I have been writing and talking about the economics of performances for over a decade, and have read hundreds of articles, studies and stories on how it is evolving. I’m also part of the performance economy myself, owning a few paid shows that diversified my income when I had a full-time job, and have now become my income since I left my full-time job in 2020. It was fascinating to watch in response to the rise of the gig worker; Half of the viewers work on solutions, resources and products to help these employees manage their careers and thrive within the lifestyle. The other half works diligently (we look at you, California and New York) Destroy the performance economy and maintain the status quo.
Anyone who wants to kill the gig economy is promoting Ideas On the situation of performance workers who support their claim. I’m not so sure they see – or tell – things clearly. Here is my opinion (at least part one) on what they say.
True lie number 1: Exploited performance workers. Work platforms like Uber, Lyft, Shipt and Grub Hub are designed to put together and provide low-cost options for services that most consumers just do not want to spend time doing on their own. For some of us, on-demand transportation, personal shopping and food delivery services are convenient. But for isolated populations who need these services to improve their quality of life (someone with a physical disability or other condition that makes it difficult to get out of the home, for example), they are life savers. During the epidemics of extradition, they were literally life-saving. Either way, keeping the cost of these services low is the only way to make the business model work.
The workers who make these platforms on demand sustainable do not make a lot of money, like many observers (and not by chance, Competing) Note. Industries threatened by these new companies are whining about exploitation as their business models become obsolete or priced out of the market. Systems set to prefer the old model, like A system of taxi medallions in New YorkMarkers are drawn with political allies to kill the competition, ostensibly to protect the employees of these shows from exploitation.
In this way, the movement to “help” the gig worker is very similar to the movement for raising the minimum wage. Activists say anything less than a “living wage” of $ 15 an hour does not allow workers to survive, and it is impossible for anyone to support a family.
Here’s the truth: the minimum wage was never meant to be a living wage. It is intended as tuition, compensation for employees whose skill and productivity are also minimal. Studies have shown that raising the minimum wage results in lower wages for low-skilled workers. Employers who have had to pay higher wages will choose to hire people with higher qualifications (just as you would choose a higher quality product if the lower quality product costs the same). Choose to cut hours or cut jobs to cut labor costsSo that the employee earns less and customers will receive more or less quality service.
Here’s another truth: the number of workers earning the minimum wage is a meager percentage of the population. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the percentage of hourly-wage workers earning the federal minimum wage earned or less dropped in 2020 was 1.5 percent. Even for well-meaning policymakers, they base policies on ancient history. The highest percentage of workers earning the minimum wage peaked in 1979, at 13.4 percent. This was the year in which the data were first collected regularly.
And in a thriving and competitive job market like the one we are experiencing now, most companies are starting entry-level workers well above their state’s minimum wage – and paying job bonuses as well. They must, in order to attract and retain talent.
Economists know that the vast majority of workers who earn the minimum wage are young – especially teenagers at the beginning of their lives. Again, from the BLS report: Although workers under the age of 25 represented only about one-fifth of the hourly wage workers, they accounted for about half of those who paid the federal minimum wage or less. At a minimum wage or less, compared to about 1% of workers aged 25 and over. No one is destined to live on a minimum wage for life – or even more than a few months. Improve productivity and be more valuable to the business.
Back to performance workers: Most on-demand performance workers in the low-wage sector do not rely on their earnings as their main income. Most of them, like many minimum wage workers, use these performances to bring in extra income. Sure, some need the extra money to get by, but many use the money to improve their lives, saving for important things, like education, buying a better house or car, or paying off debts. They also, like part of my extended family, use the money to pay for large family vacations or other luxuries that have not had a chance for their regular income.
Those who do rely on on-demand work as their primary source of income value flexibility. Many of them have constraints in their lives that will prevent them from having a traditional day job. They care for family members, work around an irregular or unexpected schedule of a spouse, or face a personal problem that makes it difficult for them to predict when they will be able to work. They know that the low salary they earn is a compromise to the flexibility and control they have over their schedule.
Health coverage and paid leave are not available to performance workers, but it is something that the health law pays off and private insurance companies are working to resolve. Young workers usually do not buy (or need) insurance like older workers, and performance workers who supplement their income usually have coverage through a partner or first job.
A Latest report from embroker.com Says 33 percent of employees will choose to work in shows because they value flexibility; Another 14 percent will use the job to make their career transition easier. Performance work is not life imprisonment; It is a choice that people can choose to join and leave when their lives and earning needs change. Let’s not kill this option based on a misguided (and paternalistic) instinct to protect workers from their choices.
Posted by
Candice’s background includes human resources, recruitment, training and evaluation. She spent several years at a nationwide staffing company, serving employers at both beaches. Her writing on business, career, and employment has appeared in the Florida Times Union, the Jacksonville Business Journal, the Atlanta Journal Constitution, and 904 Magazine, as well as several national publications and websites. Candice is often quoted in the media on local labor market and employment issues.
See all posts by candacemoody
