With the proliferation of ride-sharing technology the fundamental relationship between employer and employee was upended. What is completely missing now is the human element that was an important dynamic at the workplace. Though in some ways this has been for the better for the most part this changed dynamic is for the worse.
I started driving for Uber about a year and half ago and maintain a 4.92 rating (which according to Uber puts me in the top 5%). I had planned for this to be my little side job on the weekends so that I could have more time for personal projects. But, after months of frustration, and income that fell from $20 to $30 bucks an hour to just $10 (or less), I’m calling it quits.
Ever since day one, due to this missing human element, my experience was lackluster. When I started there was no training, just an iPhone that arrived in the mail with an app pre-installed. And the app wasn’t even intuitive. When I’ve needed help I’ve had to inquire via email and more often than not, after waiting a day or two for a reply, the email I’d get back was copy and pasted from support staff who, obviously, didn’t bother to even read it. It’s bad enough not have a human that I can speak with face to face but then to get a reply from somebody that’s acting like a robot: insult to injury.
This job has left me missing the elements of a company that I once took for granted like human resources, and a guaranteed wage. Uber’s mistake is in thinking an algorithm can run a company but I think, in time, this will come back to haunt them.
From Mr Troy Davidson Driver with Uber, based in LA, United States
Economic trends changes everyday and both employers and workers do take advantage of this depending on the industry that they are in. While being a Freelancer is an “option” to some, for many it can be a “dead end decision”. It depends on how each capitalizes on their strength and market connections.
There could be various assumptions about the employee-employer relationship when you see companies hiring freelancers. But both parties may be benefiting. For a company, a part major of it is to skip costly legal and visa processing fees, medical insurance expenses and other employee benefits. But there may also be other practical reasons. Sometimes, the job requirement is for a short time period, or the company may not be sure if they require a permanent employee for a particular position or if the returns will be enough to fund the salary for that permanent position. The employer may be unsure of the workers capabilities - a trial period of sorts. Depending on the industry, sometimes the requirement is seasonal and does not require a full-time employee (e.g. Project manager for a big concert; henna artist for a Ramadan event; a choreographer for a fashion show; promoters/hosts for an exhibition). Many times the freelancers themselves don’t want to be tied up with a specific company contractually or for a long time. They want their options to be open and easily move to the best permanent job offer they bump in to. When people decide to work as freelancers or with on-demand service based companies, they do so, with the full knowledge that regular employee benefits may not be present. A “bonus” for a successful project is widely accepted though. Working as a Freelancer will not give you a health insurance but it can be personally obtained if you are doing well. Yes you’ll miss the family benefits, air tickets and gratuity but these are given facts which all freelancers know right from the start. I honestly think a “point system” is possible if you are working on many projects with a specific company regularly, this may help on-demand economies determine certain benefits for the workers.
From Mr. Chris Bautista
Consultant and freelancer in Strategic Marketing based in Dubai
The rights’ of the employees have always been compromised in developing nations. Even the now developed nations have blood stained footprints through the entire revolution. During India’s independence, the workers union played an important part and hence the laws were reflective of the same. Till date many unions across several public sector undertakings and public transport services still have a say in their rights and are prompt in defending them as well. Therefore their rights are constantly updated and upheld through mass strikes and protests. This is perhaps because of the mass impact of a strike in such situations. Meanwhile, private enterprises look at their employees as a resource which they want to exploit as much as possible. New e-commerce ventures are primarily fuelled by the enthusiasm to capture a new and expansive market. In order to ensure that a venture reaches the end of the rainbow to the pot of gold before a competitor, time and intensive labour is required. Many of these enterprises start of as a bunch of friends trying to make big. In such situations the employees’ rights become irrelevant as all participants are motivated equally. The real issue is when these brainstorming sessions at a local cafe expand to a 25 member enterprise. It is still a start up with limited resources. Here the management starts giving incentives for all the hard labour. From this stage onwards, the employees have access to the bargaining counter as well. However, since the establishment is new, so are the employees. Thus they do not have same persuasive power as the unions in state enterprises. Further with a population of nearly 2 billion, human resource is in plenty securing the reins firmly in the hands of the management. Therefore the balance is shifted in favour of the management. Thus worker’s rights are highly dependent on basic economics and the bargaining power of the workers. It is not about the these enterprises skirting these facilities.
From Ms. Amrita Michael
Associate at a law firm and advocate, Bar council of Delhi, India
The freedom in on-demand economy is nothing but a vapour with a glittery golden coat. Coming from the background of Recruitment and Executive search business, I fully understand the flip side (or should I call the flop side) of the so called “On-Demand” economy. Companies like Uber for example has taken the western world by storm and are fast spreading to other parts of the world like an epidemic has badly plagued the rights of the workers. It is a win-loose proposition which only benefits the company’s leaders and investors.
It is a well known fact that the Companies are not obligated to pay the minimum wage or contribute to social security towards the temporary hires or on-call professionals. If they are wronged by the employers they can go nowhere but to the labor court. Temporary workers cannot even form a labor union.
Former first lady of USA Hillary Clinton is so right when she went to the extreme of throwing a serious accusation of characterizing the on-demand economy as committing wage theft. Though an on-demand economy promises to provide works with good open-ended pay, flexible hours etc., the very fact that these worker are denied an ‘employee’ status strips them bare of even the statutory benefits which is akin to treating them as second class citizens.
Plunging into the On-Demand economy to cut cost should not be at the cost of the rights and the rightful wages and the benefits of the workers.
From Mr Jeremiah Jasher
Head of recruitment and business development based in Sharjah
Being your own boss is definitely an innovative opportunity. You definitely have more control over your business, which is one massive benefit over working for or under someone else. Being a worker in an on-demand economy is like controlling an independent business. Yes, you are still bound by certain legal obligations regardless; you’re still offering a service to the public in the same manner as those large companies. In terms of employee benefit you don’t have paid annual leave, which I guess isn’t such a bad thing, because you can control when you are available for work. You may not have gratuity but you surely have a chance to depend on other sources of income. I think that on-demand economies give workers the freedom to choose between their sources of income while giving them a chance to concentrate on other personal goals. The decision to be a participant in such an economy should come with the knowledge that while one may not be able to enjoy regular employee benefits, it is also a chance for workers to work in a less stressful environment. Just because a worker is directed and controlled by an algorithm that comes through a phone as opposed to a foreman, I do not agree that the fundamental relationship of employment can be altered. It all comes down to the delivery of information, setting the right tone and your approach. The worker is still accountable for the work done or the service provided and the company is accountable to ensure correct payment to the worker.
From Mr Dave Evangelio
Freelance makeup artist & dancer based in Dubai
