Majority of gig economy workers are earning below minimum wage: research

https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2023/may/gig-economy-worker-research.html

296 378 3 years ago

bristol.ac.uk

988747• 3 years ago

And what's wrong with that? "Gig" is not a real job, so it doesn't have to pay a real salary :) It's a temporary solution for people in-between jobs.

HPsquared4• 3 years ago

Agreed, there should be an exemption for part-time work. Why is there a gulf between "unpaid" and "minimum wage" - what if someone wants to just ride the bike for fun and make a couple of pounds as a bonus?

johngladtj• 3 years ago

That's called not having a minimum wage.

Are we just now rediscovering why minimum wages are bad?

friendzis2• 3 years ago

What if someone is obsessed with heavy machinery, wants to try operate them for fun and maybe make a couple of pounds as a bonus?

Minimum wage laws are there to prevent exactly this scenario. It is deemed better to let inefficient enterprises that cannot pay even minimum wage to implode and support unlucky people via government programs rather inefficient enterprises.

karpierz• 3 years ago

What if some child wants to work in the coal mines? What if some worker wants to be paid in company scrip?

Unravelling worker rights is just a race to the bottom.

sebzim45002• 3 years ago

Maybe I should start tipping deliveroo drivers.

ta12434• 3 years ago

We're not american.

KMnO4• 3 years ago

I can’t tell how to interpret this. Doing gig work doesn’t pay well, but respondents are doing an average of 28 hours of work per week.

Something is missing from the picture. If the takeaway is that gig workers are struggling to pay living expenses, I would expect that to be reflected by working 50-60+ hours per week.

robertlagrant• 3 years ago

It's a citeable headline.

refulgentis2• 3 years ago

For interpreting it, basically:

- revenue = true hourly pay * hours.

- statutory hourly pay = some constant set by gov't.

Therefore:

- given revenue less than some X, we'll name it `living expenses`

- it's possible that true hourly pay < statutory hourly pay

Reading your comment, you may have also meant that you're trying to pick between that interpretation, and another one, that looks like:

Given:

- revenue = true hourly pay * hours.

- statutory hourly pay = some constant set by gov't.

- true hourly pay < statutory hourly pay

Proposition:

- Given hours worked < Y, where Y is some range, and revenue = Z, and workers continue being alive, then perhaps the statutory hourly pay is too high?

From there, to help me choose an interpretation, I'd look for more evidence of that. I'd want something damning, enough to overrule the statute / legal social contract of the population.

wongarsu• 3 years ago

Might be a sign that most people have another job and just do the gig work on the side

Bjartr2• 3 years ago

Plus they say minimum wage rose just this month. I'd expect to see at least a little lag between wages that are legislated directly and those only influenced by that legislation through market pressures.

jasmer9• 3 years ago

? Minimum wage is the law, not a 'market pressure'. Gig employers are not immune to that. Either they pay minimum or are fined and change their ops.

ClumsyPilot6• 3 years ago

What is this atittude to law, ehy do you think it's as optional guidelines when it comes to companies?

If something was outlawed yesterday, and you committed thay crime today, do yoy think you would get away by claiming you need time to adjust? Why is law not optional for 'little people'?

celeritascelery• 3 years ago

Most of the people I know who do gig work do it because it is so flexible. They often have other things like childcare or schooling that take a large part of their time.

CraigJPerry• 3 years ago

> an average of 28 hours

I wonder if this hours figure is calculated the same way the gig companies calculate minimum wage.

I.e. that 28 hours represents only time spent in performing the delivery task. Any waiting around beforehand when not assigned a task is not counted as working hours for the purposes of min wage calculation. If this is true (and that needs verifying) then this 28 might be a 40 hours where the person was unable to get on with their other life duties even if they weren’t technically working.

dmix3• 3 years ago

They’d obviously do it by total hours worked vs the amount Uber/etc pays out each paycheque, not going through thousands of Uber receipts, calculating the percentages paid out + time spent doing the delivery, and totalling them up. That’d be pretty hard/impossible at scale.

jasmer9• 3 years ago

Deep insight!

Retailers should only pay sales clerks when they are directly talking to customers!

Bus drivers should only be paid when the bus is moving!

I'm only going to pay my developers when they are writing lines of code!

All of the 'in between' time 'doesn't count as work'.

darkwater2• 3 years ago

I agree on the spirit of your take but then you should count the commuting hours for the rest of workers as well. If you need 1 hour to get to work and 1 to get back, you are already working (or giving your time to your work place) 50 hours a week

lozenge• 3 years ago

If they did use that flawed method then the headline would be 0% of gig workers are earning below minimum wage.

Neil442• 3 years ago

According to the study it includes hours spent logged on waiting for jobs, which I think is a correct and meaningful way to measure it. I guess this is mostly people trying to top up their primary income.

https://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/business-schoo...

themagician2• 3 years ago

If you are only making around £7 an hour it's not going to matter if you work 28 hours or 84 hours. The takeaway is that people doing jobs that wouldn't otherwise exist.

NikolaNovak3• 3 years ago

The missing number is how many of them are working another job.

I haven't taken Uber in last couple of years, but prior to Covid I took it ~weekly in Ottawa & Toronto. Not a single driver in years of travel for work, had it as their sole employment.

They're usually in a hurry, but delivery drivers I had a chance to chat with last few years also primarily use it to supplement their income.

So people may be doing 60 hours a week, just not solely via gig work.

Edit: I've Re-read the article, the 28 hours a week you quote is immediately followed by a clarifying "comprising 60% of their total earnings" -- so it looks like indeed they are working many more hours a week total.

sokoloff• 3 years ago

I found that a high fraction of my mid-day trips (commuting to/from our downtown office or taking it to/from the airport morning, afternoon, or very early evening) were from essentially full-time drivers. Friday/Saturday night trips to/from restaurants were mostly from part-time drivers, which is probably not that surprising a result.

pessimizer7• 3 years ago

Minimum wage is a rate, not an amount. It doesn't matter what other jobs people have, it won't change the rate they're paid for gigwork.

scoopdewoop• 3 years ago

Wanting more work isn't going to make a lunch rush happen again. These folks make no money at all waiting around, and can only make a nearly worthwhile sum when there is demand.

SimonPStevens• 3 years ago

I think for many gig type work out would be hard to hit 50 hours. There are only so many peak hours for these jobs in a week.

If tried to work more you'd find yourself just waiting for jobs a lot of the time and your average hourly rate would drop even lower.

jasmer9• 3 years ago

My god man, use your logic: 'pay workers illegally under wage, then can just work 60 hours a week to make up for it!' at least before we make it an issue.

If there was no minimum wage, wages in some sectors wages would drop to where they are in the undeveloped world aka $2/hour. Little communities with favela-like structures with limited heating/electricity would pop up, and if you think the 'dollar store' is cheap, then wait for the '25 cent store' where they sell stuff as they do parts of India and Brazil.

It's funny how people don't think this could happen in the 'modern world', I suggest they don't know what makes the modern world modern. For a hint, go to where the illegal workers in Cali or Texas live and exist. Those communities resemble pretty much the standard of living of Central American countries, aka 'down the economic ladder'. Because they are.

Moreover, having secondary low-wage markets will put downward wage pressure on other jobs. Extra surpluses will mostly be yielded by financial asset holders.

The solution here is simple, require people pay minimum wage. If you look at corporate profits in the US for example, there are plenty of surpluses available to pay people.

Some jobs will go away, that's fine.

I can't believe what I'm reading on this thread, the only other time I've been suspicious of 'ideological paid bots' is when I see a ton of people defending the CCP.

savant_penguin• 3 years ago

"Some jobs will go away, that's fine."

To whom is that fine? To the people going from $2/hour to zero it certainly isn't.

I honestly cannot grasp how some people can _forcibly_ remove other people's _options_ then pat themselves on the back as some sort of armchair savior.

Yes, for some people a bad option could still be their best option. What sort of moral superpower is that that enables you to forbid a contract between two consenting adults A and B such that A wants to work for X and B that's willing to pay X, but you as a C that just won't let it happen and is willing to use force to stop it from happening

ClumsyPilot6• 3 years ago

We spesifically deaigned legislation to make sure workers get paid for all their time, a chef waiting for orders and not cooking is still working. A fire marshall on duty still gwts paid if there is no fire, etc.

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.

ghaff• 3 years ago

Except we really didn't. People are not in general paid for their time going to and from being on the clock which, in many cases, is significant.

datavirtue5• 3 years ago

In my experience, this is business. I'm working on a product right now that would not pass the scrutiny of AGs or the CFPB. We will release and run for years making tons of money until the regulators catch up and realize what we are doing. Then we will ask forgiveness and compromise a bit. This is how self-policing works in banking and other regulated industries.

Companies like Uber skate along until new legislation is created that regulates them. Good luck with that.

RHSeeger3• 3 years ago

How would it work though?

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.

maximinus_thrax• 3 years ago

I am very disillusioned by our industry, it seems half the revenue was generating by techno-cheating laws.

Well, most 'disruption' is actually tech exploiting a regulatory loophole.

cdkmoose2• 3 years ago

But if the restaurant still controls the chef's work during that time, that isn't gig work. If the "employer" is required to pay by time not work, then it is now the employer's time, not the workers flexible time:

- 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

malcolmgreaves6• 3 years ago

Other folks have already commented that most folks in this line of work will have 2nd and 3rd jobs. But, I want to explain a different perspective. One that explains how gig work affects one's living (and ultimately leads to people needing to take on multiple jobs to survive).

Gig workers cannot control how many hours of work they receive a week. It's similar to shift work. When your manager is making the schedule and ensures that no one works 40 hours or more a week so they don't have to pay you benefits.

A major problem of low-wage, non-salaried work and gig work is that is an unreliable source of income. This breeds anxiety and stress, not to mention a host of other problems.

beerpls• 3 years ago

Not only that, but the 28 hours they work are probably some of the worst.

Ex you’re driving uber. You’re going to be “incentivized” (read: forced due to logistics) to work rush hour and bar hours. So you’re maybe working 5-7 and 10-12 on weekends and a couple weekdays. The reason being is that everyone wants to cruise around in the afternoon so the ratio of drivers to passengers gets so bad you’ll never get a ride.

And ofc if you’re sitting in your car with the app on waiting… you’re not being paid. That doesn’t count as work. So if you don’t get a ride for 2 hours bc not enough passengers - tough shit you’ve just made $4 for your 2 hours minus the cost of running your car and losing hours of your life.

But America is corrupted. Politicians let’s corps simply say “no we’re not breaking the law” and they believe them.

Anyone who’s debating that this is harmful and should be illegal is uneducated or a simp for those corps.

lumost• 3 years ago

How lmuch big does an Uber driver “work” for Uber? How long does a “dasher” work? If folks aren’t paid for the 15 minute gap between orders, or the 10 minute commute to pickup location - then a 60 hour work week can easily turn into 30 hours of paid time.

chongli3• 3 years ago

I would expect that to be reflected by working 50-60+ hours per week.

That does not follow. Suppose the gig workers are doing food deliveries. Each day, the market places X food orders at a total of $Y including fees and tips. If the market clears (no one who places a food order has it left unfulfilled), a reasonable assumption, then the food delivery gig is a zero-sum game. If all the drivers work more hours that just means they’ll be waiting longer, on average, for orders to come in. No amount of extra hours worked will create additional food orders.

londons_explore• 3 years ago

One common thing speaking to most low paid workers is that they would like to do more work to earn more money, but there is no more work on offer.

Even amongst software engineers, if you asked your boss "can I work a few extra saturdays and get paid a few extra $k", the typical answer is no.

The labour market is far less dynamic than say the market for carrots, where you can of course give a few $ extra and get extra carrots from walmart.

mattnewton3• 3 years ago

Why would you spend 60 hours a week in something that gives so little returns? It’s not like you can meaningfully get ahead doing this if these are the numbers. Better to spend the other hours looking for other options or just enjoying yourself.

kevviiinn3• 3 years ago

Enjoying yourself doesn't pay the bills

maxbaines5• 3 years ago

Because they have to, to make ends meet. When you are struggling to feed yourself and maybe a family it leaves little room for learning or enjoying yourself.

harvey9• 3 years ago

The UK has an hourly legal minimum wage rate. The number of hours worked does not affect the fact that, according to the study, most gig workers are earning less than that per hour.

Respondents doing an average of 28 hours gig work per week will in some cases be using that to top up insufficient hours in a low wage conventional job.

dfxm12• 3 years ago

Wages, i.e. payment per hour worked, is independent of the number of hours worked. One of the takeaways is that they aren't being paid the legal minimum wage.

The overarching takeaway is that gig work doesn't offer the protections that is extended to other workers. More to your point, understand that one of the issues that Starbucks unions are fighting for is more control over scheduling.

anamexis• 3 years ago

It seems like the hours per week is irrelevant -- the point being made is that the hourly wage is below the minimum hourly wage.

ThorsBane• 3 years ago

I suspect most gig workers do it as a side hobby or side project before having the necessary experience to start scaling a business of their own. Or to supplement other income.

namuol• 3 years ago

Doing gig work doesn’t pay well, but respondents are doing an average of 28 hours of work per week.

Curious use of “but”. Has it occurred to you that perhaps below-minimum-wage pay isn’t the best use of one’s time? Besides, an hour is an hour. If I’m not paid for that hour, it doesn’t matter if I worked 1 hour or 100 hours, but you can bet that gig companies do everything they can to avoid “full time” employment of workers in markets that require benefits for such employees, so that may also factor in to the number of hours worked.

lm284692• 3 years ago

Isn't it in the article ?

on average 28 hours a week undertaking gig work, comprising 60% of their total earnings.

And since it's bellow the minimum hourly wage does it matter that it's 1 hour or 60 hours ?

ITB• 3 years ago

There’ll be a bunch of people here saying that capitalism is vicious and people should earn more. But actually what will happen is that they will get automated and then have no job. When automation is the alternative, collective bargaining is not a great option.

HPsquared4• 3 years ago

Next step: ban automation.

toomuchtodo2• 3 years ago

Well, not necessarily, you simply tax it at a highly progressive rate and distribute the tax revenue as social services.

Automation isn't the problem, its control and use to create systems of extraction from the disadvantaged is.

duxup• 3 years ago

Wouldn't that just mean automation is inevitable anyway?

The scenario isn't "If you ask for more I'll automate you." It is that they'll automate them anyway when it is convenient for them to do so.

ta12434• 3 years ago

Automation is great. I do it all the time. Sure I could spend my life manually configuring switch ports, copying and pasting information into 50 pointless repositories, but that would be tedious, so I automate it.

Same in a shop. It's far better for a machine to stack a shelf than for a person to do it, it leaves the person free to do something more useful with their life.

Tade02• 3 years ago

Automation isn't keeping up with the decrease in fertility rates.

There's considerably less young people entering the workforce in the west now than there were 40 years ago.

ben_w5• 3 years ago

Automation isn't the same in each sector, but even if it was, it's unlikely to be linear going forward.

Likewise, fertility rates may be going down, but we also have people working on all kinds of things in that area, including but not limited to artificial wombs.

green_man_lives2• 3 years ago

But actually what will happen is that they will get automated and then have no job.

I find this to be a lazy argument because the conclusion is that you should never try to improve your situation ever. Also the easy counter to this is to establish a welfare state by taxing profits across the board (not that this could successfully be done in the US).

The counter to that argument is that capital will flee overseas. The counter to that argument is to do what China did and remind the tech oligarchs who is really in charge. The counter to that argument is that it's bad to do that because property rights are sacred.

At the end of the day though, we should really want for all citizens to have as high of a living standard as possible. I think their humanity is a better argument than any alternatives that economists can come up with.

mytailorisrich2• 3 years ago

Gig workers, especially food delivery, do a very low productivity job that consumers don't want to pay a lot for.

So, really, it cannot be well-paid. It's either crap pay or the job disappears.

This is a classic balancing act between jobs and workers protection/level of minimum wage.

n4r9• 3 years ago

The fact that automation leaves people without a means of support only supports the claim that capitalism is vicious...

ETH_start4• 3 years ago

The gig economy provides a way to mop up excess labor rendered unemployable by minimum wage/benefits laws.

The people doing gig economy jobs are at the margins, due to the circumstances they find themselves in, and those gigs are a lifeline.

balderdash6• 3 years ago

My experience with ride sharing is that you have the people that you just mentioned, + people doing it professionally, people doing it for fun / get out of the house make a little Extra money, and people in a short term bind that need to make some extra money

ETH_start4• 3 years ago

Yes true. I over-simplified. There are people who earn well from these types of gig markets. But it provides the flexibility to also allow those who really can't or won't find ordinary jobs - due to reasons ranging from their skill level, to their scheduling requirements - a way to earn.

jasmer9• 3 years ago

No - the 'gig economy' provides a way to pay people substantially lower than they would have to otherwise, often lower than minimum wage, provide no benefits or long term viability, shift social spending to government, and to create an underclass of voiceless powerless serfs.

The naivte here in these comments is deeply disturbing.

mrob• 3 years ago

Social spending should be the responsibility of government. Minimum wage, like price controls, is another form of stealth welfare, with the responsibility imposed on unaccountable third parties. It would make more sense for governments to redistribute wealth directly. Minimum wage is effectively a tax on low value labor, which is obviously inefficient.

ETH_start4• 3 years ago

That sounds like a conspiracy theory - which is often assumed to be wisdom as people believe it exhibits an ability to identify and see-through propaganda from the dominant powers - instead of an empirically grounded conclusion.

If these people could find jobs in the regulated job market, then they would already have such jobs. The fact that they resort to gigs is itself evidence that the regulated job market cannot offer them positions.

ben_w5• 3 years ago

The UK currently has chronic labour shortages in many areas, so I don't think your take is particularly credible in this specific case.

Other cases, potentially, but not this one.

ETH_start4• 3 years ago

A labor shortage can coincide with pools of unemployable workers, due to a mismatch between the skills and qualifications required for open positions and those possessed by a subset of workers.

shagie2• 3 years ago

Given the ongoing UK truck driver shortages, why is uber driver a more attractive option for driving a vehicle?

Then the question is "why is the uber driver not able to command as much as a truck driver?" and "why is the uber driver not switching to being a truck driver?"

The corresponding part is "if you can't work 8h today but only have 2 hours in the morning and 2h in the afternoon, that flexibility comes at a cost of reduced pay."

This is from a bit ago but likely still quite relevant - https://www.epi.org/publication/part-time-pay-penalty/ and https://www.hiringlab.org/2019/05/09/moms-and-part-time-work...

_dain_• 3 years ago

There's no labour shortage -- or rather there is, but it's not the relevant causal factor. There's a lack of housing supply in places with good jobs. People have to dump so much of their hard earned cash into rent that it discourages people from moving there in the first place. Talented people are stuck in shit jobs in the north because the higher wages in the south aren't enough to offset the insane rents.

Autobiographical anecdote: due to combinations of good and bad luck I've had three different jobs in three different cities over the past 18 months. My income went from (rounded) ~30k to ~60k to ~90k, up by more than a factor of three. Yet, the rent I was paying remained about the same fraction of my post-tax income in each case, while the objective standard of housing that rent paid for went down:

Sheffield: £500/month for a 2br flat in a nice neighbourhood

Cardiff: £900/month for a not-as-good 2br flat in an okay neighbourhood

Cambridge: £1300/month for a one bedroom flat in an okay neighbourhood. There are almost no <£1200/mo 2br flats on the market at all.

Now think how hopeless it is for the other 95% of the country who are not as fortunate as me.

A huge chunk of the wage premium for living in a more economically productive city is being slurped up by boomer rentiers because of the inelasticity of the housing supply curve, i.e. the "nimby tax". The price mechanism is just completely broken. Rising prices don't spur anywhere near enough construction. People just learn to make do with less: smaller houses, shittier houses, sharing rooms, or foregoing career opportunities that involve relocation. A whole generation has grown up not knowing what a functioning housing market looks like ... this is all just seen as normal.

(PS: once you factor this in, the North is even more economically weak than it appears on paper, because the high house prices in the South partially counteract the brain drain. Few graduates stay there by choice. I have no trouble believing it's de facto poorer than Poland now. Still waiting for the "levelling up" to happen.)

zubiaur• 3 years ago

An unpopular take. I think you may be onto something though. This is what I see in latam: countries with very strict labor laws end up with a huge portion of the population working informally (40% BR -70% PE).

topicseed• 3 years ago

Key takeaways...

- A study led by the University of Bristol reveals that 52% of gig workers in the UK earn below the minimum wage.

- The average hourly earnings of gig workers were £8.97, approximately 15% lower than the current UK minimum wage.

- Work-related insecurity and anxiety were experienced by 76% of gig workers surveyed.

- Many gig workers (28%) felt their health and safety were at risk, and 25% experienced pain on the job.

- Gig workers expressed the need for basic rights such as minimum wage rates, holiday and sick pay, and protection against unfair dismissal, as well as the formation of unions and platform councils to represent their interests and influence working conditions.

remote_phone2• 3 years ago

The study was an internet survey with no verification and they mixed the data between a wide variety of types of remote gigs, including upwork and fiverr and the further mixed the idea of “waiting for work” which falsely decreased the average wage.

kranke1554• 3 years ago

Falsely how?

Aerroon2• 3 years ago

- The average hourly earnings of gig workers were £8.97, approximately 15% lower than the current UK minimum wage.

UK "real" minimum wage at the time was £9.5, so it's 5.6% lower, but this only applies to people aged 23+!

You could also say that they earned 31.3% more than the minimum wage of £6.83 that applied to 18 to 20 year olds at the time.

Or 2.3% less than the minimumn wage of £9.18 that applied to 21 to 22 year olds at the time.

I'm very surprised that a study done in the UK didn't go deeper on age, especially when they're going to write such lines compared to minimum wage.

blablabla123• 3 years ago

True, they should have included that. I have the impression though that e.g. delivery jobs used to be considered student jobs instead of a full-time job to make a living from. While most gig workers seem rather young I'd think the age range has shifted upwards.

Jochim12• 3 years ago

Many businesses won't pay anything other than the 23+ rate.

The age based rates should be removed altogether, they're mainly there so that the owners of small businesses can creep on young girls.

version_five• 3 years ago

So the median wage is the minimum wage, which sort of makes sense in terms of what would incentivize people to take a gig job over a minimum wage job. It does come with some more flexibility or course which some might be happy to trade off against absolute earnings. Takeaway to me is gig jobs are a viable alternative to minimum wage, but nothing more.

mint22• 3 years ago

I would hazard to guess many don’t have a choice due to the flexibility compared to a minimum wage job. Are they doing it out of “happiness” if a 9-5 is impossible to fit in their day?

balderdash6• 3 years ago

“A major factor contributing to low pay rates is that this work involves spending significant amounts of time waiting or looking for work while logged on to a platform.”

Well sure, if you include time not working in the denominator, the pay rate is going to be low!

Seems like the title should read that gig workers would make more nominal dollars if they spent their time waiting for gig work working a minimum wage job…

gbanfalvi• 3 years ago

Well sure, if you include time not working in the denominator, the pay rate is going to be low!

So dragging around tickets in Jira and taking the next one off the backlog isn't working either?

refulgentis2• 3 years ago

Are you paid during it?

Usually, that's a full-time job, i.e not compensated hourly.

Alternatively, if you're not paid...I haven't heard of an employer only compensating for typing into Jira but not dragging tickets.

Is there another analogy familiar to us, where we're blocked on waiting for an employer to find us work, and we're not paid during it?

malcolmgreaves6• 3 years ago

Should you be paid to be on-call?

NeoTar• 3 years ago

Yes. Maybe not at your full rate, any maybe implicitly as a part of your work contract (you are paid XX for YY hours and ZZ hours on call) but 100 times yes.

Anything which an employer asks you to do is work. All work should be compensated for. This include travel required for work, training courses, time spent waiting for work where you are not completely free to engage in what you'd prefer to do.

danparsonson• 3 years ago

Seems like the title should read that gig workers would make more nominal dollars if they spent their time waiting for gig work working a minimum wage job…

So... halfway through making a burger they drop what they're doing to go pick up their next Uber passenger?

Waiting for the next job is dead time if you have no idea how long you'll have to wait and limited or no choice about when it will start. Edit to clarify: the point is that in this case you're on the clock whether you are nominally 'working' or not - it's still work time.

HDThoreaun• 3 years ago

Waiting for a ride is part of the job.

klyrs• 3 years ago

If they were working in retail, they'd be getting paid to stand around waiting for customers to arrive. Most employees are paid for downtime resulting from slack in demand for their services.

jjk1668• 3 years ago

They'ed be paid if they were on the premises and doing things their employer permitted. Generally they'ed be required to clock out if they wanted to say take a smoke break, or run some personal errands, or take a nap. Hell they won't even generally get paid for the time they spend commuting to work and similar activities that are in practice necessary for the job but during which they are not at the employer's command.

There are jobs where you need warm bodies and you are paying for availability. If you hire a security guard, you're hoping you never need them to do their job, but you're paying them to be there in case they are needed. If a gig employer demanded your time regardless of whether or not you were doing a gig, of course they should be paying for your time. But a big part of gig work is that when you're not in the middle of a gig, you have no obligations - you can sit around waiting for the next job, or you can do something else.

balderdash6• 3 years ago

You mean if they took a job that paid by the hour?! Yeah they would be paid for their time, or they’d be put to work doing some other menial task.

But they didn’t sign up for an hourly wage - so either a) they value the flexibility to use their time in between assignments as they choose. Or b) they misjudged their economic earning ability in the gig economy

davisoneee• 3 years ago

...and how do you imagine they do that (spend their time waiting for gig work by working minimum wage)?

Work at McDonalds, and then walk out to go do an uber run?

It's often claimed that the flexibility of gig work benefits workers to 'top up' their wages...but the reality is that companies push this work, and it just ends up with workers earning less than minimum wage, because rather than companies paying you for the 'between time', you now end up earning nothing. Much like other commenters say, should you get paid for the Jira ticket, or just the coding work? Gig work suggests just the actual coding.

balderdash6• 3 years ago

Doing whatever they want that’s the point - you can either A) commit to a fixed wage rate per hour regardless of how much actual work you do (working at McDonald’s when it’s slow or busy) or B) effectively commit to knit rate pricing with variable volume (if volumes are low you make less then if you had worked at McDonald’s, if volumes are high you probability make more) and receive the added to benefit of choosing when you are working, and what to do in your down time.

matsemann2• 3 years ago

Being available for work is working. A bartender at a quiet bar is still at work. Or should they only get paid while pouring a drink?

balderdash6• 3 years ago

It’s clearly not.

It’s only working to the extent you’ve contracted with your employer that you are trading your time and willingness to work for compensation e.g. salary or hourly wage.

There are plenty of jobs that have different labor arrangements: commission only (real estate agents), piecework (home cleaners), unit rate rate (truckers), to name a few… is a real estate agent who’s sitting in their backyard working because technically they’re available to go show a house if you call?

sd9• 3 years ago

But like... how could that be done, practically?

systemtest2• 3 years ago

Self-employed gig workers aren't protected against illness or unemployment. No paid time off, no sick days, no pension, no maternity leave. And on top of that the majority earn below minimum wage.

Gig work is understandable for students or people who want extra income but it shouldn't be someones main source of income.

malcolmgreaves6• 3 years ago

it shouldn't be someones main source of income.

Interesting, because as companies continue to find ways to pay less for their labor by moving folks from W-2 to 1099s, gig work will become a larger portion of the only kind of work available for people's main source of income.

If you feel like our economy should not force folks to have gig work be their main source of income, have you ever thought about how to shape society to ensure that people have jobs with stable sources of income?

systemtest2• 3 years ago

I have to admit that I lack political knowledge for a good solution.

In my opinion, if your main source of income is from one company, you should be employed and have paid sick days, paid time off, disability, unemployment and all other employee protections.

ryandrake• 3 years ago

As long as we're shaping society, we might as well go all the way: Shape it so people don't have to perform this work ritual and earn their right to merely exist and survive.

nathan_compton7• 3 years ago

It is easy. Tax the wealthy more, make sure workers and the state own stock and receive dividends from publicly traded companies, establish a generous social welfare program, and create a job guarantee from the state at the minimum wage.

ClumsyPilot6• 3 years ago

I like how we carve out acceptable targets for exploitation, and it's always young people.

Ive seen non-western societies discriminate against old and young.

Western society discriminates against young people but protects the older generation.

Combined with growing bon-working population, this is resulting in political disaster.

Majority of working age population voted against Brexit, against current conservative government in Britain, against Trump presidency.

jsbg8• 3 years ago

I like how we carve out acceptable targets for exploitation, and it's always young people.

Working is a two-way agreement, not exploitation. The job market "discriminates against" people with little or no experience. Gaining experience is valuable, that's why young people choose to take jobs with low monetary pay.

themagician2• 3 years ago

If we are going to let this persist we should really just get rid of the minimum wage all together. Having a minimum wage for some jobs but not for others is just silly at this point.

remedan• 3 years ago

How is not having minimal wage for any job better than having it for only some?

swarnie• 3 years ago

Minimum wage does not apply to self employed people.

Definitely doesn't apply to visaless drivers borrowing accounts.

jacknews2• 3 years ago

When we can also get rid of 'minimum food' and 'minimum housing' and so on then we can get rid of minimum wage.

Actually there is a way to satisfy the 'everything is a market' camp at the same time as treating people as, well, people, and not just some resource that should disapear if it's not in demand.

Universal Equity. Not just Universal Basic Income, dispensed at the whim of government, but actual equity - everyone owns a share in the economy, whether or not they are employed by it.

jsbg8• 3 years ago

everyone owns a share in the economy

People already have that option, as long as they're ok also losing money when the economy is down.

pessimizer7• 3 years ago

I agree; honesty is better. We should change "labor law" to "labor advice" or "labor suggestions."

jjk1668• 3 years ago

Minimum wage is necessary where labor is at a severe disadvantage. The number of employers in a location is often pretty limited, and if an unskilled worker doesn't take the deal they're offered, and if they can't find a better deal in a timely manner they face poverty. A minimum wage means these small number of employers can't dragoon workers into the lowest possible wage above starvation. While it does mean some people will get payed nothing instead of something, it's often easier to deal with a small number of unemployed people who can easily be supported by a large population where everyone else is getting payed decently.

But there are plenty of other circumstances where employment isn't a race to the bottom. Most gig workers are in a position where they could easily do something else if the compensation was inadequate, including getting a minimum wage non-gig job, and most people in the society are not relying on gig jobs as their sole source of income. Further there is no social welfare where society at large supports people who can't get gig jobs. Under such circumstances, what is the argument for the person who would be rendered unemployed by a minimum wage to want a minimum wage?

say_it_as_it_is• 3 years ago

Minimum wage earners who are working 40 hours a week find out that they could work half as many hours and still earn that much. They also get flexible hours and the freedom to decide what gig to do. Card-carrying Socialists are teaching them how exploited they are, by The System, encouraging unionization.

dewfaced• 3 years ago

For me gig work is side income. I do uber and make $25/hr. Closer to $17/hr. once I pay for gas. But I am on the luck side because I get tipped well.

malcolmgreaves6• 3 years ago

But I am on the luck side because I get tipped well

That's curious! Do you know why you get tipped well?

_joel• 3 years ago

That's great but the UK isn't the US. However I do hear of people doing it here, just to be able to pay their mortgage

pessimizer7• 3 years ago

How much after you depreciate the value of your car? <$15/hr?

mint22• 3 years ago

Don’t forget taxes! <$12/hr

And If they’re earning so little that taxes do not apply, chances are OUR tax money is instead funding things to help them get by so that gig companies can skirt labor laws.

nintendo1889• 3 years ago

Well I guess they better start living in tents, prepping, learning survival skills, and buying bitcoin! No, I am not joking: https://archive.is/ifiOt

DoreenMichele3• 3 years ago

More than just side hustles to earn extra cash, respondents spent on average 28 hours a week undertaking gig work, comprising 60% of their total earnings.

This makes me wonder what the other 40 percent of their earnings is from, how much time it takes and how well it pays.

dmix3• 3 years ago

My friend is an Uber driver, he’s an immigrant from Africa and has been running a small accounting business for years. He doesn’t always have a lot of work and it can be seasonal so he uses Uber to fill the gap (allowing him to completely stop doing Uber for a month or two and come back to it).

He also has small kids at home so helps with them during the day and does Uber at nights.

Gig work is very flexible that way, unlike almost any other side job accessible to most people.

DoreenMichele3• 3 years ago

I've done gig work under circumstances where a normal job was simply not possible. I often earned well under minimum wage because I was sick and struggling to get anything done.

I was thrilled to have the ability to earn anything and I have long voiced criticisms of this assumption that earning less than minimum wage is inherently some kind of employer abuse that must be aggressively stamped out.

It's not like people are throwing money at me out of pity for my incurable condition and sad sack life story. Denying me the opportunity to choose to work part-time for sometimes less than minimum wage winds up being just a means to cut my income, not improve my life any.

pierat2• 3 years ago

And we're shocked... why?

These aren't real contractors, with complex tasks, negotiations for 3-5x salary of a normal employee. Ive done that. No benefits , but paid EXTRAORDINARILY well, like on the range of $300/hr

But "gig work companies" are about bypassing and subverting normal employment by calling it "contract work", and having NONE of the meeting of the minds of a proper contractor.

And it's blatantly obvious why - it lowers cost and transfers liability to people who don't have a clue what those externalized liabilities really are.

swores3• 3 years ago

It's a study of the extent to which people are being screwed over, not sure why you're acting like the fact that, depressingly, it's not surprising is a gotcha.

That it is happening means we need the government (or courts, or whatever) to take action to fix it, the fact that this hasn't yet happened means that studies like this are extremely useful.

jjoonathan• 3 years ago

The "gotcha" isn't aimed at the people doing the study or advocating for change, it's aimed at the apologists who were running around with "everyone is winning" rhetoric. There were plenty of them around here. They were very wrong about something that should have been obvious.

This is all going to play out again with AI, but moreso, so it's important to keep score.

s1artibartfast6• 3 years ago

This whole topic seems to be unnecessary and stupid.

Gig workers should all be sole Proprietors of their own businesses. The only reason they aren't is because governments make it difficult to run your own business.

This would solve basically all of the legal and moral problems.

Gig workers would be responsible for all of their own benefits, but be able to deduct all of their business costs. They would be responsible for if their own business turns a profit or loss and if they want to continue it.

candiodari• 3 years ago

The government can only make this work disappear, illegal, and you know it. They cannot fix it.

Fact of the matter is that even with labor conditions like this Uber and Food Delivery and other gig economy marketplaces are delivering services that are too expensive. More expensive than the threshold where average people would say "I'll just (go there/use public transport/get my food/fix it) myself".

A lot of companies like Uber are effectively transferring wealth from investors to poor people ... If the government touches this, whoever does that it will be skinned alive, because governments have failed since the 80s to provide an economy where jobs are plentiful and easy enough.

stri8ed2• 3 years ago

Would there be any demand for those gig works, if it had to pay comparable to full employment? And would that be a good thing?

mattwad• 3 years ago

an extreme example of this would be "well, would there be any demand for slaves if you had to pay them? would that be a good thing?"

ivanhoe2• 3 years ago

I doubt that guests in restaurants will start flipping their own burgers, or folks will stop ordering home deliveries, so I don't think the demand is a problem here. Real problem is on the other side, the vast supply of that segment of the workforce. These are easily replacable employees, so employer has unfair "if you don't like it, leave it" leverage over them - plus most of them can't really afford to be picky about jobs as they need that money badly. And employers exploit it.

ivanhoe2• 3 years ago

It's a practice of basically praying on the vulnerable social groups, and that should make it a problem of the whole society - and even if one doesn't care of ethical issues of such exploitation of fellow human beings, and lacks any empathy for them at all, at least they should care about the burden that its side-effects put on the budget. Our tax money then has to be used to fix problems created by such evil business practices instead of using it on something else, so these companies are really ripping us all off in the process.

MisterBastahrd• 3 years ago

There have been multiple times where I've forgotten to change the dollar amount on a Doordash tip (I try to tip generously) for something purchased locally... usually it ends up being a $25 order with a $3-4 tip. I don't know if drivers get any part of any of the fees, but I know that I've always gotten the thing I ordered. It's crazy, but people still do it.

kinnth• 3 years ago

From the small interactions i've had with deliveroo/uber, most of the workers there LOVE the flexibility. It's the main reason they do it and they sacrafice some financial rewards for that flexibility.

So I believe workers should get paid the minimum, but im sure that gig work fills a niche that no other work does. They don't want to negotiate, they want simplicity and flexibility or else they could work as temp staffing or short term work such as call center or gigs, that are paid well but often bad work.

bee_rider5• 3 years ago

Generally people put on an appearance of cheerfulness while working, especially if they are incentivized to make you happy (good review, tips). So I’d take this sort of measurement with a grain of salt.

bananapub2• 3 years ago

yes, I am sure the people who rely on your custom and want a nice tip are extremely positive when in your presence.

bbradley406• 3 years ago

One of my most memorable Uber rides was with a younger mother that had a tough child custody schedule that prevented her from working a regular job.

In a perfect world this wouldn't even be a concern, but as she explained it to me, Uber was one of the very few options that let her work when she could.

settrans• 3 years ago

I find this sanctimonious _I know better than you_ attitude shocking and inappropriately condescending.

Just because these people are earning less than minimum wage, what makes you think you know better than them what's good for them, and that they "don't have a clue"? Why is this "blatantly obvious"? Why are they not rational actors but you are?

Given that so many people are making this choice for themselves, it feels like it's possible that there's demand for below-minimum-wage labor (otherwise, why wouldn't they go and get minimum-wage jobs?).

oliwarner4• 3 years ago

I think you might be mistaking making a choice with having a choice. These people don't have another choice.

Many gig workers do gig work around other work and pressures (eg childcare). The work they do isn't what they would choose all other things being equal but the soaring cost of living, the lack of affordable and convenient childcare means people have to do sums that end in them doing a few hours a day in a shitty extra job.

I think many would rather choose a better paid job compatible with modern life. They just don't exist.

ouid• 3 years ago

the problem with below minimum wage labor has never been that there's no demand for it...

dumbfounder• 3 years ago

How much time is spent going to and from work when you have a normal job, maybe 10%? (actually, more, the average is 59 minutes: https://uk.indeed.com/career-advice/finding-a-job/commute-to...). That cuts the gap to almost nothing right there. They cite that logging on and looking for work as factors in the calculation, this seems like a one-sided manipulation to make the numbers look bad to me if you don't include commute time on the other side. The study (shockingly!) seems to have an agenda based on the conclusions it came to:

"The self-employed who are dependent on platforms to make a living are urgently in need of labour protections to shield them against the huge power asymmetries that exist in the sector. This clearly warrants the expansion of the current ‘worker’ status to protect them."

I do not think they need shields. There are plenty of reasons on both sides. We can educate them on the plusses and minuses, but let them make a choice.

chongli3• 3 years ago

And it's blatantly obvious why - it lowers cost and transfers liability to people who don't have a clue what those externalized liabilities really are.

That’s one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that it’s serving the previously untapped market for below-minimum-wage work. If this gig work did not exist, some of the workers would find regular minimum wage jobs but many would be left unemployed.

Many of the Uber drivers I’ve met are educated immigrants to my country (Canada). They are underemployed because of various barriers put in place to protect the jobs of locals. Usually, the issue is that their credentials aren’t recognized because they were earned in another country.

So the question is: what are the gig work companies supposed to do about this? They didn’t make the laws/regulations preventing these workers from getting better jobs. If they went away, these workers might have no other opportunities.

If anyone is to blame, it should be the citizens who simultaneously support an increase in immigration and at the same time erect regulatory/professional credential roadblocks preventing those skilled immigrants from working in their field of expertise.

Of course, another portion of gig workers are people like my father: semi-retired, not professionally credentialed, and doing gig work part time to make ends meet (his pension is not even close to livable). Taking gig work away from him would put him on the street.

Edit: one more thing I’d like to add. Based on reports from my dad, the number of food delivery drivers in our city is increasing so the availability of orders (and hence productive hours of work) is decreasing. At the same time, restaurants all over the city have posted signs advertising the availability of kitchen jobs. If gig work is so undesirable (because it ostensibly pays less than minimum wage), why are there so many vacancies at restaurants (which do pay minimum wage) but none in gig work?

anonymouskimmer2• 3 years ago

So the question is: what are the gig work companies supposed to do about this?

The article isn't asking this question, it's posing answers to another question: "What should society do about gig work companies?" The solutions proposed in this article are:

"Respondents strongly felt the creation of co-determination mechanisms would allow workers, and their representatives, to influence platform provider decisions which could instantly improve their working lives.

"These policies include elected bodies of worker representatives approving all major platform changes that impact jobs and working conditions. Our findings emphasise the potential for trade union growth in this sector, with majorities being willing to join and even organise such bodies."

If gig work is so undesirable (because it ostensibly pays less than minimum wage), why are there so many vacancies at restaurants (which do pay minimum wage) but none in gig work?

Good question.

bee_rider5• 3 years ago

They probably understand the idea of externalized liabilities. Or, at least, we have no reason to suspect they have any less understand of the idea than us. Probably they have more understanding of it, given that they are living the experience of having liabilities externalized onto them. (Although maybe some of us here work for these gig app platform companies and have a heightened understanding of the phenomenon their company is abusing).

I think it is more likely that these folks just don’t have better employment opportunities. The race to the bottom on quality of life is a big collective action problem, right? We know the solution, minimum wage laws, it is just that we prefer cheap services to making sure everybody gets a humane living standard.

jjk1668• 3 years ago

The hallmark of contract employees is not a massive increase in hourly pay, it is the ability to choose when you work and what jobs you take. Minimum wage makes sense for traditional employment because it's all or nothing, it doesn't matter how much you don't want to come into work today, either you work or you're fired. With gig economy work, you can say "eh this isn't worth it for me" when the compensation would be low or if you had something better to do, but still get paid when it would be more advantageous for you.

If people aren't being compensated enough to justify the time spent, they can just stop with no penalties. That for many people a menial gig that pays less than minimum wage is better than any alternative they have access to is the real issue. People should have access to rewarding work and hobbies that they'd prefer to gig work, but you don't fix that by making gig work pay more.

ilaksh2• 3 years ago

That's a false dichotomy. I have been a contractor for most software engineering jobs I have done for many years and all of them were very complex. None of them were for a particularly high rate like $300/hour.

The rate actually has generally been fairly unrelated to the complexity. Possibly the biggest determining factor in my rate has been how much savings I had (usually close to zero) when I needed to find another contract. That determined how selective I could be and how long I could spend looking. If your option is to take the next contract or miss rent, you take what you can get, often for a discounted rate.

Jupe• 3 years ago

Are "gig" workers considered independent enterprises themselves? Do they need to pay self-employment taxes?

bshimmin• 3 years ago

They are considered to be self-employed. If they're earning more than £1000 a year, then they need to file a self-assessment tax return with HMRC, and if they're earning more than a certain amount, perhaps £12500 a year, they will need to pay income tax on those earnings (plus national insurance).

Do most gig workers actually do these things? I have no idea.

fareesh• 3 years ago

Is gig work intended to be a substitute for employment, or a career?

My impression was these jobs are for folks who need an extra income or are in a temporary rough spot in life.

Does the math allow for gig workers to be paid more AND for the venture to remain profitable to a degree that reasonably satisfies investors AND consumers to pay a minimal additional amount?

swores3• 3 years ago

It may or may not still be feasible for these companies if they were paying minimum wage, but that's irrelevant to the fact that minimum wage is a requirement. Doesn't matter if the worker is already earning £100k in their main job, and 5 hours of "gig economy" work, those 5 hours are still legally required to hit the minimum wage.

lifeonlars2• 3 years ago

minimum wage legislation does not have an exception for those in a 'temporary rough spot'

there are lots of businesses which would be profitable if they didn't have to worry about laws or regulations, but which are unviable in the real world. for example, selling methamphetamine to middle school kids in tony neighbourhoods.

yanellena• 3 years ago

A lot of these ventures aren't profitable even while paying their employees a pittance.

brewdad4• 3 years ago

The fact that these job my be side gigs is irrelevant to a discussion about whether they are dodging minimum wage.

throwaway22032• 3 years ago

The "abstract" here for lack of better terms is extremely misleading.

The minimum wage raised to approx 10.50 from 9.50 last month, but the survey was polled last year, when the minimum wage was 9.50.

That makes the discrepancy shrink to approx 5% from 15%.

We've had 10%+ inflation in basics in the UK so you can't really compare 2021/2022/2023 like for like without accounting for that.

abeppu• 3 years ago

How can we be surprised by this? Isn't this, from the companies' view, exactly what gig work is _for_.

If you're offering a food delivery service, and you thought that end users + restaurants were willing to pay more than minimum wage for delivery services, you'd hire an army of minimum-wage workers and pocket the difference. If it's likely that people are willing to pay less than minimum wage for delivery services, then you've gotta design a way to pay people less than that by inventing something other than normal "employment".

pyrophane• 3 years ago

One thing I didn't take away from this is the extent to which gig workers they surveyed would prefer full-time employment but aren't able to find it.

If someone has the opportunity to work full-time but is choosing the flexibility of gig work, then I see this as less of an issue.

On the other hand, if someone is doing gig work because that is what is available to them, and they aren't able to make enough to get by despite their best effort, then something needs to change.

matt3210• 3 years ago

That’s the point. The system is working as intended

oblio• 3 years ago

Also, see MLM.

chrishannah• 3 years ago

So what they're saying is, they want all the benefits of having a permanent full-time job, but they don't want to work permanently or full-time?

mrkwse• 3 years ago

I don't think it's a safe assumption that gig workers are typically choosing gig work over full-time contracted employment, but rather choosing gig work over unemployment/benefits.

brewdad4• 3 years ago

Part-time employees are still required to be paid minimum wage.

maxbaines5• 3 years ago

we should all take note of this, and where we can give a meaningful tip to the workers. Every time I use a service like this I tip on average twice the delivery cost ~£5. Very few of these services are essential, there here to make our lives easier, I tip them for that.

brewdad4• 3 years ago

I thought those tips don't generally make it to the workers anyway. All you are doing is subsidizing the same corporation that is taking advantage of their workers.

sebzim45002• 3 years ago

Presumably if you tip cash it does.

maxbaines5• 3 years ago

Oh wow, i naturally presumed it was the case, about to check on that thanks for the info.

remote_phone2• 3 years ago

Can we please delete this post? The “study” is absolute garbage. It’s an internet survey with no verification. Reading through the “study” was a complete waste of time.

surement• 3 years ago

you can flag it

eat• 3 years ago

That's the whole point.

bilsbie• 3 years ago

For drivers is this before or after vehicle depreciation, maintainemce, and insurance?

mym1990• 3 years ago

Very likely before. Generally, in the US, I have seen averages for driving a car around .50-.60 cents a mile. This includes cost of gas, the cost of maintenance, insurance, and the cost of depreciation.

neilwilson• 3 years ago

Bit of a pity it doesn’t go into how many of these people then claim tax credits - which tops up their earnings to a living income.

ISTM that tax credits end up subsidising sub minimum wage gig workers to the benefit of the business using the gig worker.

sequoia2• 3 years ago

Here's an interesting talk related to app workers working collectively https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8rJN4ikQhQ

The question I wish the authors of this paper had asked, which seems like a key question to me is: "Why do keep working on this platform if it pays so little? Why not get another job?"

If it's because they cannot find any other employment and this is the only work they can find (sometimes the case for newcomers to the country etc.), then removing gig jobs would appear to result in them having no employment at all.

In many cases (I might even guess "most cases") people do work through these apps because they allow a level of flexibility people cannot typically get from other jobs. If you work at Nandos you can't decide to take the morning off or work a couple extra hours during some downtime, you can't stay home a few days if your child is sick or childcare falls through and pick up working again once the disruption abates or unilaterally decide to switch from morning to evening hours for a few days.

Some people just don't like dealing with coworkers and a boss. In any event, I think the "why" behind peoples' decisions to do these jobs is highly relevant, and I think that the flexibility these gigs provide should be factored in when comparing them to a job at a grocery store or something, as it seems like an apples to oranges comparison.

ilaksh2• 3 years ago

Its because A) its hard to find a good job in general, B) its very hard to find a good job in a hurry, C) most people don't have much savings when they lose their job, so they need to find another one quickly), D) these jobs are VASTLY easier to get quickly than most jobs, E) these jobs don't allow for much savings or breathing room, so stopping to spend a significant amount of time looking for a different job can be at risk of not being able to pay expenses.

When you are stuck in survival mode, you take what you can get. You're not picky. And they are not bad jobs in some ways.

sequoia2• 3 years ago

Also this question seems a bit ridiculous: "I can decide the time I start and be reasonably confident of having work to undertake"

If you're driving a cab, you work when people need cabs. If you're delivering food, you work during times of the day people are ordering food. This is the nature of these jobs. Does an icecream truck owner get to decide to work during colder or rainy weather because that's what he prefers? Of course not; he has to work at times and places where people are likely to purchase ice cream.

It hardly seems reasonable to blame deliveroo for the fact that people tend to cluster food ordering during one or two periods of the day.

davidguetta• 3 years ago

Who could have thought

Krisjohn• 3 years ago

This is suppressing everyone's wages. Failure to address this is a government policy failure. How about we take all the existing laws designed to stop this and enforce them?

Majority of gig economy workers are earning below minimum wage: research

Related Stories