This article from the Wall Street Journal is really intriguing especially in light of our conversation of inequality. This article provides a pro and con side written by different authors on the usage of services such as Uber and other "app" jobs that provide people employment.
On the pro side, a professor from Oxford Business school purports that this new type of economy aids in people finding jobs that haven't been able to, provides additional income for those that are retired, and additional capital for entrepreneurs looking to start a business. The perks of flexibility and autonomy, the author says, are attractive and freeing to those looking to stray away from typical hierarchies and this new form of Sharing Economy provides a means to do that.
On the con side, executive director of the Silicon Valley innovation salon Futurecast, argues that this new type of economy promotes inequality. He argues that while these jobs as drivers, or cleaners has the same level of commitment as a typical job without protection such as unemployment or insurance. He purports that this creates a new class of workers, he calls the "precariat." He also says: "In some ways, this “new” economy is actually very old. It’s a Wal-Mart-style economy in which precariously employed, low-paid workers have little power. But even those in low-end, nonunionized jobs at traditional analog employers like Wal-Mart get some benefits under federal law. And in contrast with the “disrupters” of Silicon Valley who shamelessly claim to be “revolutionizing” work, at least the Wal-Marts of the world don’t market themselves as liberators of labor."
Both make an interesting argument about this technological shift in the economy? Are you pro or con Sharing Economy?
The two authors both make good points. In my opinion, jobs from the sharing economy could be good for supplemental work, but would not be ideal as the sole method of supporting oneself on. For workers already getting benefits from another job, it's a great way to make extra money, but I'm guessing this isn't the case for most sharing economy employees.
ReplyDeleteThe two sides to our sharing economy are argued well in this article. I agree with Kate, I would think that this type of job would be alright if it is supplemental, say a second job to make a little extra money. This way, individuals would be receiving benefits from another company. However, I'm sure that's not always the case. I'm not sure I would encourage much more of our economy to become a sharing economy, but it is nice that these companies are opening up positions and employing more people, rather than them not having a job at all.
ReplyDeleteMy personal experiences from the sharing economy have all been positive. Those have mostly been with Uber, but I'll say that from a consumer's standpoint I've been very satisfied. But from an employee's standpoint, I don't feel like being a driver or a cleaner is totally sustainable. I also don't feel like many of these jobs allow for the growth or the development of a career. They have sort of a ceiling, it would seem to me. That's why I agree that these positions are great supplementally, but not as a primary form of employment.
ReplyDeleteAs others have stated above both authors make great points to both sides of this argument. Also, I don't think that a job in this shared economy having only one of these jobs as a primary form of income cannot be a sustainable form of income. The second author makes a great point that these workers are non-unionized and these companies have no responsibility towards their workers and expands the "Wal-Mart" worker field, but I would agree that the new jobs are better for our economy because it employs people would otherwise would still be unemployed.
ReplyDeleteI can agree with all of you on your points: the mixed opinions in the article's argument, jobs from the sharing economy are not entirely supportive, the employment piece is good, and a lack of career growth in these shared economy opportunities. At the end of the day, I support these jobs because, like Nolan said, people who would otherwise be unemployed now have a job. I'm also a fan because I've had great experiences with people/drivers from Uber; and often those drivers express how they enjoy their job because they get paid well and get to be social. So maybe that job makes them happy. It's not the most sustainable career path, but perhaps it can serve as a bridge between career opportunities. Either way, it at least is employing people.
ReplyDeleteThese type of jobs are really nice for a second form of work to make a little cash on the side or a good filler job when you are in between jobs or looking for a new job. I will say Uber offers some pretty nice perks to people interested in traveling/ checking out new areas of the country. When I was in FL this past SB we had an Uber driver that was from Ohio but was offered the chance to move down to Ft. Myers/Naples for a few months to help Uber launch in this area and deal with the high demand of new customers. Uber paid for his housing and lent him a new 2015 car to drive while he was down there. So I totally agree with what the others have mentioned above, I think this economy has its perks for part time work or in between jobs but do not like the idea of it being used as a full time job.
ReplyDeleteI think the jobs from the sharing economy have some benefit to them (i.e., employes the unemployed, extra side money). However, I think these jobs should be used in conjunction with other form of primary income method. Like other commentators have stated previously, the sharing economy job opportunities should be seen as a supplementary form of income. Also, I think Cameron brings about a good point, these sharing economy jobs do not give people the opportunity to advance in their field. As a result, I think the sharing economy jobs may be hindering people's chances of advancing in their fields and may not contribute to the long term economic growth and prosperity of this country's economy.
ReplyDelete