One of the 21st-Century’s darkest hour in the work sector is the predatory gig economy. Apart from constant income and healthcare benefits, lots of workers are informed that they are fortunate that they can offer passengers transport services in a vehicle for minimal profits.
The previous week, it was believed that in California a ballot measure, the Proposition 22 that enables gig economy companies to continue handling drivers as independent contractors would not be implemented in this state, which develops with each passing day. However, the number of voters who passed this measure was overwhelming, because of the significant amounts that Seamless, DoorDash, Left and Uber spent.
The tech giants coalition presented more than $200m, which is ten times more than the amount that the proposition’s rivals, such as labor unions gave. It effortlessly defeated the people fighting for workers’ rights.
It is a substantial amount. Uber and its companions went all out. The firms generated investment capital worth billions, and the firms were able to use the money to silence the ones campaigning for their staff easily. Implementing Proposition 22 means that these tech giants’ subordinates will still be underpaid and overworked. They will go on living in poverty, unable to get unemployment insurance, healthcare or paid family leave during a pandemic.
The vote may affect the whole country since it turned down the policies laid out in a state supreme court ruling in 2018, and in 2019 preserved a state regulation that indicated workers who regularly worked in a firm should be classified as employees. Currently, these regulations do not apply to gig workers, and they can go on working alone.
This era is a dangerous and capitalistic one, where firms can inhumanly misuse their workers without ever making a profit. Ancient major companies, such as General Motors needed to make money for sustenance. Uber business can be described as a scam or even Trumpian. Uber presents a Trumpian business model. It entered cities forcefully all over the globe and openly breached local regulations. Uber consumes investor cash and succeeds through utter ubiquity.
Each year, Uber makes cash losses, but dominates the market, providing affordable transportation while making competitors like taxi drivers commit suicide. It is not possible to compete with a firm that that is permitted to grow yet it’s making losses. Uber can persistently offer discounts for its rides, with the assurance that more money will be available to sustain it for life.
The fact is that for Uber to survive, it does not just depend on non-classification of its drivers as full-time staff. It would turn them into a standard firm, subject to specific regulations of gravity. Workers make demands, so they are costly. If Proposition 22 had not been passed, Uber, which is a multibillion-dollar industry, would have had to give its workers the capital instead. The longterm effect would have been improper, making rich executives and benefactors lose sight of reality.
Normally, a firm cannot consistently operate at a loss, mistreat its workers and continue with operations. Uber can, however. For most of 2010, gig firms survived on the public’s goodwill. Most politicians and consumers existed in blissful ignorance of how cheaply their goods were offered, and they celebrated Lyft and Uber’s as well as their counterparts’ growth.
The result of this step should not be considered a big tech referendum because the spending disparity is ridiculous. When a labor union obtains $200 to silence conflict, the overall total of votes can change. The result, however, cautions the opposers, showing them that these greedy firms can do whatever it takes to guard their odd advantage in the marketplace. Uber and its cohorts treat workers like dispensable assets. After their win in California, they will look for big wins in other areas. It will be the decision of other States, even Congress to find a way of controlling these firms. It should be a united fight.