5 ms·

You are looking for this in the article > It wasn’t a clear case of wage theft, because 60 percent of workers were making about the same or slightly more under

You are looking for this in the article > It wasn’t a clear case of wage theft, because 60 percent of workers were making about the same or slightly more under the new scheme. Your statement that "some 30+% are getting at least 10% more" assumes that there is no wage theft - which is not cut in stone.

chgs 2y ago
Aren’t gig workers contractors? Is it wage theft if I negotiate a lower price with my local timber yard?
- p_l 2y ago
  Mostly gray area because gig corps don't like actually treating the workers as contractors, they just like the lowered costs. Sometimes that goes afoul when it's ruled that they put requirements that are only valid for employees on contractors.
  - qeternity 2y ago
    > Mostly gray area because gig corps don't like actually treating the workers as contractors, they just like the lowered costs. I don't follow this? Is this predicated on the fact that gig corps can choose not to work with contractors that don't meet their criteria? If so, how is this different from only using lumber yards that consistently meet your expectations?
    - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
      >I don't follow this? The implication of the parent poster seems to be that there are legal requirements regarding contractors and legal requirements regarding employees but gig corps would prefer to treat their workers as one or the other class depending on which is to their benefit - which would be against the law because of the aforementioned concept "legal requirements".
      - p_l 2y ago
        Exactly this - there are differences in what you can require from someone on employment contract and external contracting company (whether that company is single person or not) and effectively making one category into another without actually reclassifying (like employing as employee) is considered fraud in most places.
        robertlagrant 2y ago
        Can you give an example?
        amanaplanacanal 2y ago
        Your favorite web search engine is your friend here.
        p_l 2y ago
        There are possible frauds from both employer and employee side, but I will list some common "landmines" of miss-classification, though beware that they are picked across different jurisdictions and I do not remember which apply where. All examples are possible items that can be decided to be part of misclassification, usually from contractor to effective employee: - requiring specific dress code is non-enforceable on contractors in many places - contractor is not required to provide specific person to fulfill the job, only a person of appropriate qualifications (it's valid for there to be a check on those qualifications) - in UK case, contractor might be asked to prove that they have a substitute to work in their place! - [Poland, possibly other] having only one client is not illegal, but can be grounds for investigations and if it's your only client where you work for equivalent of full-time job, it will be evidence for tax fraud - You can not enforce working hours on contractors in most jurisdiction, only specific deliverables (taking part of work meetings is deliverable, requiring availability in general of specific person at specific times can be grounds for reclassification) - above is often linked with "gig economy" - rules regarding "contractors" needing to pick up available jobs etc. are often considered illegal skirting of employment law. As sibling comment mentioned, more is available from your local (too) friendly search engine. And employment lawyers and HR specialists.
- LunaSea 2y ago
  Everybody knows they aren't contractors.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 2y ago
    In this case would it matter if they were contractors or not? There is a way of calculating the pay for a job. It is predictable. Publish the algorithm. Want to change it? Great. Update the documentation and then publish that. The workers should be able to calculate exactly what they are owed. They can decide to leave or stay. Only in America are people deflecting by bringing up the employment status of people when the issue is a lack of transparency designed to allow wage theft.
    - casercaramel144 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - Herrum 2y ago
        I don't think the reasons you are listing are valid at all. 1. If they can game it, they should. If that's a problem, then Shipt should fix their algorithm. 2. It's fine to data wrangle your way to an automated model for e.g. your company's growth projection or for predicting where you can best expand to find more customers. It's not okay to use it to unilaterally change pay agreements with your workers or "contractors". 3. The right of an individual to know what they're getting paid for their work outweighs any company's nebulous claim of its algorithm being a trade secret or something vague like that. Can you imagine businnesses actually operating like this? "You can't know what we'll pay you for this job, its ~~seeeecret~~. Just trust us."
        Brian_K_White 2y ago
        It's amazing that anyone would even try to say that. From now on I'm going to pay my rent according to a secret algorithm of my own devising and my landlord will just have to hope I'm generous this month. I can't have him gaming the lease agreement by only providing the things it says!
- mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
  Gig workers fall into a grey area between contractor and employee, depending on the particular jurisdiction and particular job. There are many ongoing legal battles trying to update outdated legal frameworks that don't quite account for modern realities. It is not as simple as you buying lumber.
or_am_i 2y ago
To clarify, I was basing the "some 30%" on the wage change distribution histogram that comes somewhat further down in the article from the statement you quote.
alwa 2y ago
Maybe not cut in stone, but if the data are derived from the workers’ payout receipts, it would seem likely that this was the amount that was paid out by Shipt. Or do you mean that third parties might be skimming something off after the company pays out?
NovemberWhiskey 2y ago
I mean, it wasn't "a clear case of wage theft" as these weren't wage workers; and in any case it's not like they weren't told ahead of time how much the order would pay.
- mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
  Do you know that for a fact they were told the total amount including tips, as well as all the details of the job, like items needed and delivery locations ahead of time? Gig apps often withhold info until after a worker accepts, to reduce workers ability to focus on desirable orders. In some jurisdictions Uber drivers don't see the final destination until after they accept a ride.

chgs 2y ago

Aren’t gig workers contractors? Is it wage theft if I negotiate a lower price with my local timber yard?

p_l 2y ago
Mostly gray area because gig corps don't like actually treating the workers as contractors, they just like the lowered costs. Sometimes that goes afoul when it's ruled that they put requirements that are only valid for employees on contractors.
- qeternity 2y ago
  > Mostly gray area because gig corps don't like actually treating the workers as contractors, they just like the lowered costs. I don't follow this? Is this predicated on the fact that gig corps can choose not to work with contractors that don't meet their criteria? If so, how is this different from only using lumber yards that consistently meet your expectations?
  - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
    >I don't follow this? The implication of the parent poster seems to be that there are legal requirements regarding contractors and legal requirements regarding employees but gig corps would prefer to treat their workers as one or the other class depending on which is to their benefit - which would be against the law because of the aforementioned concept "legal requirements".
    - p_l 2y ago
      Exactly this - there are differences in what you can require from someone on employment contract and external contracting company (whether that company is single person or not) and effectively making one category into another without actually reclassifying (like employing as employee) is considered fraud in most places.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        Can you give an example?
        amanaplanacanal 2y ago
        Your favorite web search engine is your friend here.
        p_l 2y ago
        There are possible frauds from both employer and employee side, but I will list some common "landmines" of miss-classification, though beware that they are picked across different jurisdictions and I do not remember which apply where. All examples are possible items that can be decided to be part of misclassification, usually from contractor to effective employee: - requiring specific dress code is non-enforceable on contractors in many places - contractor is not required to provide specific person to fulfill the job, only a person of appropriate qualifications (it's valid for there to be a check on those qualifications) - in UK case, contractor might be asked to prove that they have a substitute to work in their place! - [Poland, possibly other] having only one client is not illegal, but can be grounds for investigations and if it's your only client where you work for equivalent of full-time job, it will be evidence for tax fraud - You can not enforce working hours on contractors in most jurisdiction, only specific deliverables (taking part of work meetings is deliverable, requiring availability in general of specific person at specific times can be grounds for reclassification) - above is often linked with "gig economy" - rules regarding "contractors" needing to pick up available jobs etc. are often considered illegal skirting of employment law. As sibling comment mentioned, more is available from your local (too) friendly search engine. And employment lawyers and HR specialists.
LunaSea 2y ago
Everybody knows they aren't contractors.
- 2muchcoffeeman 2y ago
  In this case would it matter if they were contractors or not? There is a way of calculating the pay for a job. It is predictable. Publish the algorithm. Want to change it? Great. Update the documentation and then publish that. The workers should be able to calculate exactly what they are owed. They can decide to leave or stay. Only in America are people deflecting by bringing up the employment status of people when the issue is a lack of transparency designed to allow wage theft.
  - casercaramel144 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - Herrum 2y ago
      I don't think the reasons you are listing are valid at all. 1. If they can game it, they should. If that's a problem, then Shipt should fix their algorithm. 2. It's fine to data wrangle your way to an automated model for e.g. your company's growth projection or for predicting where you can best expand to find more customers. It's not okay to use it to unilaterally change pay agreements with your workers or "contractors". 3. The right of an individual to know what they're getting paid for their work outweighs any company's nebulous claim of its algorithm being a trade secret or something vague like that. Can you imagine businnesses actually operating like this? "You can't know what we'll pay you for this job, its ~~seeeecret~~. Just trust us."
      - Brian_K_White 2y ago
        It's amazing that anyone would even try to say that. From now on I'm going to pay my rent according to a secret algorithm of my own devising and my landlord will just have to hope I'm generous this month. I can't have him gaming the lease agreement by only providing the things it says!
mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
Gig workers fall into a grey area between contractor and employee, depending on the particular jurisdiction and particular job. There are many ongoing legal battles trying to update outdated legal frameworks that don't quite account for modern realities. It is not as simple as you buying lumber.

or_am_i 2y ago

To clarify, I was basing the "some 30%" on the wage change distribution histogram that comes somewhat further down in the article from the statement you quote.

alwa 2y ago

Maybe not cut in stone, but if the data are derived from the workers’ payout receipts, it would seem likely that this was the amount that was paid out by Shipt. Or do you mean that third parties might be skimming something off after the company pays out?

NovemberWhiskey 2y ago

I mean, it wasn't "a clear case of wage theft" as these weren't wage workers; and in any case it's not like they weren't told ahead of time how much the order would pay.

mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
Do you know that for a fact they were told the total amount including tips, as well as all the details of the job, like items needed and delivery locations ahead of time? Gig apps often withhold info until after a worker accepts, to reduce workers ability to focus on desirable orders. In some jurisdictions Uber drivers don't see the final destination until after they accept a ride.