Its obvious to me that an additional category is prudent, or that people besides employees should have access to subsidized health care premiums and some form of paid sick leave. that doesnt have to come from the employer and that doesnt have to mean that worker flexibility is curbed.
contractors can already do retirement benefits plans such as the 401k plan, running your own is far more flexible than an employee’s version
its lazy to “solve” these gaps by reclassifying workers as employees
it is also ridiculous that only giant corporations can lobby the people to get its own exemption passed to restore contractor status, other groups should have this power too. maybe an agency could put up comment periods for specific industries, removing this need from the legislature or proposition process
The UK has a “worker” [0] classification between employee and true independent contractor. It provides protections like minimum wage and time off while preserving freedom about when and how someone works. It seems like it would fit this case well, but I doubt it will ever happen. Unions are the major force pushing for gig workers to be classified as employees because they’d be able to unionize.
The UK also has some of the poorest workers and working conditions when compared to neighbouring peer countries.
The worker classification has resulted in a situation of extreme precarity for millions of people by explicitly creating a class of employee that do not enjoy the same rights as those who are financially/socially better off than them. Consider the following:
> Workers usually are not entitled to:
> minimum notice periods if their employment will be ending, for example if an employer is dismissing them
> protection against unfair dismissal
> the right to request flexible working
> time off for emergencies
> Statutory Redundancy Pay
Frankly, this describes an employment class that outright refuses to acknowledge the humanity of those categorised under it. A closer look at the context of "time off for emergencies" exemplifies this. Compared with an "employee", a person classified as a worker is not legally entitled to leave work to:
- Attend the birth of their child.
- Respond to their partner being assaulted or mugged.
- Care for their child should their school close.
- Maternity/Paternity leave (They are still entitled to Maternity/Paternity pay however).
Consider also that many of the protections workers are supposed to enjoy are simply not enforced and that the people who fall under the category are unlikely to have the financial means, free time, or information to bring a legal challenge should their rights be violated.
Given how obviously the classification erodes employment protections, I really don't think there lies a justification for the creation of this underclass other than it being profitable for those with money.
This can be a form collusion that runs into anti trust law. There’s even a court case about this involving public defenders who were hired as independent contractors being unable to unionize for this reason.
> maybe an agency could put up comment periods for specific industries
The problem is there is no agency with a financial incentive to support the individual drivers. The drivers don’t earn enough on their own to create meaningful representation. If the drivers somehow were able to pool their resources under some sort of a guild then they might. But that will take a lot of organizing and someone with resources that can stop driving to spend time organizing.
And therein is the problem. We have a large labor pool that is not protected by employment law and is easily exploited through low pay rates. So how is a driver supposed to find money to fund their own 401k plans when they are barely covering their costs?
> no agency with a financial incentive to support the individual drivers
There is a massive political operation trying to represent drivers. They just didn't bother asking the drivers what they want, they made assumptions for them. That's why we have this multi-year string of bills, propositions and lawsuits.
Its obvious to me that an additional category is prudent, or that people besides employees should have access to subsidized health care premiums and some form of paid sick leave. that doesnt have to come from the employer and that doesnt have to mean that worker flexibility is curbed.
contractors can already do retirement benefits plans such as the 401k plan, running your own is far more flexible than an employee’s version
its lazy to “solve” these gaps by reclassifying workers as employees
it is also ridiculous that only giant corporations can lobby the people to get its own exemption passed to restore contractor status, other groups should have this power too. maybe an agency could put up comment periods for specific industries, removing this need from the legislature or proposition process
round hole, square peg