Slashdot Mirror
The Gig Economy Celebrates Working Yourself to Death (newyorker.com)
Writing for The New Yorker, Jia Tolentino documents stories of several people -- a nine-month pregnant Lyft driver, for instance -- who contribute to companies that work on the model of gig economy. Through these tales, Tolentino underscores an increasingly growing pattern in the Silicon Valley (and elsewhere) where companies offer hard-labor contracts to people, pay them peanuts (with little liabilities), and yet find a reason to celebrate their business and encourage more to come onboard. From the article: Fiverr, which had raised a hundred and ten million dollars in venture capital by November, 2015, has more about the "In Doers We Trust" campaign on its Web site. In one video, a peppy female voice-over urges "doers" to "always be available," to think about beating "the trust-fund kids," and to pitch themselves to everyone they see, including their dentist. A Fiverr press release about "In Doers We Trust" states, "The campaign positions Fiverr to seize today's emerging zeitgeist of entrepreneurial flexibility, rapid experimentation, and doing more with less. It pushes against bureaucratic overthinking, analysis-paralysis, and excessive whiteboarding." This is the jargon through which the essentially cannibalistic nature of the gig economy is dressed up as an aesthetic. No one wants to eat coffee for lunch or go on a bender of sleep deprivation -- or answer a call from a client while having sex, as recommended in the video. It's a stretch to feel cheerful at all about the Fiverr marketplace, perusing the thousands of listings of people who will record any song, make any happy-birthday video, or design any book cover for five dollars. I'd guess that plenty of the people who advertise services on Fiverr would accept some "whiteboarding" in exchange for employer-sponsored health insurance. At the root of this is the American obsession with self-reliance, which makes it more acceptable to applaud an individual for working himself to death than to argue that an individual working himself to death is evidence of a flawed economic system. The contrast between the gig economy's rhetoric (everyone is always connecting, having fun, and killing it!) and the conditions that allow it to exist (a lack of dependable employment that pays a living wage) makes this kink in our thinking especially clear.
companies report record profits and the rich get richer.
guillotines are being prepared.
"The campaign positions Fiverr to seize today's emerging zeitgeist of entrepreneurial flexibility, rapid experimentation, and doing more with less. It pushes against bureaucratic overthinking, analysis-paralysis, and excessive whiteboarding."
Whoever came up with that deserves excessive waterboarding.
I think it's called Fiverr because you work for an hour and earn a fiver, or something.
This article mostly seems to be about stirring up outrage over the fact that people can choose the terms and hours of their work.
Who is the sucker here?
> the American obsession with self-reliance, which makes it more acceptable to applaud an individual for working himself to death than to argue that an individual working himself to death is evidence of a flawed economic system.
It's a choice between community and individuals. Self-reliance was great back in the day when you could (in theory) walk into the wilds and build your own civilization, but if you want a modern standard of living there are simply too many things to do, too much to know. We rely heavily on people taking on highly specialized roles and ultimately everyone lives better as a result.
Modern 'self-reliance' is more like modern 'fuck you, I got mine'. It's people exploiting others and making them like it by holding out the carrot of their own anomalous success. And we eat it up because the human brain is shitty at probabilities... we all think WE are going to be the next big exploiter when the odds are far better that we'll win the lottery, and the truth is we're more likely to die by lightning strike than have either of those things happen.
Americans have to get over their fear of socialism and accept that, all other things being equal, a community that works together is stronger and more prosperous than one that does not. Or they can watch wealth disparity continue to increase, a smaller and smaller portion of the population living like near-Gods while the greater portion has less and less. It'll take time for that to become apparent, so long as bellies are full and everyone has an Internet connection, but eventually the mob rises up and you get a revolution.
The outrage is that this is the future that awaits most workers in almost any sector, and instead of trying to remedy this, we think it's a positive thing that people can choose between poor working conditions and starvation.
Since you are so obviously in favour of choice, for your lunch you have the following choices:
1. Shit sandwich
2. Vomit stew
3. Ground glass hash
Enjoy!
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
“You eat a coffee for lunch,” the ad proclaims. “You follow through on your follow through. Sleep deprivation is your drug of choice. You might be a doer.”
I'll see you and raise you this:
"The busy man is never wise, and the wise man is never busy".
- Lin Yutang
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
And both you and I know that's a useless gesture, and sometimes you simply cannot boycott some companies. Tell me, can you find a computer not made in poor working conditions? Probably not. The problem is the system itself and the way we are headed to. The Americans have an obsession with "competing" with China and India, but this only means that they will end up working for Chinese and Indian wages in Chinese and Indian conditions. Don't worry about me. I'll be good enough to retire soon. You should worry about the people around you when they get tired of living like that.
Meanwhile, in the real world, I will probably make my own lunch (a departure from my routine, because reasons), but there are plenty of places near me willing to trade tasty, reasonably nutritious food for either a lot of money or a little, as I wish.
I'm not aware of people saying "gee, I really don't want that nine-to-five job, I want to be an uberer/fiverr/lyfter". They* are taking those jobs because they don't have anywhere else to go
*I fully expect a few "disproving anecdotes", the best kind of science. But its overwhelmingly true.
Ah, the great "meaning" argument. Whether they were intended as full-time work originally or not, they most certainly have morphed into that. And I don't really care about motivation as much as impact. And Uber/Lyft with their car leases, definitely are trying to make you think of it as a full-time job.
Which isn't at all the message Fixerr/Uber/Lyft are putting out there.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
The last time that you could get a decent permanent job without solid skills and education was the 70s. But they weren't easy jobs - things like auto plant worker. And many of those jobs vanished in the 80s. Today's WSJ has an article why... basically people got progressively more expensive, while automation got less expensive. The "gig economy" is no different than what people did before about it... Amway or Fuller, or holding Tupperware parties, or starting a lawn care or housecleaning service, or starting your own cab/limo company before cities regulated and medallioned that option off the list. The unfortunate part is that we fall for the sob stories, the anecdotes of emotion, and then close off another rung on the upward-mobility ladder in the name of protecting the people that, as a result, are held down more firmly.
SV is one huge company town right from the last century. The only thing that is missing is Pinkerton thugs cracking skulls.
This is the logical conclusion of all union-busting that we have done last 25 years. While you might hate unions, the alternative is much worse.
The gig economy is just gigs for some cash not full time employment.
I frankly don't buy it! There are small groups of people who are interested in that sort of thing. Teenagers who still are largely fed/clothed/housed by their parents, perhaps a stay at home parent needing something to do while the kids are at school, retirees who don't perhaps have savings for entertainment and actually want light work as a diversion. Maybe some trust fund babies that want to make a few bucks without rules attached. I am sure there are others. I am also sure this isn't a large enough labor pool to meet the demand in terms of scale companies like Lyft, Uber, fiverr, Amazon (turk) etc in vision.
The rest of the labor force isn't taking gigs because they want to! They are taking gigs because they are trying to meet needs or at least perceived needs. Most sensible after working a 40-60 hour week want to use their remaining time, to enjoy the home they secured, eat a nice meal, watch a movie, watch the world go by, read a book, talk to family, see friends, etc. Some people who are self employed might be self motivated to work 9 hours + and that might make sense if they are doing it so they can 'get a head' and eventually not have to work so hard etc. Its also different in that they are working for something that is their own, in the same way some of us would work DIY remodeling our own home etc.
Really do think that Uber driver would not be somewhere else if they did not feel like they really needed the money at least on some level? They are doing it out of some kind of insecurity, tangible or emotional. Don't tell me some people just like driving either, I love driving. I take my Sunday drives on the Blue Ridge Parkway either by myself or with my wife. I don't play taxi driver for randos downtown. I don't believe anyone else would either if they were 'entirely free' to decide.
There is some external pressure and its almost certainly in the form under employment, unemployment, under paid and without negotiating leverage, trade competition and similar. The capital owner element of the gig economy is keenly aware of this, its the reason they have a labor pool to hire. I am not saying its exploitative, people should be free to make whatever contract, work whatever job they wish. I just don't have any illusion that this is a bunch of people out there looking to make a little mad money. There are major structural factors at work here and the market is simply responding. I am also of the belief that its response isn't unaffected by governmental policy. They people we voted for are doing this to us.
They have been doing it to us since the 60's. People are getting fed up. Trump is just the tip of the ice burg (hopefully)! The capital class that owns the media and dominates politics are reacting virulently to his populist message and that tells me they are frightened it could endure beyond his presidency. Perhaps someone a little more politically savy will be able to take the Trump ball and run with it.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
American society has always had the obsession on self-reliance, but I'm glad people are starting to see gig economy jobs for what they are. The question is what we do when the possibilities of realistically supporting yourself evaporate completely, and we go back to a semi-feudal system -- the nobles having all the power and letting the peasants who serve them exist at the bare minimum standard.
For decades in the US, the formula was simple:
- If you're smart, go to college and study anything. A large company will hire you at the entry level and take you through to the end of your career
- If you're semi-skilled, go to trade school, become an apprentice and join a trade union; there will be work until you retire.
- If you're less skilled, go join a union and work in a factory -- same deal, there will always be work.
It seems to me like this is gone, and no one noticed until now, or brushed it off. The modern economy is built around steady paychecks -- people can't buy a house for cash, they have to get a mortgage and pay it off as they earn. Same thing for consumer credit...no one is going to go into debt if they feel they can't pay for it, and debt is what drives the economy to some extent.
Steady paychecks are one of the reasons I've stayed out of the IT contracting world, even though I've been told I'd be excellent at it. It's stressful worrying about your job, or where the money is going to come from, and having to constantly hustle to find new work.
This works on a retail level but there is no way this can be done at the base material level. How do you boycott a mining company that employs slave labor when their metals pass through several transactions before they end up in your computer?
Nobody is forcing you to buy a computer, and I probably can find a computer assembled by people who care about the product and their conditions. If you think there's a substantial unmet demand for that kind of thing, maybe you or a fellow-traveler should start selling artisanal computers made from sustainably sourced, fair-trade components.
You want to "fix" the parts of human nature that you've been brainwashed to find distasteful. Don't expect the rest of us to jump onto your Marxist bandwagon.
Repeat after me: "The market is not a magic fixall for every problem."
How bizarrely deluded must you be to think that this entirely arbitrary concept of market forces is a substitute for actually caring about actual people and their living conditions?
People hate on unions, then wonder why they are treated like crap by employers.
... or you could just have a society with sane and decent regulation. Contrary to what the propaganda says, that is not automatically communism, it's simple human decency.
Talking about decent, I seem to remember that one rather popular religion is preaching this. Something to do with a rebel that got up the nose of the Roman authorities. And isn't there another rather popular religion that has giving to the poor on its shortlist of things you definitely should do? And then there is another religion/philosophy that explains that being decent to your fellows may help you escape suffering in multiple incarnations. Come to think of it, it seems that being decent to your fellow human beings is on the recommended list of just about every religion. Imagine that, perhaps it is just a good idea?
If their business model can't support paying a living wage, it SHOULD go away rather than damaging the economics of more adequate employers.
They are? Awesome! I decide that I don't work anymore!
Wait. No, I can't do that, then I won't have no money.
Ok, then I decide to only do what I want to do!
Wait, no, that doesn't work either, nobody's going to pay me to post on /. all day.
Ok, then I decide that I find a job where they don't care that I post on /. all day!
Unfortunately such jobs don't exist.
Then I go self-employed and do it!
Yes, but still... nobody's going to pay for that.
Making my own decisions sucks. Mostly because they're not my decisions at all. In the end, I can only decide between choices others have offered, and the chances are high that none of them are what I'd decide for if I really had to choose. It almost feels like an election, you know...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Um... no.
You send money abroad when you buy ANYTHING made in China or wherever.
You send money abroad when using any service which is at some point in its flow using any resources which are not internal to the country you live in.
Those immigrants sending money to their own countries should be VERY low in your priority list.
Your mobile phone, clothes, car, TV, even food, all of them read "money sent abroad" when you look at them. If anything, immigrants actually REDUCE those amounts indirectly through them paying taxes, renting homes locally, eating food locally, etc., although they're subjected to the same issues that you're facing (stuff they use also originates from abroad to some extent).
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)