Is an Uber driver an employee or an independent entrepreneur who happens to use the Uber platform (and is subject to discipline by Uber, has his or her fares set by Uber, and so on)? That’s the question in a California court case, and it’s a question addressed in a new paper by Princeton economist and former Obama Council of Economic Advisers head Alan Krueger and former Deputy Secretary of Labor Seth Harris. Krueger and Harris say the answer is a little of column A, a little of column B. But for everything in column A that might make supporters of decent labor standards smile—that “gig economy” workers should benefit from discrimination laws and have the right to unionize—there’s something shockingly bad—like that these workers shouldn’t get minimum wage protections. Steven Greenhouse has questions:
Krueger and Harris say that on-demand companies shouldn’t be required to provide workers’ compensation for their workers; instead the two authors say companies should be able to opt into workers’ comp as they wish. They note that Uber and Lyft drivers are insured by their own car insurance, so they might not need workers’ comp if they get into an accident while driving a passenger. But shouldn’t these drivers have workers’ comp’ coverage in case they, while opening a door for a passenger, slip on the ice and break a hip or elbow? Or if they slip a disc while removing heavy luggage from the trunk? Or if an inebriated passenger punches them out and injures them? And what if a GrubHub delivery worker on a bicycle is struck by a car and sent to the hospital? Or what if a Caviar or GrubHub delivery worker has to go the hospital after being mugged and robbed while making a delivery in a tough part of town? Krueger and Harris say that without workers’ comp, workers can always sue under tort law, but that wouldn’t be a satisfactory alternative in many cases, especially when workers need immediate hospital care and replacement income. (Remember, a high percentage of on-demand workers don’t have health insurance.) [...]
Would this new category of independent workers be covered by the paid sick day laws in various cities? Dedicated drivers who drive 10 or 12 hours a day, often five or six days a week, why shouldn’t they be covered by these sick day laws?
The National Employment Law Project’s Rebecca Smith points out some of the glaring contradictions in Krueger and Harris’ argument:
Their proposal mixes and matches the rights traditionally associated with employment, saying that workers in the on-demand economy should have protection from discrimination, but no right to a minimum wage; that their employers should have to pay Social Security taxes, but not workers' compensation or unemployment insurance taxes. In their world, these workers would have no right to employer-provided health insurance under the Affordable Care Act and no protection against dangerous conditions at work. Businesses would pay a 5 percent payroll tax to finance health insurance subsidies, pooling these contributions and creating a private system of portable benefits.
If Uber and TaskRabbit and the like can’t compete while paying their workers the minimum wage, they can’t compete.
A fair day’s wage
● New Hampshire’s WMUR is being booted from its participation in next Saturday’s Democratic presidential debate over an ongoing labor dispute.
● Four organizing wins to cheer our hearts this holiday season.
● New York court dismisses challenge to nail salon wage protections.
● It’s a small group of workers, but an important first:
The United Auto Workers union won its first organizing vote at a foreign-owned auto assembly plant in the U.S. South on Friday, in a groundbreaking victory after decades of failed attempts.
About 71 percent of skilled trades workers who cast ballots at Volkswagen AG's (VOWG_p.DE) factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee voted to join the UAW, according to the company and the union.
● Shocking! Unions or the lack thereof are related to construction deaths.
● The supposedly retired Steven Greenhouse writes about Uber drivers fighting for workplace rights.
Education
● A look at the business of charter schools.
● Micah Uetricht argues that the coming Chicago Teachers Union strike could be a watershed moment in the city.
● Edushyster has an unexpectedly fascinating interview with Massachusetts State Auditor Suzanne Bump on her audit of the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and its oversight of charter schools:
What we found was that DESE was using subjective standards, that there wasn’t an even application of standards when they were, say, renewing the charters of schools. We looked to try and determine whether the data they were putting out relative to student demographics was accurate, whether waitlists were accurate. This is information that guides DESE’s policy making and we found it to be unreliable because the state never verifies it. Data reliability testing is the first thing you do in auditing. You can’t reach proper conclusions if we can’t rely upon the data and we found that we couldn’t rely upon the data. That’s a warning to DESE that they shouldn’t be either.
● Who's running America's charter schools?