Sir, – I refer to John Holden's article "The main tool needed to work in the gig economy? A smartphone" (August 24th). The gig economy is not a "burgeoning business model" that can offer salvation to people on the Live Register. It is not really a new model at all. Companies such as Uber offer conventional services by engaging workers on the equivalent of zero-hour contracts. The only novelty is that they have delegated middle-management functions, such as allocating hours and reviewing performance, to a mobile application.
While your writer suggests that the gig economy could offer a source of income to those looking for more permanent work, the reality is that the large pool of workers providing services for these companies raises competition and keeps rewards low. As a result, gig economy workers often have to work long hours to cover basic necessities, ruling out the possibility of simultaneously applying for a job in the traditional economy. Further, the insistence of these companies that their workers are self-employed means that this low-paid work is undertaken without any entitlement to paid holidays, sick leave or minimum wage. Essentially, work in the gig economy resembles work in the 19th-century industrial economy before any of these protections had been won.
By attempting to apply employment law to these companies, the Government is not enforcing regulations that are no longer fit for purpose. It is calling a spade a spade. If these companies are to benefit from having legions of workers available at the tap of a touch-screen, then they must also pay the cost of their insta-workforce, by complying with their employment law obligations. – Yours, etc,
MARY CATHERINE
NAUGHTON,
Barcelona.