The self-destructive government attack on The Gig Economy
The worrying trend towards penalising peer to peer technology
The Uber Problem
In April of this year, Uber, in a very unexpected turn of events, agreed to begin to pay their drivers sick pay, in addition to Holiday Pay. Whereas unionists and the morally conflicted personalities of Westminster hailed this as some kind of victory over the ‘evil’ car monopoly, I see this as a very significant milestone of devolution for the exciting, and widely, misunderstood ‘Gig Economy’.
You’d be forgiven for believing that the Gig Economy is some kind of veiled iteration of human trafficking or slavery the way it is depicted in mainstream media. Just run a Google search on the term, and the usual media outlets will appear, spouting their confused (and morally selective) rhetoric of the measures not being ‘harsh enough’ and ‘protecting the rights’ of the poor and downtrodden castaways of society that we call Uber drivers, normally supported by a picture of dishevelled Deliveroo driver, who moonlights as a busker.
My immediate thought is, do any of these well meaning MP’s even use the Uber service? Have they ever spoken to an Uber driver?
You’d be forgiven for believing that the Gig Economy is some kind of veiled iteration of human trafficking
The Drivers point of view
To answer my own questions respectively; I do, regularly, and I do, regularly. I use MINIcabs (not taxis) all of the time now, thanks to Uber, and I always speak to my Uber drivers. Partly because I do feel somewhat obliged to, due to the ghastly user rating system that forces me to be nice (even when I’m feeling considerably unsociable). And partly, because on days that I’m not feeling unsociable, I actually love to start conversations with strangers. After the usual dry and safe exchange regarding weather, language and ethnicity (I’m yet to meet an Uber driver who doesn’t have another Nigerian friend), I’ll normally dive into the ‘how long have you been doing this? Do you like it? What did you do before?’ line of questioning. Using this method of rudimentary data collection, I can safely say that I’ve surveyed some 40–50 Uber drivers, and they all pretty much answer the same way. They love the job, love the freedom, are troubled by the growing competition, and welcome holiday pay, but did not think it was necessary before they were gifted it.
Employed, Self-Employed or miscellaneous…
The fact is, there is not a single Uber driver that considers themselves an employee of Uber. They don’t have the company name emblazoned on the sides of their vehicle. They start and finish work as and when they please. They accept or reject jobs as and when they please. They can come and go on holiday as and when they please, AND, they can ‘moonlight’ with other employment without the fear of reprimand. All of this points to the simple fact that they are, indeed, self employed. I struggle to really understand the confusion surrounding this. I can only think there is more insidious, less chivalrous reason for this reckless kind of legislation.
Uber is not an employer, it is in fact, a clever little collection of programming scripts that govern a transaction between two human beings.
Tech, not employer.
The reason I am such a fan of The Gig Economy is because it exemplifies the most exciting benefit of our modern, tech-based society. That is peer to peer servicing. Programs (yes, it is a computer program) such as Uber, are not employers. They are in fact, clever little collections of programming script that govern a transaction between two human beings. This kind of transaction and direct, demand-based interaction is made possible by the brilliant miniature AI that is Uber’s tech. Am I fan of Uber’s exorbitant fee structure for this tech? Certainly not. But, it is a free market, and until we have the development of a blockchain equivalent to Uber (*light bulb), we have to concede that they are the minicab management software with the greatest user base, and thus, best service.
The Zero-hour contract comparison
The nature of the User — Driver transaction in Uber is direct. As an Uber user, I broadcast my desire to get from A to B. Uber drivers, then decide if the trip is one they are willing to take on (based on distance and earning potential), and once they have decided to take me, I pay them (directly and automatically) using the Uber system. The driver is paid by Uber, proportionally and directly for my journey. Uber then takes a fee for managing all of the elements of this transaction (in essence, making it possible). This is not the same as a Zero-hour contract, where irrespective of my performance, my pay is fixed. Irrespective of my desire to work, hours are assigned, and irrespective of my needs, work is not guaranteed.
Market Forces made The Gig Economy
The fact of the matter is that The Gig Economy was created by and driven by technology and these exact market conditions. As the owner of a digital marketing company, for years, I used Upwork (formely O-Desk and Elance) to hire talent from all over the world to help in projects. I was able to compensate contractors, accordingly, regardless of location. Websites like Fiverr, provide amazing opportunities for talented individuals to win lots of work and churn out an income for their talents without geographic restriction.
Everyday, new AI is being developed to facilitate the ‘peer to peer’ nature that humans are choosing over the old methods. This has happened for a reason. Just as technological advances (and corporate greed) have fractured our traditional labour landscape, pioneering tech, has responded by providing an alternative that gives all people the chance to make additional income, and be their own boss. Uber is just another expression of this, and it should not be punished for its success. The worrying element for me, is the potential for the legislators to rinse and repeat this misapplication of legislation on to all innovative apps, tech and AI, and in doing so, abort the blossoming creativity of the tech industry that is developing in the UK. Where do you draw the line? Should Ebay compensate their storeowners when sales are low? It’s a slippery slope.
Human Rights or Political Point Scoring?
When a company grows to the size of Uber, it becomes an easy target for lazy and/or agenda-driven policies to target them. After all, it’s a great headline for the government to proclaim they have solved the employment argument by delegating a massive bill on to a rather financially flush tech company. But, in doing so, they have potentially created an atmosphere of reluctance in an otherwise flourishing tech landscape. I’m hopeful that this won’t proceed to damage our ability to continue to compete with Silicon Valley as the world’s dominant space for technological innovation. However, we can only do that if this is a one-off and it’s not indicative of a trend towards penalising the Gig Economy to win political points.
Just as technological advances (and corporate greed) have fractured our traditional labour landscape, pioneering tech, has responded by providing an alternative that gives all people the chance to make additional income, and be their own boss.
