5 ms·

Do you realize what you're saying? Gig company A only dribbles out 8 hours of work a week so your Dad is forced to also work for gig company B, but needs flexi

Do you realize what you're saying? Gig company A only dribbles out 8 hours of work a week so your Dad is forced to also work for gig company B, but needs flexible hours to do so. You are completely failing to see my point--if gig company A had to employ your Dad as a part time or full time employee with guaranteed minimum wage or work hours and other benefits he wouldn't have to tetris together an insane set of gig work jobs to keep from being evicted or starved. Your dad is forced to be an indentured servant for these companies that can't make money without exploiting people like him. And somehow you are immediately going to bat for these employers... pretty sick IMHO.

aikinai 3y ago
I’m not GP, but I think you’re missing their point. They described the Canadian job as “gig” but it’s actually structured more like more traditional part time work. It sounds like you’d prefer to outlaw all part time work? The point is true gig work allows you the flexibility to fit it around whatever else you have going on, be that part time work, starting a startup, taking care of a family, etc. of course it’s downsides and probably needs some more rules to protect the workers. But banning eliminates the opportunity entirely. It sucks to be a freelance writer and it’s easy to get screwed; should we ban that too?
- qbasic_forever 3y ago
  Nope, I said none of those things like banning part time work that you are saying. Your only comment here is to try to pivot into other arguments that you are inventing. Not gonna work here.
- hedora 3y ago
  Personally, I think part time jobs should have to come with the same benefits as full time, by law. That would encourage companies to offer full time positions. Current law (in the US) financially penalizes full time employers, which is why most part time workers end up working multiple part time jobs.
  - chongli 3y ago
    My dad (and loads of other gig workers) don’t want full time Uber jobs. They like gig work because it gives their lives flexibility. The employer-employee relationship is about more than money & benefits, it’s about power. A full time job gives your employer the power to dictate your life schedule to you. Your boss wants you at your desk at 8am but you have to take your kid to school at 8:30? Too bad! You’re there at 8 or you’re fired. It’s even worse in retail and food service, as I alluded to in my original post. These workers get their schedules a week ahead, with shifts all over the place. One day you’re opening at 6am. Next day you’re closing at 9pm. Good luck having any kind of life outside of work with a schedule like that!
  - PixyMisa 3y ago
    This has been tried. It results in eliminating part-time jobs, overloading full-time employees, and increasing unemployment.
    - tremon 3y ago
      increasing unemployment That is irrelevant, because of how it's measured: 1 person working 40 hours/week and 9 people not working gives an unemployment of 90%, but 10 persons working 4 hours/week gives an unemployment of 0% -- yet both scenarios have the same amount of work. Of course using part-time jobs reduces the unemployment figures. It says nothing, however, about the availability of work.
  - alborzb 3y ago
    > "part time jobs should have to come with the same benefits as full time, by law." All this does is eliminate more jobs. In your hypothetical scenario, a company that hires 2 or 3 people part-time would need to do health insurance for each of them, benefits for each of them and the additional full-time equivalent paperwork for each of them... In that scenario, the company would end up just hiring 1 person full-time for the hours, and have much less added overhead costs. This would lead to higher unemployment, because now instead of 3 people being employed part-time, only 1 person is employed. Where's the good in that? Maybe I'm just not seeing it from my perspective, if anyone else can chime in?
- jamilton 3y ago
  It doesn't sound like Skip pays hourly though, so it's not very similar to part time work at all.
- fragmede 3y ago
  It sucks to be seven years old and work in a textile factory, and they totally get screwed. So we chose to ban that. Slavery is another labor practice we've banned. Not sure what your point is about freelance writers.
  - ffhhttt 3y ago
    Freelance writer are essentially gig workers and therefore slaves or underage factory workers according to you bizarrely nonsensical analogy
    - fragmede 3y ago
      That's not what I wrote at all.
jvmfjvfjvf 3y ago
"Your dad is forced to be an indentured servant for these companies" His dad can work at anytime, anywhere and doesn't have a boss to mandate when he clocks in. How is that being an indentured servant?
- qbasic_forever 3y ago
  He DOES have a boss that mandates when he needs to work--the apps penalize him if he isn't taking rides and eventually cut off his work entirely if he isn't taking them (which is the whole point of the original article and legislation in Seattle!).
  - jvmfjvfjvf 3y ago
    Absolutely wrong. There are no penalties for not working. I've done that myself. Further to equate a "boss" to an app is quite a leap.
    - qbasic_forever 3y ago
      The commenter explicitly says to the contrary: > Skip, on the other hand, penalizes his earnings if he falls below 80% moving average accept rate (over the last 10 orders).
      - jvmfjvfjvf 3y ago
        You're talking about a different app not Uber, which doesn't penalize per acceptance rates. Besides, I don't think you understand how these gig apps work. You can only accept or reject if you're clocked into a shift. His dad can clock in at anytime but he won't be penalized on Skip if he's not clocked in.
      - lalopalota 3y ago
        The commenter also says nothing about being penalized for not taking shifts. If they sign up for a shift, they are expected to work that shift. It is a completely different model than Uber Eats, which he can sign into or out of at any given time, without penalty.
PixyMisa 3y ago
If gig company A had to employ your Dad as a part time or full time employee with guaranteed minimum wage or work hours and other benefits he wouldn't have a job.
- qbasic_forever 3y ago
  The demand for food delivery still exists and plenty of other companies would fill the void, that's how the free market works. Right now these apps are exploiting workers so they can pocket more money for shareholders and paper over a failing business model.
  - ffhhttt 3y ago
    However they would have no incentives to hire people who prefer highly flexible work hours and would force his dad to work fixed shifts which clearly not something many gig workers prefer (and I’m sure many of them would prefer higher grade pay for instance than whatever you’re proposing).
  - kelnos 3y ago
    Love how you talk about the "free market" here, but also insist that certain types of employment should be illegal. (As an aside: we don't have a free market. Such a thing doesn't actually exist in the real world.) I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Certainly there's some legal regime where workers can continue to enjoy the kind of work time flexibility they have with gig work, while also being compensated and treated fairly.
- komali2 3y ago
  If the best the current system can offer is "either debase yourself like a peasant into multiple gig jobs that regularly screw you, or, be homeless, and sorry there's just nothing we can do about that" eventually people are going to start considering other systems. Social unrest is bad for business. I'm not sure why companies keep turning the screws when profits are at record highs.
  - 3y ago
splistud 3y ago
[dead]
Enginerrrd 3y ago
>Your dad is forced to be an indentured servant for these companies that can't make money without exploiting people like him. This is absurdly patronizing to people making their own choices, and the freedom to seek employment or work as they see fit. As someone who, as an independent contractor in CA, was the victim of such patronizing sympathy that resulted in regulation which was deeply contrary to my own interests, please stop trying to "protect" people like me. Ironically, that regulation was targeted at Uber, who then received a specific carve out that left me screwed over as a small independent contractor.

aikinai 3y ago

I’m not GP, but I think you’re missing their point. They described the Canadian job as “gig” but it’s actually structured more like more traditional part time work. It sounds like you’d prefer to outlaw all part time work? The point is true gig work allows you the flexibility to fit it around whatever else you have going on, be that part time work, starting a startup, taking care of a family, etc. of course it’s downsides and probably needs some more rules to protect the workers. But banning eliminates the opportunity entirely. It sucks to be a freelance writer and it’s easy to get screwed; should we ban that too?

qbasic_forever 3y ago
Nope, I said none of those things like banning part time work that you are saying. Your only comment here is to try to pivot into other arguments that you are inventing. Not gonna work here.
hedora 3y ago
Personally, I think part time jobs should have to come with the same benefits as full time, by law. That would encourage companies to offer full time positions. Current law (in the US) financially penalizes full time employers, which is why most part time workers end up working multiple part time jobs.
- chongli 3y ago
  My dad (and loads of other gig workers) don’t want full time Uber jobs. They like gig work because it gives their lives flexibility. The employer-employee relationship is about more than money & benefits, it’s about power. A full time job gives your employer the power to dictate your life schedule to you. Your boss wants you at your desk at 8am but you have to take your kid to school at 8:30? Too bad! You’re there at 8 or you’re fired. It’s even worse in retail and food service, as I alluded to in my original post. These workers get their schedules a week ahead, with shifts all over the place. One day you’re opening at 6am. Next day you’re closing at 9pm. Good luck having any kind of life outside of work with a schedule like that!
- PixyMisa 3y ago
  This has been tried. It results in eliminating part-time jobs, overloading full-time employees, and increasing unemployment.
  - tremon 3y ago
    increasing unemployment That is irrelevant, because of how it's measured: 1 person working 40 hours/week and 9 people not working gives an unemployment of 90%, but 10 persons working 4 hours/week gives an unemployment of 0% -- yet both scenarios have the same amount of work. Of course using part-time jobs reduces the unemployment figures. It says nothing, however, about the availability of work.
- alborzb 3y ago
  > "part time jobs should have to come with the same benefits as full time, by law." All this does is eliminate more jobs. In your hypothetical scenario, a company that hires 2 or 3 people part-time would need to do health insurance for each of them, benefits for each of them and the additional full-time equivalent paperwork for each of them... In that scenario, the company would end up just hiring 1 person full-time for the hours, and have much less added overhead costs. This would lead to higher unemployment, because now instead of 3 people being employed part-time, only 1 person is employed. Where's the good in that? Maybe I'm just not seeing it from my perspective, if anyone else can chime in?
jamilton 3y ago
It doesn't sound like Skip pays hourly though, so it's not very similar to part time work at all.
fragmede 3y ago
It sucks to be seven years old and work in a textile factory, and they totally get screwed. So we chose to ban that. Slavery is another labor practice we've banned. Not sure what your point is about freelance writers.
- ffhhttt 3y ago
  Freelance writer are essentially gig workers and therefore slaves or underage factory workers according to you bizarrely nonsensical analogy
  - fragmede 3y ago
    That's not what I wrote at all.

jvmfjvfjvf 3y ago

"Your dad is forced to be an indentured servant for these companies" His dad can work at anytime, anywhere and doesn't have a boss to mandate when he clocks in. How is that being an indentured servant?

qbasic_forever 3y ago
He DOES have a boss that mandates when he needs to work--the apps penalize him if he isn't taking rides and eventually cut off his work entirely if he isn't taking them (which is the whole point of the original article and legislation in Seattle!).
- jvmfjvfjvf 3y ago
  Absolutely wrong. There are no penalties for not working. I've done that myself. Further to equate a "boss" to an app is quite a leap.
  - qbasic_forever 3y ago
    The commenter explicitly says to the contrary: > Skip, on the other hand, penalizes his earnings if he falls below 80% moving average accept rate (over the last 10 orders).
    - jvmfjvfjvf 3y ago
      You're talking about a different app not Uber, which doesn't penalize per acceptance rates. Besides, I don't think you understand how these gig apps work. You can only accept or reject if you're clocked into a shift. His dad can clock in at anytime but he won't be penalized on Skip if he's not clocked in.
    - lalopalota 3y ago
      The commenter also says nothing about being penalized for not taking shifts. If they sign up for a shift, they are expected to work that shift. It is a completely different model than Uber Eats, which he can sign into or out of at any given time, without penalty.

PixyMisa 3y ago

If gig company A had to employ your Dad as a part time or full time employee with guaranteed minimum wage or work hours and other benefits he wouldn't have a job.

qbasic_forever 3y ago
The demand for food delivery still exists and plenty of other companies would fill the void, that's how the free market works. Right now these apps are exploiting workers so they can pocket more money for shareholders and paper over a failing business model.
- ffhhttt 3y ago
  However they would have no incentives to hire people who prefer highly flexible work hours and would force his dad to work fixed shifts which clearly not something many gig workers prefer (and I’m sure many of them would prefer higher grade pay for instance than whatever you’re proposing).
- kelnos 3y ago
  Love how you talk about the "free market" here, but also insist that certain types of employment should be illegal. (As an aside: we don't have a free market. Such a thing doesn't actually exist in the real world.) I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Certainly there's some legal regime where workers can continue to enjoy the kind of work time flexibility they have with gig work, while also being compensated and treated fairly.
komali2 3y ago
If the best the current system can offer is "either debase yourself like a peasant into multiple gig jobs that regularly screw you, or, be homeless, and sorry there's just nothing we can do about that" eventually people are going to start considering other systems. Social unrest is bad for business. I'm not sure why companies keep turning the screws when profits are at record highs.
- 3y ago

splistud 3y ago

[dead]

Enginerrrd 3y ago

>Your dad is forced to be an indentured servant for these companies that can't make money without exploiting people like him. This is absurdly patronizing to people making their own choices, and the freedom to seek employment or work as they see fit. As someone who, as an independent contractor in CA, was the victim of such patronizing sympathy that resulted in regulation which was deeply contrary to my own interests, please stop trying to "protect" people like me. Ironically, that regulation was targeted at Uber, who then received a specific carve out that left me screwed over as a small independent contractor.