Poor worker conditions power gig economy(youtube.com)
youtube.com
Poor worker conditions power gig economy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNLXqvPk2tU
4 comments
That company has sprung up so fast and yet I still don't really understand what it is. They're all over Cardiff, and from what I can tell it's just a generic delivery service for restaurants that don't want to hire their own drivers?
If I had to pick a minimum wage job, it certainly wouldn't be carrying a rectangular box on a bicycle through Britain's terrifying traffic.
If I had to pick a minimum wage job, it certainly wouldn't be carrying a rectangular box on a bicycle through Britain's terrifying traffic.
One can only hope Uber drivers get declared employees and Mr. Kalanick gets hit with a bill for several hundred million dollars.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/uber-class-action-law...
I find it hard to believe that the IRS isn't doing this for the workers, for two reasons. Firstly, another component of Uber's business model that wasn't touched on by the video is that Uber/Lyft/Deliveroo and so on effectively force their employees to commit tax fraud by paying far too little, and the IRS of course gets to clean up the mess, but can't go after these employees because there's far too many of them. So it seems logical for me that they'd simply go after Uber, and get an injunction barring them from using workers without an employee contract. Second, the IRS should enforce it's own rules. You are not allowed to be a freelancer if you don't control your own customer relation, and in these cases you clearly have no ability to do so. So working for gig economy businesses is illegal, it's just that the law that makes it illegal is a tax law that is rarely enforced :
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
Specifically, it's high time Uber gets hit with:
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/uber-class-action-law...
I find it hard to believe that the IRS isn't doing this for the workers, for two reasons. Firstly, another component of Uber's business model that wasn't touched on by the video is that Uber/Lyft/Deliveroo and so on effectively force their employees to commit tax fraud by paying far too little, and the IRS of course gets to clean up the mess, but can't go after these employees because there's far too many of them. So it seems logical for me that they'd simply go after Uber, and get an injunction barring them from using workers without an employee contract. Second, the IRS should enforce it's own rules. You are not allowed to be a freelancer if you don't control your own customer relation, and in these cases you clearly have no ability to do so. So working for gig economy businesses is illegal, it's just that the law that makes it illegal is a tax law that is rarely enforced :
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
Specifically, it's high time Uber gets hit with:
Consequences of Treating an Employee as an Independent Contractor
If you classify an employee as an independent contractor and you have no reasonable basis for doing so, you may be held liable for employment taxes for that worker (the relief provisions, discussed below, will not apply). See Internal Revenue Code section 3509 for more information.
I might agree with this stance if this were not being very selectively enforced.
Uber is far more "contractor like" than many professions/industries in the US including the very industry it replaces. Cabbies are contractors, yet have far less autonomy than Uber drivers. Same goes for Fedex (ground) drivers.
The fact Uber is the one they are going after is telling and honestly ridiculous; if not downright dishonest and corrupt. You cannot make the argument to me that a Fedex Ground driver who drives a company vehicle, on a schedule set in stone, with a route they must adhere to, while wearing a company uniform is less an employee than an Uber driver using their own vehicle, at the hours they choose, in the locations they see fit.
I could absolutely be convinced that both those conditions meet the employee test - but until I see these huge "legacy" industries who are obviously using middle-layer contractors as a loophole being smacked, I think it's entirely political and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the workers or changing anything.
Uber is far more "contractor like" than many professions/industries in the US including the very industry it replaces. Cabbies are contractors, yet have far less autonomy than Uber drivers. Same goes for Fedex (ground) drivers.
The fact Uber is the one they are going after is telling and honestly ridiculous; if not downright dishonest and corrupt. You cannot make the argument to me that a Fedex Ground driver who drives a company vehicle, on a schedule set in stone, with a route they must adhere to, while wearing a company uniform is less an employee than an Uber driver using their own vehicle, at the hours they choose, in the locations they see fit.
I could absolutely be convinced that both those conditions meet the employee test - but until I see these huge "legacy" industries who are obviously using middle-layer contractors as a loophole being smacked, I think it's entirely political and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the workers or changing anything.
I simple wage test -- does the worker net more than some low wage per hour, after a reasonable estimate of expenses -- would go far. The point of the employee/contractor distinction is give the right person responsibility for the complexities of the work. Someone who earns less than a "living wage" isn't a responsible business owner.
>Second, the IRS should enforce it's own rules.
The IRS has had its staff and budget cut to the point where it's actually quite difficult for them to successfully enforce tax law.
The IRS has had its staff and budget cut to the point where it's actually quite difficult for them to successfully enforce tax law.
Peter Theil can fund crushing media companies through the courts, why can't I crowdsource the IRS pursuing Uber if it's positive ROI on the recovery/whistleblower fee?
This video does a great job at summarizing the issues and abuses of the gig economy, and even goes much further than most blog like articles to support their claims.
I am surprised and pleased to see a reference to Snow Crash from the Financial Times.
Sure enough, they have accidents as a result, again, something I see on an almost daily basis. They get no sick pay if this happens, no support whatsoever from deliveroo. So they get back on their bike, injured, and carry on working, as they have no choice.
They also get a lot of abuse from drunk customers in the late evening. Again, they just grin and bear it and carry on.
This is the definition of exploitation.
It's thoroughly depressing, almost Dickensian.