Delivery workers are keeping California fed. They say no one’s keeping them safe
latimes.com
latimes.com
Some of the stuff described in the article is really unfortunate and all too often an outcome of a large bureaucracy. That doesn't make it okay. They need to come up with better procedures and err on the side of making sure people don't deliver while infected and that they get any sick pay they deserve.
Supposedly, there's a stimulus package coming out that may help give some people relief as well. And I think we need a whole lot more emphasis on preventative measures generally for this pandemic.
If the US had universal healthcare, this would be less of a problem. If we solved some of our other issues, like our housing supply issues, this would be less of a problem.
Blaming the distress these workers are experiencing entirely on the fact that they are gig workers isn't reasonable. That's just one piece of the picture here.
> If the US had universal healthcare, this would be less of a problem.
Italy's socialized healthcare apparently didn't cut it. There are plenty of examples of the existing U.S. healthcare bureaucracy royally screwing up in the covid response.
Do I'm not buying the logic that an even bigger bureaucracy is the solution to Kafkaesque bureaucracy, at least not for this problem.
I especially don't understand people who are railing on the responses of Trump or BoJo also arguing that the U.S. president should be even more in charge of this sort of thing.
On the one hand classism purports to be a motivator: if people just work harder, they can improve their class standing and buy more stuff; on the other, it's just a variation on aristocracy: some people are better than others, and they are wealthy people, it's an indisputable fact of their superiority that they can buy more and better versions of the basic things that we claim form a civil society.
If public institutions are incompetent in a democracy, how is it the culture isn't also incompetent? Incompetency and aristocracy are not civil institutions, yet we've managed to institutionalize them both by just making excuses for them.
If you're holed up at home and SARS-CoV-2 strolls in your front door on the outside of your toilet paper then you might as well have just taken the risk and gone shopping yourself! Such painful short-sightedness.
I doubt that the birth of the precariat was consciously and intentionally master planned by anyone. In some sense, that's attributing too much competence to the upper classes to think they could mastermind such a plan.
In another, it's calling them more deeply and comically idiotic than they merit because even rich people are scared here lately of what is going on in the world. At least some of them wish they could figure out how to stamp out the economic instability we have and they just can't figure out how on earth that works.
It's hard to design good systems. It's much easier to design a system that does some of the things you want while overlooking a lot of important details and thereby fostering a lot of unintended consequences.
It was consciously and intentionally create, but the planning is usually obscured behind euphemisms. Nobody directly says they are trying to make employment more precarious; they say they are making a new type of business that is "more efficient".
> unintended consequences
The consequences may not be intended, but pretending they weren't obvious results of a new design is gross negligence. The long term economic impact and its secondary/tertiary effects on society of a "gig-economy" business "disrupting" a traditional employer are hard to predict. The fact that it would make a lot of people's employment far more precarious is not only obvious, it's the core feature that differentiates the new type of business.
I happen to work for a service that is well designed and gives me control over the things that matter to me. It also has a low barrier to entry but doesn't have a low ceiling. It's possible to make a middle class income this way.
So I'm quite convinced that efficiency isn't simply some polite euphemism for "fuck you." I think it's possible to design gig work platforms that work well for the workers.
I'm hardly the only person on the planet for whom many regular jobs are simply out of the question.
I think the efficiency gains are real and can be managed in a way that is good for all involved parties.
I think gig work can be the next industrial revolution where we make it possible for ordinary people to have some of the things historically reserved for the jet set.
Because my income was portable, I was able to take a train to another state and get back into housing in a cheaper state than California. For many poor people, that's unimaginable. They would need to look for a job in the new location, which would mean having no income for a time because, say, waitressing jobs don't hire you from out of state typically.
I got to work as much or as little as I chose. It was dictated by my health to a large degree, which was enormously frustrating, but it meant that when I was feeling better, I could immediately earn money again. I didn't have to job hunt.
For me, gig work was nothing short of a miracle allowing me to have some earned income under circumstances where that should have been simply impossible.
So, sorry, I don't think so.
Edit1: Could you clarify, I'm curious as to what kind of the jet set class items would be accessible at the entry level or not so far high in the gig-econ?
Edit2: Also I do not mean to say that the gig-econ does not offer economical sustenance or reinsertion for workers that cannot endure more classical jobs but they're the great minority in these kind of jobs but that is just my own opinion and read on the market
My case doesn't prove that millions of people aren't being given a raw deal. It just indicates that gig work doesn't have to be a raw deal and it is possible to design systems that work well.
I've tried to promote that idea in the past. It didn't really catch on. Most people basically agree with you and feel that I'm some bizarro statistical outlier and not really an example of how to do this well and what we should be aiming for.
As long as the people creating startups generally agree with you, we will continue to see more gig work that craps all over the workers. I don't think it has to be that way. I don't think it should be that way. I see enormous potential for gig work to make the world a better place.
But the world is probably not going to stop being a shitty place full of shitty people just because I'm capable of envisioning something better sprouting from the muck. Most likely, such visions will continue to be crushed under the boot of those in power and continue to go nowhere fast.
Same as it ever was.
Edit2: Also I do not mean to say that the gig-econ does not offer economical sustenance or reinsertion for workers that cannot endure more classical jobs but they're the great minority in these kind of jobs but that is just my own opinion and read on the market
I've seen data that suggests that up to 60 percent of people are at least moderately handicapped. Most downplay it and don't want to wear the label "handicapped" or "disabled."
Such people benefit enormously from having more control over their lives, such as when, where and how much they work. This is one of the things rich people tend to have more of than poor people and I think it has substantial impacts on health, productivity and quality of life.
But it's like 4:30 am where I am and I hope to sleep soon, so I don't care to drone on at great length about this topic, though I no doubt could.
I'd like to see the source for the estimated 60% if you can send it later.
One thing is since companies like Uber are prime example of how gig-econ works and treats its workers, and that I do not agree with those standards and work ethics I would postulate the opposite. I do not condone the gig-econ style of jobs one bit. I would rather see more flexibility from the work place towards limited workers with proportional social benefits but the gig-econ from my understanding does not even offer that little.
If the 60prct holds then you're not the statistical outlier but rather a proper representation of who the gigs are for and I think that would validate their existence but I still see them not necessarily as a raw deal but rather a cheapskate move. But yes some are raw af.
> 60 percent of people are at least moderately handicapped. Most downplay it and don't want to wear the label "handicapped" or "disabled." Such people benefit enormously from having more control over their lives
I don't know you nor your story and this isn't a comment about you personally, but writing that kind of sentences with a straight face to defend the gig economy is such a weird thing. You shouldn't have to work while "deathly ill", you shouldn't need the gig economy to survive while handicapped.
With 60 percent of the population impaired to some degree, it doesn't work for the world to say "Only the hail and hardy people should work."
I didn't qualify for disability. I still don't.
I had a corporate job. I quit it so I could prioritize my health.
Like many people, my job was harming my health. In contrast, gig work allowed me to get healthier.
This world does not usually reward you for having a good sob story. That's not how that works.
Saying impaired people shouldn't have to work and from there arranging a world where they aren't allowed to work is a nightmare scenario where any defect cuts you out of the system entirely.
When I was a homemaker, I couldn't get good drugs to treat my condition. I was bedridden and being treated like a hypochondriac who got off on cadging antibiotics for funsies.
Then I got a proper diagnosis. The following year, with appropriate accommodation for my condition, I attended an eight week GIS Summer School.
Halfway through, the air turned yellow, probably from sulfur from a factory, and I began reacting anaphylacticly anytime I set foot outside.
I had borrowed $19k to attend. Failure was not an option.
A doctor put me on eight prescription drugs so I could finish the program.
Twenty-two months of drug withdrawal followed. And it saved my life. All those drugs were a turning point in my condition.
People don't really try to help sad sacks live. They don't really try to heal the sick or have compassion for the poor.
But they will dope you to the gills because you have a job to do.
Working -- on my terms -- saved my life.
Maybe that's not a good thing. It's a shitty life in a shitty world full of shitty people and I routinely wish I had died instead.
But working was the only viable option I had for so very many reasons. Telling me I shouldn't work is like telling me to go die in a fire for having been born with the wrong genes.
This really struck me. There's an interesting stain of American progressivism that sees a bad situation and, in earnestly attempting to address it, makes the problem worse. See the death of SROs and various forms of actually affordable housing: a veneer of compassion justified restrictive zoning ("nobody deserves to live in conditions like that!"), but without a suitable replacement occupants often just ended up on the street. Same effect with asylums: horrible abuses spurred public interest in dismantling them, but absent a replacement you just end up dumping the patients on the street without their meds. Sex work? Nobody should have to sell their body to survive! Therefore, let's persecute Backpage and force sex workers back out on the street where they can't meaningfully vet clients! Oh...
There's a pattern here. This history makes me apprehensive that well-intentioned (or not, just wearing the mask) attempts to reform gig work will end up being a huge fuck you to the people actually impacted by them. That's not to say the gig economy doesn't enable abuses - it absolutely does, but any action should at minimum involve a lot of genuine consultation with those affected and, preferably, address root causes rather than symptoms, e.g. a workable solution to lack of job-provided healthcare probably shouldn't involve reenforcing our already-fucked system of employer-provided healthcare serfdom.
They've essentially outlawed gig work in California. I left California to get back in housing. I spent three years researching where I could move to make my life work. There isn't any place else I can go. If I get evicted, I'm screwed.
I can't go back to California and wouldn't want to, but no place else has similarly dry, temperate weather. Washington is much colder and wetter.
I have no car and no driver's license. If my life cones unraveled, there isn't another town where I can make it work.
The pandemic is causing a lot of homeless shelters and soup kitchens to close. They've also closed coffee shops and restaurants and libraries. There's no place for a homeless person to go sit and eat, plug in and get on the wifi.
If I got evicted, I would be facing a nightmare situation with no solutions.
I'm trying to chalk the dream up to insomnia and stress, but I grew up with really poisonous ideas that "if you dream it, it absolutely will come true" and I'm completely freaked out today.
We've spent decades tearing down SROs and not building anything that works as a viable solution at that price point for people. Then we claim our homeless problem is just a bunch of junkies and isn't about a lack of affordable housing options.
It's nigh impossible to live without a car in the US. Gig work is one of the few things that worked for me while the entire world was all too comfortable metaphorically stepping over my body in the gutter.
I've spent a lot of years fighting the good fight while getting no real support and being told it's somehow my fault my life is in the toilet. I've spent years trying to educate HN about reality for the masses in this country and being told there is no housing crisis, it's just a personal problem, the homeless are all junkies, get a real job, etc.
When the pandemic first hit, my life was only minorly impacted. I already live like a hermit because of my medical situation and I already do remote work even though I'm dirt poor and not one of the privileged few.
But if I got evicted, I'm not sure I wouldn't just kill myself. It looks so impossible to cope with at this point and the world doesn't want to change. Everyone is in a hurry to get back to "normal" and it's like, hello!, Normal isn't working well for a lot of people and is probably why we have a pandemic.
But no one is going to listen to me. I've tried to promote gig work as a solution for homeless people and lifestyle interventions for health issues for years and been dismissed as a kook. I can't get traction.
I think our problems could be solved. But I'm beginning to think they won't be solved.
The world would literally rather die than take advice from me and I'm not seeing other sources providing better solutions. I'm finally starting to get very concerned.
I've read your posts over the years and always found them interesting and well written. It has changed the way I look at homelessness, even though I'm not from, or live in, the US.
Just know that, for what it's worth, you have at least made one person change their mind.
I know it's not much and it won't solve any of the issues you have, but I really hope things work out for you. I won't say "everything will be ok" because I don't know if they will be... but I hope I can at least warm your heart or make you smile for a few seconds while reading this.
I really wish for you to find the strength, luck, light at the end of the tunnel, or however you wanna call it, to pull through this situation.
You have obviously poured a lot of energy and well articulated and informative thoughts into this forum and I'd like to at least thank you for what I've learned from them.
Godspeed Doreen.
I've said that for years. I don't harp on it, but I do feel a personal need to give another take on it. If they start outlawing gig work, as California more or less has done, this negatively impacts me.
Thankfully, I had already left California before that happened. But I've heard from someone still in California how much it has put them to n a world of hurt.
"that's attributing too much competence to the upper classes to think they could mastermind such a plan"
ROFL
Unrelated, I have heard from my friends that your homelessness resource site for san diego is still extremely useful, even outside of san diego. Thank you.
Let's say you are playing a free game you downloaded to your phone. You don't have to spend money to accomplish anything in particular, but if you have money to spare, you can spend actual real life dollars on in-app purchases to get past some challenge.
It takes actual skill to get past certain challenges. Rich people can be sort of halfway competent at playing the game and get farther, faster because they can rely on in-app purchases.
Real life is not unlike that.
In real life, rich people are often able to throw money at their problems. Poor people are not able to do the same.
If poor people want a solution, they have to be extremely competent to make that happen. They can't hire a high-priced lawyer or whatever to fix the mess for them.
It gets compounded because rich people will have compassion for the problems of other rich people and hire them out of pity when their consulting business is in a slump. Poor people will be rejected and told their inability to find adequate work is evidence of incompetence and that they don't deserve to be hired.
Once you are rich enough, people will kiss your ass, help you save face, etc when you fuck up.
Poor people generally don't get the same courtesies.
This has been a huge problem for me in recent years. Men on HN are obviously competent if they have a lot of karma. My high karma count isn't considered evidence of competence and my need for an income is me "panhandling the internet."
Etc. Ad nauseum.
Source?
It would seem like common sense at this stage that if someone with an infectious disease sneezes on your raw salad leaves or your cold lasagna, you're probably getting it too no?
If you think the OPs comments are important, maybe you could also go verify this information yourself and post back if you find something worthwhile refuting the original claim.
That's not how debate works online or has worked for millennia. The onus is on the person making the claim to prove it.
Despite this 2 nurses have tested positive but are asymptomatic. They aren't allowed to stop working as long as they don't develop strong symptoms. To add insult to injury there are no PPE and even if there are limited quantities available they're not allowed[1] to use it due to rationing. Visiting a hospital right now can be deadly if you're not certain to be positive already or if not in a life-threatening condition. I'd imagine it's similar in many other undeveloped or poor countries.
[1] in Croatian https://www.medicinskasestra.eu/2020/03/25/medicinske-sestre... images from article OCR'ed and google translated: https://pastebin.com/nVXTdDgT
Regarding the bracing situation (outside of going to jail for talking about it) that does seem to be the effect everywhere. Heavily rationed PPE, mandatory overtime, PTO cancelled.
That was the major innovation of the last business cycle. It's coming home to roost in a truly spectacular way over the past month.