its amazing how all the progress was undone by pretending workhours don't count when an app says so.
I am very disillusioned by our industry, it seems half the revenue was generating by techno-cheating laws.
Companies like Uber skate along until new legislation is created that regulates them. Good luck with that.
When they are caught, hopefully, they don't pull Volkswagen, and throw engineers under the bus.
- ability to assign tasks, not leaving the worker the option to say I don't want that task
- ability to control how many workers can log in at a time, forcing Uber to pay a 1000 drivers who all logged in from 2:00 AM to 5:00AM when there aren't enough rides to be taken, isn't right
If I sign onto the app to say that I'm available for delivery, does that count as "working hours", and the company is required to make sure that I make minimum wage, regardless of how many orders are paid out?
What if I sign onto the app, but then don't accept any of the deliveries I get offered? Then they'd be required to make sure I get minimum wage, without ever doing any actual work.
I do think there's a problem as things stand, but I don't think the solution is a simple one.
That's like asking what if you don't do any work at a regular job.
If you're not doing any work, they can fire you. Once you've been fired, they don't need to pay you anything whether you're waiting around or not. But until you've been fired, they should be paying you.
>But you're not required, as I understand it, to take any of the jobs offered by the various gig work services.
There's no contradiction between not being required to take any particular job, and "if you refuse to take 40 jobs in a row, go away".
(If the jobs are so bad that most of the workforce will refuse 40 in a row, so the company can't fire them because they'd have no workers, that's the company's fault for having such a poor selection that the workers wait long times. In which case yes, pay them.)
Ok, so you take _some_ of the jobs, just enough to appear to be working reasonably. And then someone needs to figure out what "some" is. Plus half the point of a gig job is you decide when/what you are willing to work.
As noted, I don't believe there is NO solution... I just don't think it's as simple as "well, just require each person gets paid minimum wage". Because there's a lot of things to consider.
Just let the company decide it.
It doesn't cause a problem because if the company sets an unreasonably high standard for how many jobs you need to take to not be fired, they'll run out of workers.
Like it works for any other work: you get a roster of when you're expected to work and get paid for that time, and perform tasks during this time. This problem has been solved decades if not centuries ago, e.g. factory shifts or supermarket employees.
Well, most 'disruption' is actually tech exploiting a regulatory loophole.
So much for innovation, eh?
It might be illegal across the USA, but I do know at least that in Oregon, this is illegal. I know someone that got several hours of backpay for unpaid lunch breaks because someone reported the business for not allowing them to leave during unpaid lunch breaks.
Requiring people to stay on premises during lunch wasn't illegal, but if the requirement was there, they have to be paid during the lunch break. If you are clocking out, then you MUST be allowed to leave.
When I was younger one manager was notorious for clocking us out while we were still cleaning at the end of the night. It went on because reporting it risked having your shifts cut or being quietly let go.
It's the same in the rental market. Where I am, viewing and application fees have been illegal for years but estate agents will still try to charge them. If you bring it up or refuse to pay they'll just find someone else who will.
Besides which, this is not the equivalent of making a bartender clock out during his break. It's the equivalent of making him clock out while he stands at the bar waiting for the next customer.
If you are not paid for that time, they have no right to require anything.
Wtf is this attitude to employees as if they are property.