Re:In the Future, Employees Won’t Exist
by yummyfajitas on Sunday June 14, 2015 @10:46AM
(#9715072)
Yes, unions do regard labor market rigidities as accomplishments.
That's probably why the sharing economy is growing rapidly while the unionized workforce can't compete. That's probably also why unions are desperate to hinder the rest of the market with rigidities, e.g. a $15 min wage for thee but not for me.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/27/labor-leader...
Re:In the Future, Employees Won’t Exist
by mschuster91 on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:03PM
(#9715342)
> That's probably why the sharing economy is growing rapidly while the unionized workforce can't compete.
This is the same problem as with Mitumba (donated clothing of western countries) in Africa. You can't compete with free.
The sharing economy looks good on paper - but when things like accidents, illnesses or a "disruption" occur, the workers are left in the road ditches, while employed workers keep to enjoy social security, health insurance, unemployment insurance, ...
The problem is that for low-income jobs typical in the "contractor economy" like cleaning, driving Ubers and flipping burgers, the amount of cash available to the worker is not enough to cover e.g. a broken leg which puts you out of work for two months or more.
> It's a bad idea to force employers to take on large fixed-cost obligations when they purchase labor - this creates rigidities in the market and disincentivizes purchasing.
In Germany we regard this form of security for the worker an accomplishment of the unions. In the sharing economy you can end up totally broke and fucked up even if it is not your fault at all that you aren't able to work anymore.