Skip to main content

Should we boycott Uber?

Rebecca Long-Bailey
(Image from Wikipedia)
Apparently, the shadow business secretary, Rebecca Long-Bailey has said that she won't use Uber, the cab company, because doing so is 'not morally acceptable.'

Like many decisions that span politics, business and employment the right thing to do here is not clear cut - there are far more shades of grey than black and white certainties. Ms Long-Bailey suggests that Uber exploits their drivers by treating them as self-employed, and thus preventing them from having the rights of an employed worker.

On the one hand I can see that the gig economy (effectively freelancing) has potential benefits. I've effectively been a gig economy worker ever since I left BA in 1994. I don't get any benefits like paid holiday or paid sick leave or a company pension. I probably earn less than I would have if I'd stayed working for a big company. But in exchange I have the flexibility to work when I like for whoever I like, provided I can persuade them that it's worth them paying me the money. It's not always easy, but there's no way I would go back to being directly employed by someone else.

However, on the other hand, it's clear that many of those employed in the modern gig economy have far less flexibility than I have. Companies like Uber and Deliveroo may not necessarily be as free and easy with their offers of work as they like to suggest. Being a freelance is always a balance between self-determination, potential earnings and risk - and it does seem that when working for these new gig providers, there just isn't enough self-determination and potential for earning to balance out the risk.

I'm not sure Ms Long-Bailey's approach is the right one, though. It's more likely to result in an Uber driver earning less than in the company suffering too much. (I couldn't emulate her, anyway, as we don't have Uber in Swindon and Deliveroo won't come out as far as where I live.) But I do think that we need some kind of legislation to level the playing field.

Matthew Taylor from the RSA was asked to come up with a solution and suggests a midway role of a 'dependent contractor', entitled to sick pay, holidays and the like for those workers who are occupying a freelance type position but without the freedom and self-determined flexibility that should go with this kind of job. I'm not sure he's the right person to solve this, as he seems to have been a career bureaucrat, and his suggested solution sounds likely to pile up the red tape. Perhaps legislation would be better directed at ensuring that companies like Uber and Deliveroo don't abuse their position, and are required instead to remove any restrictive practices and payment structures that lock their people into being effective zero hour contract employees who lack employee benefits. Then we might see the best of both worlds.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope