduced. There are exceptions, of course, but we can't fashion a society around exceptions.
    - 3y ago