In Houston almost everyone I talked to were - retired, raising kids, had another jobs, going to school, or had some health issues that prevented full time employment.
The vast majority of the economy is made up of jobs where a company tells you when to show up, when to go home, and tries to schedule you for 38 hrs. Why can't we have just one job for people who have life circumstances that require flexibility.
Note that I've also had a lot of responses that they are "retired" but also say they drive >30 hours per week, which I'd personally consider "switched careers" or "unretired" but it's somewhat a matter of perspective.
71% of drivers work 30 or more hours, and 50% work 40 or more.
More troubling, 53% relied on gig work for all of their income. Another 10% said gig work accounted for at least 75% of their income.
[0] https://transform.ucsc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/OnDema...
Key goal: Representative sample of on-demand _work_ being done in the city, not of all on-demand _workers_. (emphasis not mine)
The team making the study has selected parameters to examine basically exactly to produce a number where the majority of rideshare is full-time. So is it clear that most rideshare workers are full time? Definitely not. And the fact that the team has weighted their sampling in such a way makes me even more skeptical about the veracity of that fact when taken across the whole population of drivers.
As far as the distinction between work and workers, it’s who is doing the work. If most people with an driver app are idle, they’ve removed themselves from the candidate pool. They’re irrelevant. It’s no different than talking about active users versus total accounts made. In other words, if you want to know how policies affect people, you look at who is affected.
1) low sample size (219 responses)
2) usage of $10 gift cards as incentives. as an online survey, this opened up opportunities for gaming
3) targeting appears to have been geared towards members of Gig Workers Rising, a union-backed group
I think Uber's study of all of its drivers [2] in California provides a more measured picture:
74% of drivers work < 25h/week, but only account for 42% of trips
So, no, the majority of rideshare drivers aren't full-time, but rideshare companies do rely heavily on drivers who are online >25hours/week.
[1] https://workercenters.com/special-report-ca-labor-groups-fla...
[2] https://medium.com/uber-under-the-hood/which-drivers-do-the-...
Then again this is a while ago so maybe things have shifted with time.
It may seem heartless but I’m not sure whom to blame for the problems that come from treating rideshare as a full time job except the drivers who chose to do that themselves. Despite the gross advertising budget it seems like the gig economy companies were in the right.
Really, the issue is further up. It’s a universal loss of low skill labor. These people should have more real employment opportunities in society. If it was easier to get a basic job with benefits it would be way easier to accept whatever arrangement Uber was offering without legislating them. And Uber would inherently have to treat them more fairly as well.
Your 2nd paragraph is exactly what prop22 added. Now full-time drivers enjoy some benefits.
To make this a concrete example, consider a DoorDash driver. They get an order to drive to a restaurant. Clock starts, they get 15 minutes. The order isn’t ready, so they’re waiting for another 15 minutes, but the clock is stopped. Then they drive to your house, which takes another 15. A 45 minute task, but only 30 minutes counts. “But they’re not working when they’re waiting!” DoorDash cries. But they’re not free to leave, because then they’d lose the entire payout and get blackballed. It’s just a process inefficiency. If the driver worked for the restaurant, they’d still get paid while waiting.
The original law that Prop 22 replaced, addressed this down time, and because of this, Prop 22 was written.
While there maybe reasonable arguments to be made about how gig work is different from full time and traditional contractor work, the most damning part of Prop 22 for me was the 7/8s majority needed to amend the new law. That’s just bullshit.
What you are describing is completely wrong. It's incredible how short sighted people get when they want to go all out and lash at the "evil" gig economy companies. Like really, the wording is publicly available for you to read.
Engaged time is time from accepting the gig, to the time the gig ends. Waiting is included. That's it.
While I wouldn't expect anything like full-time pay, Uber/Lyft et. al. still get a benefit of having drivers on call (lower wait times for their customers). I personally would have liked to see some compensation (within reason) for time spent on call but not on a ride. Not sure how easy it would be to make both a fair and reasonably un-cheatable system, but its something that should have been considered.
However if you incentive being on call no matter what, you get drivers driving to the mountains to get their guaranteed pay.
I don't really see why we need a third category, it should just be that some drivers are full time and some are not. I don't believe that Uber could sufficiently fulfill even half the rides with only the true part timers short of driver incentives also going way up (which would benefit people like your husband).