> There is no real difference between paying $10.62 to a contractor who has to pay $0.62 more in social security tax and paying $10 to an employee and $0.62 to the social security administration. And the employee would (all else equal) choose a job paying $10 as an employee over a job paying <$10.62 as a contractor, so the contractors have to pay more or offer some other countervailing benefit to be competitive.
Except the ads posted in your local bulletin board / signposts are "Want a job for $10/hr?!??"
So what happens in practice, is that the gig-worker is paid $10 (costing the company $10), vs the employee who'd be paid $10 (costing the company $10.62 + other bits, like health care and various insurances)
Which lasts until you send them the documents showing the real numbers and they figure it out.
Give people some credit. The education system isn't perfect but people can do basic arithmetic. Or if they can't then maybe solve that instead of this.
> Or if they can't then maybe solve that instead of this.
Why not both? If a problem is identified with our culture, its not exactly a strong argument to say "Well, here's another problem I'm more concerned about".
All I'll say is: lets solve both problems simultaneously. There's many problems in the world, and we should work on solving as many of them as possible.
I've got friends (who were with me in that knife salesman gig work) who didn't understand the difference at all, no matter how many times I explained it to them. People's brains just don't work the way you say. Sure, I understood the difference and how to do my own taxes, but not everyone has that capability unfortunately.
Because they're alternatives to each other. You don't need both.
If people don't understand how to compare their alternatives, they're going to get screwed left and right, not just in the difference between employee and contractor. So we have to fix that more general problem if it exists.
And solving that problem means not only that you don't need to prohibit people from being classified as contractors but that doing so is a net harm. Because prohibiting it for the benefit of the person doing the math wrong (solvable the other way) is a harm to the person who benefits from the arrangement, e.g. because they want the more flexible hours that come from being a contractor instead of an employee.
> Because they're alternatives to each other. You don't need both.
Sure we do.
Our education system sucks (as proof by my friends who were unable to grasp this basic arithmetic). AND we have a Gig vs Employee issue that also needs to be clarified through the law.
Lets fix both. I don't see any problem working towards the problem you suggested, nor the problem I suggested. I'm sure our failure in education is also causing issues in other aspects of our society unrelated to this particular issue.
> Our education system sucks (as proof by my friends who were unable to grasp this basic arithmetic). AND we have a Gig vs Employee issue that also needs to be clarified through the law.
Fixing the education system solves both of them, because then people aren't fooled into becoming a contractor when it doesn't benefit them. Then you don't need the government to force them into being an employee including in cases where they're better off as a contractor -- you only need to do the first one.
Also, if you tried to explain it multiple times to them, maybe it isn't the education's systems fault? Like you said above, their brains are unable to grasp it. No amount of education reform is going to fix that.
Except the ads posted in your local bulletin board / signposts are "Want a job for $10/hr?!??"
So what happens in practice, is that the gig-worker is paid $10 (costing the company $10), vs the employee who'd be paid $10 (costing the company $10.62 + other bits, like health care and various insurances)