Skip to main content

View Diary: The rise of 'insourcing' gives Internet companies a new way to exploit workers (35 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  example used in the diary (0+ / 0-)

    The taxi driver was the example used in the diary.  The author made it sound like, because the driver was not making 100K a year take home, that the driver was somehow oppressed or underpaid.  The point was not that taxi driving was not a hard job, or that he did not earn his money, but simply that  it was untrue that someone the the service was not providing him a means to make adequate money.  Clearly $30K a year is not good money, but it is not bad money.  I also point out that we do not know if this guy is actively trying to get gigs, or is just waiting for gigs, i.e. if he is working full time, or just getting by.

    And I think it presumptuous to imply that a taxi driver is a less disruptive life that other jobs.  If one works retail, one may be scheduled on a moments notice, and if one does not show up there is no work next week.  That might mean taking a bus to the babysitter and taking a bus to work and hoping the buses are running on time.  Because at 7.25 you can't afford no taxi.

    One of my friends in college worked at a grocery store.  Sometimes he would be on the first shirt, sometimes second, sometimes third.  You don't think that is disruptive.  More recently I knew a kid who worked in a grocery store and was promoted to manager, not pay increase.  But he had to work more hours or he would be fired.  The problem is that that meant he had less time for school.

    Most of use have disruptive jobs in some way.  Many of us were making more money years ago.  But when the average family income is right at $53K, often because two people are working, we do not feel entitled to $100K a year just because we once were able to pull it off.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site