I’m always been suspicious of the “new economy” gurus who promise that the wonders of technologies will, praise be, free everyone from the chains of hard labor–this was essentially the dumb idea behind Robert Reich’s elitist nonsense about “symbolic analysts” (that was the now-discredited idea he probably thought up after he’d pushed for NAFTA and was looking for another way to promote himself). The economy, and the ability to make a living, is always about the ability of workers to have power over their work life, and leverage power to demand decent wages.
Which is why Uber was just a bunch of new exploitation wrapped in the new lingo of the “sharing economy”. A judge has seen through all that.
A good moment, via The Wall Street Journal:
California’s labor commissioner has ruled that a driver for Uber Technologies Inc. should be classified as an employee of the company, a decision that could set a precedent for how the ride-hailing service compensates its more than 200,000 drivers.Uber has been ordered to pay Barbara Berwick, a San Francisco driver for Uber from July to September of last year, more than $4,100 to cover the costs of vehicle mileage and tolls, the commissioner said in a June 3 ruling that was filed in California state court on Tuesday.
The regulator found that Uber is “involved in every aspect of the operation,” from vetting drivers and their vehicles to setting rates for trip fares, and therefore is legally an employer of its drivers. Uber had unsuccessfully argued that because it is just a smartphone service for matching passengers with a ride, its drivers should be classified as contractors. [emphasis added]
The business press understands the threat to these exploiters:
Startups use contractors for the simple reason that they are a lot cheaper than employees. When you’re an independent contractor, your employer does not have to consider paying into Social Security or withholding taxes. It saves them money.When the home-cleaning startup MyClean switched from an independent-contractor model to one with full-time employees, the startup saw its labor costs rise by 40%.
From a financial perspective, it makes sense why companies are clinging to the independent-contractor model. But drivers have a lot to gain from rulings in their favor, including reimbursement for their expenses.
If juries rule against Uber and Lyft, drivers stand to gain more than just lost wages. These lawsuits could change Uber and Lyft’s business models entirely.[emphasis added]
And:
In addition, drivers would be able to organize formally. Right now, drivers — especially those unhappy with their working conditions — have informally organized by region or in forums such as UberPeople. In August, Uber drivers in Southern California aligned with a local Teamsters union.
A good thing for workers. The “sharing economy” is partly about “sharing” the misery of trying to string together one or two or three jobs just to pay the bills, and Uber has tapped into that misery.We shouldn’t let Uber and its ilk build multi-billion valuations, and huge wealth for its founders, on the backs of people.
In that sense, for all the hipness and sheen of cool App functionality, Uber is no better than Wal-Mart.
