Hacker News Reader

Comment by toyg | Hacker News Reader

He's not playing golf all day: he did design and commission the scheduling system he now operates, and provides ongoing advertisement and management.

From what he says, it looks like he gets $40 to $60 per job, whereas cleaners get $15 to $30 per job -- they work in team, so it's $30 to $60 in total (it's all pre-tax, from what I understand). Not a terrible arrangement, to be honest, especially in the Land Of The Free From Socialism; apparently this is much more than what they used to make when a big company exploited them.

I do agree however that the IRS will kick the shit out of him if he doesn't switch to proper employment asap, and that's how it should be: it's all fun and games when things go well, but when hard times come (and they will come) the workers should get some protection.

View on HN

I know, and I don't mean to put down his effort (as I said below, there is some value added). But they are just being exploited by a smaller company - it's the same.

edit: what is with downvotes lately? This is not a contest, feel free to join the discussion.

Workers are not pointed a gun to do the job. Given the opportunities they have, they are choosing this specific opportunity. This means that this service is increasing their expected value from the job. I don't see how this can be bad.

Read comment below for my take on that. I'm not blaming anyone or saying it's morally wrong, just exploring a different arrangement.

What's the problem then? Having management? 'Stealing' profit from the workers?

You can't seem to understand that 1000 workers doing 'their' job may be hundrends of times less productive than doing the same job under the same company. Lots of things (machinery, know how, etc.) need a company and a capital.

Finally, I also don't understand discussing capitalism. Here we are discussing freedom for individuals to work and to create a start up. What would you rather do? Force everybody down the same principles? Not sure it's right.

Problem? None. I think you need to re-read the thread with a lighter head.

"Working for x" != "Exploited by x". In one of the comments he says his best team earn double when they did before.

This is a sentiment that I see frequently on HN, and I'm not exactly sure why. I was a "questionably" contracted employee for awhile, and I never once felt exploited by the company, and I'm confident that they never felt that they were exploiting me.

Sure, being contractors might not be ideal for them at the moment, but they are the first 8 employees at the company. There are additional benefits to being in that situation.

In addition, we have no idea how much they do or do not understand their employment status. It is convenient for us to jump to the conclusion that the employees are ignorant about tax law, but that very well may not be the case. Just like in any other service industry, there are plenty of educated and informed workers in the mix, especially when you start looking at those that tend to excel in that particular field (he did say he now only hires top notch folk, after all).

I guess what I'm saying is, the discussion about W2 vs 1099 in this case is both valid and valuable, but let's not jump to any conclusions about who is exploiting whom.

I think you fell on the wrong comment tree. The "exploitation" in discussion has nothing to do with the employment laws discussed above.

After re-reading your comment and the one to which it replied, I see that you are correct. My reply was not in the wrong tree but rather based on an incorrect assumption.

Pardon my ignorance, but what "exploitation" is being discussed here?

right. You're one of those left-wing, the government should force "equality" people.

By this logic, all employers are exploiting their workers. Most employers make much more money on the work that their employees are completing.

However, they are going to this company by choice. They can choose to leave. They also agree to the wage. In addition to all of this, it's not easy being an independent worker. If anything, the small company is preventing them from getting exploited (they don't have to worry about chasing down a paycheck from each individual client, marketing, etc).

Finding clients is just as time consuming as the actual work itself. I know, I've done it myself as a freelancer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com