Coronavirus, Sick Leave, and the Gig Economy

[Snowboarder_Bo]

Srsly.

[Ruken]

@Broomstick

Because the US society as a whole is unwilling to use tax money for a social safety net that role has been imposed on businesses. If you don’t want employers to be so obligated then lobby for an actual social safety net such as many European nations have. Yes, that will cost the rich more money.

I don’t think I’m rich (yet! Optimism…) but I’m ok with it costing me more money too.

[Brayne_Ded]

@D_Anconia

Please explain why you think that people should be paid for NOT working???

I am doubtless not the first to say, but you appear to be unaware of the implications. If someone has a contagious illness and goes to work … but I’m sure you can guess the rest.

[Brayne_Ded]

@SciFiSam

Isn’t the potential situation with coronavirus slightly different to normal sick leave? With shutdowns like they’ve had in China and Italy, it’s not employees staying home because they’re sick, it’s practically everyone staying home in order to prevent the spread of the disease. They’re not actually sick.

And it’s the government - federal, state or local - ordering them to stay home and not work. It’s not their choice.

So it would make sense for there to be some one-time only actions taken to help those employees, and it’s the government’s responsibility to take those actions. Italy, for example, has suspended mortgage payments (and some reports also say utility bills), which then leads to rent payments being suspended (the govt will end up bailing the banks out for the lost payments, like the UK did for other reasons a few years ago). The workers still aren’t earning, but at least they’re also not getting into debt and risking losing their homes, so when the crisis is over they can get back on their feet again.

TBH, that makes more sense than trying to get all employers including small companies to provide extra sick pay for people who aren’t actually sick. That would require changing far more laws and requiring admin from small companies who might find it difficult to do extra admin when their workers are on lockdown.

As to why those non-working people should get paid, or rather, not have to pay for a short period of time - if too many gig workers end up in huge debt, bankrupt or homeless, then they won’t have money to spend to stimulate the economy.

I am left wondering what the European governments are going to do about the businesses, restaurants and shops that have closed down due to the shutdown. My guess is that they will help out as much as they can, but the costs could be gigantic. And this is just the start. The predictions are for it to be really bad from June to August, and then to pick up again by the winter. How long is this going to last? And how many businesses will go bust?

[Leaper]

@Brayne_Ded

I am left wondering what the European governments are going to do about the businesses, restaurants and shops that have closed down due to the shutdown. My guess is that they will help out as much as they can, but the costs could be gigantic. And this is just the start. The predictions are for it to be really bad from June to August, and then to pick up again by the winter. How long is this going to last? And how many businesses will go bust?

Not just Europe, of course. It’ll be a global issue, even in Taiwan, considering how interconnected the world’s economies are. As I’ve said elsewhere, since it’s an election year here in the U.S., I’m sure something will be done; just not sure what. Maybe the federal government can ask Jeff Bezos for 0.01% of his net worth, I dunno.

And which predictions are you referring to?

[Voyager]

The Times today published an editorial on the sick leave problem today. Link.. The on-line version has a chart showing companies not offering sick leave - McDonalds and WalMart lead.
Flu cases were 11% lower in states or cities with required sick leave.
Why would I want to patronize a company which basically encourages workers to report in sick (by not paying them otherwise) and thus putting my health at risk? The editorial also gives the cost of offering sick leave - an average of 2.7 cents an hour. Too expensive to protect our health? Fuck you companies.

[Max_S]

@Banquet_Bear

…where did the bolded not come from? Perhaps you should read what I wrote a bit more carefully.

… :smack:

Right you are, Banquet Bear.

~Max

[Max_S]

@Voyager

Link.. The on-line version has a chart showing companies not offering sick leave - McDonalds and WalMart lead.

This is not totally accurate. The website’s infographic is based on a survey of workers, not companies. As is pointed out in the article, many workers may be unaware of or afraid to utilize their sick leave benefits.

Since 2015, McDonalds-owned restaurants (about 10% of McDonalds restaurants) have offered paid time off for employees after one year of experience. As cited in the New York Times article, thirteen states already require large companies to offer paid sick leave. Wal-Mart has offered sick leave to all employees since February of 2019, which may be after the Shift Project collected their data.

But what about gig workers? If the law does not recognize an employer-employee relationship, that is, if you have a self-employed worker calling in sick, who exactly would provide the compensation? If you employ yourself, it is your responsibility to provide for your own benefits. We could pass a law garnishing the income of self-employed individuals, on the basis that they cannot be trusted to save responsibly. But I don’t think the premise is true; gig workers appear to be incapable of bringing in enough money to save to begin with. So the garnishment would probably bring income below the level of sustenance.

We could, as proposed above, reclassify gig workers as employees. This might work for certain arrangements, such as Uber or Instacart. I don’t think it would be appropriate to reclassify gig workers unless they work over 30 hours or so, the reason being that the worker has no contractual obligation to actually work until accepting a particular micro-job. Unless the worker has in fact been working on a regular basis for a significant number of hours, I don’t think I can support an implied employer-employee relationship between the marketplace and the worker.

~Max

[Voyager]

@Max_S

This is not totally accurate. The website’s infographic is based on a survey of workers, not companies. As is pointed out in the article, many workers may be unaware of or afraid to utilize their sick leave benefits.

Since 2015, McDonalds-owned restaurants (about 10% of McDonalds restaurants) have offered paid time off for employees after one year of experience. As cited in the New York Times article, thirteen states already require large companies to offer paid sick leave. Wal-Mart has offered sick leave to all employees since February of 2019, which may be after the Shift Project collected their data.

But what about gig workers? If the law does not recognize an employer-employee relationship, that is, if you have a self-employed worker calling in sick, who exactly would provide the compensation? If you employ yourself, it is your responsibility to provide for your own benefits. We could pass a law garnishing the income of self-employed individuals, on the basis that they cannot be trusted to save responsibly. But I don’t think the premise is true; gig workers appear to be incapable of bringing in enough money to save to begin with. So the garnishment would probably bring income below the level of sustenance.

We could, as proposed above, reclassify gig workers as employees. This might work for certain arrangements, such as Uber or Instacart. I don’t think it would be appropriate to reclassify gig workers unless they work over 30 hours or so, the reason being that the worker has no contractual obligation to actually work until accepting a particular micro-job. Unless the worker has in fact been working on a regular basis for a significant number of hours, I don’t think I can support an implied employer-employee relationship between the marketplace and the worker.

~Max

I didn’t see the need to quote the entire article. Clearly they offer sick leave in states that require it. And companies whose cultures make it unwise to use sick leave are not much better than ones without benefits. I worked for a big company where we didn’t have to stay until 9 pm - it was purely voluntary - but the one person who didn’t stay got killed at the next performance review.
Which is why employee responses are more accurate than corporate ones.
Uber and Lyft, in California at least, said they are paying drivers sick time.
Yeah the gig economy is a problem. My wife is a writer, freelance, and if she gets sick one day she can make it up by working on the weekend. Many contract employees who have to come in don’t have that luxury.

[DrCube]

@Max_S

This is not totally accurate. The website’s infographic is based on a survey of workers, not companies. As is pointed out in the article, many workers may be unaware of or afraid to utilize their sick leave benefits.

This is functionally equivalent to not having sick leave. It’s not hard to inform your employees of their benefits and ensure that they are encouraged to use them. Most of these companies do the opposite.

[Max_S]

@DrCube

This is functionally equivalent to not having sick leave. It’s not hard to inform your employees of their benefits and ensure that they are encouraged to use them. Most of these companies do the opposite.

I will concede the argument with regard to the big picture, but I still think there is utility in pointing out the difference. I wrote that bit on the off-chance that it helps one of the Teeming Millions: an immediate solution can be as simple as talking with a manager or reviewing some employee handbook, rather than waiting on corporate to crumble under a public pressure campaign.

~Max

[bengangmo]

@Max_S

This is not totally accurate. The website’s infographic is based on a survey of workers, not companies. As is pointed out in the article, many workers may be unaware of or afraid to utilize their sick leave benefits.

Since 2015, McDonalds-owned restaurants (about 10% of McDonalds restaurants) have offered paid time off for employees after one year of experience. As cited in the New York Times article, thirteen states already require large companies to offer paid sick leave. Wal-Mart has offered sick leave to all employees since February of 2019, which may be after the Shift Project collected their data.

But what about gig workers? If the law does not recognize an employer-employee relationship, that is, if you have a self-employed worker calling in sick, who exactly would provide the compensation? If you employ yourself, it is your responsibility to provide for your own benefits. We could pass a law garnishing the income of self-employed individuals, on the basis that they cannot be trusted to save responsibly. But I don’t think the premise is true; gig workers appear to be incapable of bringing in enough money to save to begin with. So the garnishment would probably bring income below the level of sustenance.

We could, as proposed above, reclassify gig workers as employees. This might work for certain arrangements, such as Uber or Instacart. I don’t think it would be appropriate to reclassify gig workers unless they work over 30 hours or so, the reason being that the worker has no contractual obligation to actually work until accepting a particular micro-job. Unless the worker has in fact been working on a regular basis for a significant number of hours, I don’t think I can support an implied employer-employee relationship between the marketplace and the worker.

~Max

The other thought to bear in mind - some people do gig work specifically because there is no employer / employee relationship.
I drove uber on a part-time basis purely because I was independent in the sense that I could work when and for how long I felt like it. How can you expect to take sickleave if you don’t even want to work a regular roster or be rostered?

[Voyager]

@Max_S

I will concede the argument with regard to the big picture, but I still think there is utility in pointing out the difference. I wrote that bit on the off-chance that it helps one of the Teeming Millions: an immediate solution can be as simple as talking with a manager or reviewing some employee handbook, rather than waiting on corporate to crumble under a public pressure campaign.

~Max

Have you ever worked for a big company?

Charter Communications refuses to let its employees work from home, despite the crisis. Story.
A guy complained in an internal email. He more or less got fired. If the culture is don’t take sick days, going to HR is not going to help a bit. They’ll give you your sick day pay, and then rate you as unsatisfactory.

Ironically, Charter sells internet services. You’d think they’d lead by example.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Ruken

It is possible to not provide paid sick leave while simultaneously discouraging or forbidding contageous people from coming in.

Well sure. You can fire them. Then get a healthy peasant to replace them.

Alternatively, you could have your armed security guards gun down anyone in your work compound who sneezes.

[RioRico]

@bengangmo

The other thought to bear in mind - some people do gig work specifically because there is no employer / employee relationship.
I drove uber on a part-time basis purely because I was independent in the sense that I could work when and for how long I felt like it. How can you expect to take sickleave if you don’t even want to work a regular roster or be rostered?

In my idiotic, carefree salad days, when rice and cabbage were about all I could afford to eat but rotgut was cheap, I worked with daily-labor agencies in New York and San Francisco. I’d show up on days I wanted to work for sub-minimum wage. If I appeared every workday that week, even if not always assigned work, I received the balance of minimum wage. If payment was by check, the agency-owner’s brother’s bar next door cashed it for a beer.

The work: Hauling trash (“cartage”); schlepping hot fabric; filling off-label liquor or paint jugs; delivering new pianos - those had some supervision. Unloading boxcars; delivering store adverts house-to-house; hanging posters - those were do-it-till-done gigs, just me and my conscience. Work hard or sneakily, finish early, get paid for a full day, unsupervied. If I’d rather be elsewhere awhile, no problem. Freedom!

Sick leave? Ha. Just the standard GOP health plan: Don’t get sick or hurt. No money for food? A convent down the street passed out sack lunches and the Hare Krishnas served hot meals. Nowhere to sleep? Yeah, that got tricky. But I survived.

Unlike Uber or Lyft, I didn’t provide my own vehicle nor deal with other overhead. I didn’t work for a loss. Gigwork looks like elective [del]slavery[/del] indentured servitude. I’d hate to be that desperate.