Slashdot Mirror
The Uber Economy Needs a New Category of Worker
An anonymous reader writes: Uber headlines a new group of companies building out the so-called "sharing economy," in which people can easily hop in and out of employment modes. Somebody can suddenly start hiring out his driving services to others, taking breaks and setting hours as he prefers, and then just as quickly stop participating forever. An article at NY Magazine says we need to define a new class of worker to fit Uber drivers and similar at-will employees. "According to American employment law, though, our driver must be one or the other, a 1099 contractor or a W2 employee. And the gulf between the two in terms of mandated government protections and benefits is as wide as the line between them is blurry. As such, thousands of on-demand-economy employees and scads of lawyers are at war in court to determine what camp our average driver should fall into. ... It might be time for a new standard that splits the difference between the two — a 'dependent contractor,' as some labor experts call it — that would be better for businesses, consumers, and all those workers themselves."
1099 Contractors can't be controlled like a regular employee. You can't train them and you can't direct their behavior (such as work hours, etc) while working. Companies don't like this, as in some of these internet companies are pulling their 1099 employees in as W2 employees so they can control them better. What these finance guys want is a new category where they can control you like a W2 employee but don't have to give you benefits like a 1099. The employer gets the best of both worlds and the employee gets bent over and taken.
I'm sure the people suggesting this would like to see the minimum wage dropped to zero as well so they can make more cash exploiting people.
"don't have the flexibility of being contractors?"
What, exactly, is your malfunction? Uber requires that you take one trip once every 180 days to stay active. Not exactly suffering from a lack of flexibility there.
Now they do get to arbitrarily set rates, which I don't like. Which is why I don't drive for them.
but on the plus side they'll be negotiating a higher salary for you since they get a cut.
Are you sure? Maybe it's more likely that these agencies are going to compete against each other, and will offer lower rates than their competition.
I feel we need either a negative income tax or a basic income.
For a negative income tax...
If Poverty Level > Federal AGI, then (Poverty Level - Federal AGI) / 2 = Credit
For citizens and permanent residences only. For those who are 22+ years old.
The divide by 2 thing is to incentivize working still as it doesn't completely fill the gap to get out of poverty.
For a basic income...
For citizens and permanent residents only.
22-65, $500/person/month and $750/couple/month
21-, $250/person/month
66+, $750/person/month or $1125/person/month or social security, whichever is higher
The 1.5 multiplier assumes less expenses when a married couple lives together. Although, someone can avoid that by simply not getting married I guess.
I figure this would be beneficial towards the homeless, especially if four homeless individuals were to pool their money and live together.
This wouldn't be a replacement for SNAP. If it were, I'd add a flat $200/person/month into those figures above.
This would need to be adjusted annually for inflation.