The thing about government stepping in to fix this issue, is that government is what is used to protect the interest of the wealthiest. NIMBY and protectionism are the reason why there isn't affordable housing in a lot of these places. Established home owners vote to create zoning laws that stop multiunit homes or smaller homes being created. Combine this with mandates that require solar panels that drive the cost of new homes way up and you have a recipe for a housing crisis.
So while I think laws and ordinances can fix issues, I don't have a lot of confidence that the wealthiest among us wont step in and user their influence to make sure the laws benefit them.
PREACH. I just finished reading Winners Take All and the whole thesis of the book was about this. Sure they want to help, but their solutions will be couched on something that still works for their interests too. eek.
Agreed, maybe I was a tad optimistic about government but I think it was created for these challenges. If we don’t keep on demanding that these issues are worked on then where are we going as a country?
Definitely agree with you on that. I'm more asking myself what can I do, what other ways do I have to affect meaningful change? I'm not asking in a defeatist way, but more in the my-own-town-council-could-be-doing-this and I could influence them way.
“We as a society have agreed that there are certain standards that businesses have to adhere to in terms of treatment of workers in this country,” said Jacobs. “Gig companies have developed a business model that has been geared toward evading labor and employment law and shifting all costs and risk onto workers.”
I just read last night in the book "Winners Take All" that the problem with these gig economy tech leaders is they see themselves as underdogs and rebels fighting the big bad government and unions. I'm not sure I'd trust a millionaire (or billionaire) leader who still wears their rebel beret.
The AB5 thing is such a mess, I get the idea behind it but the cascading problems it's caused for my friends in CA who are writers has been wretched.
They call it radical here to just break up the big tech co's like Uber etc, but if they see themselves as tech companies why couldn't a taxi co that uses a CB dispatcher see themselves as a tech company too and wash their hands of the responsibility of their workers?
Why is it so radical to challenge the authority of companies who at this point seem to have more pull than our own government.
To me it seems less like challenging the authority of the companies and more like challenging the authority of individuals to decide how they want to live their own lives.
Who's to say that someone shouldn't be allowed to make the trade off of health or unemployment insurance for being able to set their own schedule and contract with any number of different companies?
Gig economy hate really bums me out. What's the end game? You can start going down the road of outlawing contract work like California, but what does that get you? In the end, companies won't care. Some will go out of business, which is why you see them fighting this, but others will just raise their prices to compensate for the cost of hiring full time employees. The only real losers will be those who preferred working as contractors and consumers who benefited from the innovative business models enabled by their existence.
It's definitely a tough issue. I've seen the 'gig' economy work in rural areas really well. But the people are working for uber or any of these companies. They're just stringing a bunch of odd jobs together to make ends meet and they keep their cost really low.
For example: my uncle owns his home/land around it. He gardens and hunts for a good deal of his food. He does odd jobs like fixing cars, demo and home makeover work, fences, tree jobs whatever. But he mostly works for what he needs when he needs it, and leaves the rest along. Like in December he does extra jobs for Christmas, but good luck getting him to do something extra the first few weeks of deer season. He loves his life and does well for himself.
But he could never live in the city. He doesn't have a retirement account (that I know of....) He isn't trying to pay for anyone's college. He isn't paying rent or a mortgage. In other words, he wouldn't try to tell anyone else to live his way. The problem today is that we treat Gig jobs like they are extra cash and in between jobs when increasingly they are the only jobs available. We should think about that, and think about companies that are built off under valued labor.
I agree. Great article about how the domino effect works in society. I believe it’s the government’s place to intervene when necessary , that’s what they’re here for. My family lives in San Francisco and Oakland and it really is A tale of two cities “big tech” and “the workers”.
This really opened my eyes as to gig employment as a primary source of income. My daughter drives for Uber, but here in North Central Indiana,it's a nice way to earn more, not a way to try to make a living.
That's a great point and also an example of the kind of opportunity that will be taken away if these companies are forced to reclassify their entire labor pool.
The thing about government stepping in to fix this issue, is that government is what is used to protect the interest of the wealthiest. NIMBY and protectionism are the reason why there isn't affordable housing in a lot of these places. Established home owners vote to create zoning laws that stop multiunit homes or smaller homes being created. Combine this with mandates that require solar panels that drive the cost of new homes way up and you have a recipe for a housing crisis. So while I think laws and ordinances can fix issues, I don't have a lot of confidence that the wealthiest among us wont step in and user their influence to make sure the laws benefit them.
PREACH. I just finished reading Winners Take All and the whole thesis of the book was about this. Sure they want to help, but their solutions will be couched on something that still works for their interests too. eek.
Agreed, maybe I was a tad optimistic about government but I think it was created for these challenges. If we don’t keep on demanding that these issues are worked on then where are we going as a country?
Definitely agree with you on that. I'm more asking myself what can I do, what other ways do I have to affect meaningful change? I'm not asking in a defeatist way, but more in the my-own-town-council-could-be-doing-this and I could influence them way.
Going to meetings and speaking up makes an impact, running for office really makes people listen .
I'm going to have to start showing up more. I don't think running is for me as it comes with the risk of actually winning.
This is really interesting.
This especially struck me:
I just read last night in the book "Winners Take All" that the problem with these gig economy tech leaders is they see themselves as underdogs and rebels fighting the big bad government and unions. I'm not sure I'd trust a millionaire (or billionaire) leader who still wears their rebel beret.
The AB5 thing is such a mess, I get the idea behind it but the cascading problems it's caused for my friends in CA who are writers has been wretched.
They call it radical here to just break up the big tech co's like Uber etc, but if they see themselves as tech companies why couldn't a taxi co that uses a CB dispatcher see themselves as a tech company too and wash their hands of the responsibility of their workers?
Why is it so radical to challenge the authority of companies who at this point seem to have more pull than our own government.
To me it seems less like challenging the authority of the companies and more like challenging the authority of individuals to decide how they want to live their own lives.
Who's to say that someone shouldn't be allowed to make the trade off of health or unemployment insurance for being able to set their own schedule and contract with any number of different companies?
Gig economy hate really bums me out. What's the end game? You can start going down the road of outlawing contract work like California, but what does that get you? In the end, companies won't care. Some will go out of business, which is why you see them fighting this, but others will just raise their prices to compensate for the cost of hiring full time employees. The only real losers will be those who preferred working as contractors and consumers who benefited from the innovative business models enabled by their existence.
It's definitely a tough issue. I've seen the 'gig' economy work in rural areas really well. But the people are working for uber or any of these companies. They're just stringing a bunch of odd jobs together to make ends meet and they keep their cost really low.
For example: my uncle owns his home/land around it. He gardens and hunts for a good deal of his food. He does odd jobs like fixing cars, demo and home makeover work, fences, tree jobs whatever. But he mostly works for what he needs when he needs it, and leaves the rest along. Like in December he does extra jobs for Christmas, but good luck getting him to do something extra the first few weeks of deer season. He loves his life and does well for himself.
But he could never live in the city. He doesn't have a retirement account (that I know of....) He isn't trying to pay for anyone's college. He isn't paying rent or a mortgage. In other words, he wouldn't try to tell anyone else to live his way. The problem today is that we treat Gig jobs like they are extra cash and in between jobs when increasingly they are the only jobs available. We should think about that, and think about companies that are built off under valued labor.
I agree. Great article about how the domino effect works in society. I believe it’s the government’s place to intervene when necessary , that’s what they’re here for. My family lives in San Francisco and Oakland and it really is A tale of two cities “big tech” and “the workers”.
Excellent overview of the issues and their consequences around gig worker regulation.
This really opened my eyes as to gig employment as a primary source of income. My daughter drives for Uber, but here in North Central Indiana,it's a nice way to earn more, not a way to try to make a living.
That's a great point and also an example of the kind of opportunity that will be taken away if these companies are forced to reclassify their entire labor pool.