
Poor worker conditions power gig economy - mti
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNLXqvPk2tU
======
walrus1066
In London, deliveroo is one of the most visible examples of this. I see them
on every road, rushing through traffic so they can make minimum wage.

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.

~~~
robotmay
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.

------
candiodari
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...](http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/uber-class-action-lawsuit-new-
york)

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...](https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-
employed/independent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee)

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.
    

For Uber, this should be a mid-9 figures amount worldwide at least. There's a
good chance it would effectively end Uber's business model. And as a non-
billionaire, I have to say, that's a good thing.

~~~
phil21
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.

~~~
gohrt
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.

------
lithos
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.

------
Terr_
I am surprised and pleased to see a reference to _Snow Crash_ from the
Financial Times.

