[P2P-F] Fwd: [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: How Uber and the Gig Economy Are Making Voters as Disposable as Temp Workers

[Michel Bauwens]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: peter waterman <peterwaterman1936 at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:04 PM
Subject: [NetworkedLabour] Fwd: How Uber and the Gig Economy Are Making
Voters as Disposable as Temp Workers
To: "CRITICAL-LABOUR-STUDIES at jiscmail.ac.uk" <
CRITICAL-LABOUR-STUDIES at jiscmail.ac.uk>, "<
networkedlabour at lists.contrast.org>" <networkedlabour at lists.contrast.org>,
WSFDiscuss List <WorldSocialForum-Discuss at openspaceforum.net>, Debate is a
listserve that attempts to promote information and analyses of interest to
the independent left in South and Southern Africa <debate-list at fahamu.org>,
p2p-foundation <p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sid Shniad <shniad at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:25 PM
Subject: How Uber and the Gig Economy Are Making Voters as Disposable as
Temp Workers
To:








*http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/32152-how-uber-and-the-gig-economy-are-making-voters-as-disposable-as-temp-workers
<http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/32152-how-uber-and-the-gig-economy-are-making-voters-as-disposable-as-temp-workers>Truthout
       31 July 2015 How Uber and the Gig Economy Are Making Voters as
Disposable as Temp WorkersBy Michael Meurer**[image: Jeb Bush, the former
governor of Florida, catches a ride with Uber driver Jay Salazar after a
campaign event in San Francisco, July 16, 2015. The Bush campaign has
trumpeted his use of the ride-hailing service to get around San Francisco —
a sign of how Uber has become an proxy in the political debate over the
future of labor and regulation. (Photo: Jim Wilson/The New York Times)]*Jeb
Bush, the former governor of Florida, catches a ride with Uber driver Jay
Salazar after a campaign event in San Francisco, July 16, 2015. The Bush
campaign has trumpeted his use of the ride-hailing service to get around
San Francisco - a sign of how Uber has become a proxy in the political
debate over the future of labor and regulation. (Photo: Jim Wilson/The New
York Times)

A series of recent PR skirmishes between presidential candidates Hillary
Clinton and Jeb Bush over the role of Uber workers in the new on-demand sharing
economy
<https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/adam-parsons/sharing-economy-short-introduction-to-its-political-evolution>
has
made it clear that both candidates are focused on disposable temp voters,
who are the electoral analog to the disposable temp workers who now drive
the US economy. A temp economy has, in effect, produced a temp politics.

This new temp politics is not about building social consensus and a
governing majority around a bold, unifying democratic vision for the
future. Rather, it is about building temporary electoral majorities in key
swing states, using sophisticated PR tactics, powerful data tools
<http://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-data-driven-campaigning-matters-in-the-2014-us-elections-and-beyond/>
and
social media to push emotional hot button issues down to the level of the
individual. The objective is to pick off demographic niches from a confused
and splintered electorate that has been fed a steady diet of intentionally
divisive politics
<http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/10/06/Deep-Seated-Roots-Divisive-US-Politics>
for
more than three decades amid widespread economic anxiety that is inherent
in the new gig economy.
The model of disposable workers that drives the so-called sharing economy
has spilled into social and political life.

Temp politics is an outgrowth of the sweeping transformation of economic,
social and political life over the past 35 years to fit the demands of
global capital for "flexible,"
<http://www.cepr.net/documents/failure-two-fronts-2015-01.pdf> nonunion
labor markets that fuel growth in monopoly profits, irrespective of the
social and environmental costs. In this new economic order, voters have
become as interchangeable and disposable as temp workers.

*Clinton and Bush Get Uberized*

During a July 13 media event to announce her economic plan for the 2016
presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton made a public show of exquisite
handwringing over the lack of worker protections in what she called
the new "gig
economy,"
<http://www.salon.com/2015/07/13/8_key_takeaways_from_hillary_clintons_first_major_economic_address_of_the_2016_campaign/>
using
ride-share companies such as Uber as an example.

Jeb Bush countered by staging a July 16 visit to a Silicon Valley tech
startup using an Uber car and driver, gushing to the media that the dawn of
the new Uber worker model "should be a time for celebration."
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/jeb-bush-uber-120256.html> Bush
declared that companies such as Uber are "disrupting the old order"
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jeb-bush-stands-up-for-uber-and-the-sharing-economy/>
of
traditional "taxi cab cartels,"
<http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/morning_call/2015/07/jeb-bush-presidential-campaign-tech-business-sf.html>
while
his campaign released a press statement calling for an end to "big
government, Hillary-supported taxi regulations."
<http://www.businessinsider.com/jeb-bush-uber-campaign-spending-report-2015-7>

Clinton presents herself as the champion of beleaguered workers who now
have "gigs" without benefits instead of "jobs." Bush has adopted the
language of a faux revolutionary, spouting slogans about the disruptive
genius of the market and the brilliant new ways that workers "can customize
their lives"
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/jeb-bush-uber-120256.html> and use
gigs as Uber drivers to stay debt-free while in college.

What has gone unremarked in this early PR dust-up is that the model of
disposable workers that drives the so-called sharing economy has spilled
into social and political life in profound new ways, creating for the first
time an enormous cohort of disposable temp voters with weak or no party
affiliation. The PR tactics of both candidates are aimed at these
unaffiliated temp voters, who confront the acid realities of the new gig
economy daily.

*The Rise of the Gig Economy*

Of the 160,000 people in the United States who work full- or part-time for
Uber
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/13/business/rising-economic-insecurity-tied-to-decades-long-trend-in-employment-practices.html?_r=0>,
only 4,000 are direct employees who enjoy health, dental and vision
insurance. Uber drivers are low-wage, temp "contractors" who use their own
cars, pay their own insurance and are left to fend for themselves without
benefits. Wall Street loves the Uber model. In what CNBC calls a "funding
frenzy,"
<http://www.cnbc.com/2015/05/14/funding-for-on-demand-start-ups-hits-frenzy.html>
on-demand
companies such as Uber raised $4.1 billion in capital in 2014, with
investment expected to double to over $8 billion in 2015.

As a reflection of this economic Uberization, temp workers now account for 18
percent of the US workforce
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/13/business/rising-economic-insecurity-tied-to-decades-long-trend-in-employment-practices.html?_r=0>,
having grown from 18 million to 32 million between 2001 and 2014. Yet the
gig economy extends well beyond startups. Apple, for example, directly
employs only 10 percent
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/13/business/rising-economic-insecurity-tied-to-decades-long-trend-in-employment-practices.html?_r=0>
of
more than 1 million workers making and selling their products worldwide.

Jeb Bush's callow celebration of economic disruption as an unalloyed good
driven by entrepreneurial genius is a conscious diversion to cut off
discussion about the nature and extent of the disruption, about who
benefits and who loses.
The media posturing by Clinton and Bush over Uber is an early test of their
strategies for reaching these anxious worker-voters.

For example, a 2014 study of employment patterns commissioned by the
Freelancers Union, an advocacy group for freelance workers, puts the total
temp workforce in the United States at one-third of all workers
<https://www.freelancersunion.org/blog/dispatches/2014/09/04/53million/> if
freelancers are included. The New York Times reports
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/13/business/rising-economic-insecurity-tied-to-decades-long-trend-in-employment-practices.html?_r=0>
that
in surveying this historic shift to temp labor, Sara Horowitz, founder of
the Freelancers Union, "puts the scale of the dislocation on a par with
that caused by the spread of railroads before and after the Civil War and
the boom in the mass production of goods during the early 20th century."

These new workers have no permanent affiliation with, nor allegiance to, a
company or organization, such as a union, that might represent their
economic interests or provide health and retirement benefits. At the same
time, nearly one-fourth of workers
<http://www.gallup.com/poll/1720/work-work-place.aspx> with full-time jobs
report permanent anxiety and uncertainty about either losing their
positions or having their hours cut, while 34 percent worry about benefit
cuts.

The media posturing by Clinton and Bush over Uber is an early test of their
strategies for reaching these anxious worker-voters. They cannot win a
general election unless they find ways to capitalize on their economic
uncertainty, especially in key swing states. Examining historic shifts in
voter perceptions and allegiance makes it clear why this is the case.

*Disposable Temp Voters in the Gig Economy*

The percentage of Americans who identify as political independents has
risen in lock step with the increase in temp employment and economic
uncertainty, jumping to 46 percent
<http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx>in
the fourth quarter of 2013. This is the highest percentage in the 25 years
since Gallup began polling party identification. Gallup also reports that
nearly 60 percent of Americans want a third political party
<http://www.gallup.com/poll/177284/americans-continue-say-third-political-party-needed.aspx>
because
they believe Democrats and Republicans "do such a poor job" of representing
their interests. Among self-described independents, 71 percent favor the
formation of a third party. This rise in unrepresented voters is also
reflected in the record low approval
<http://www.gallup.com/poll/180113/2014-approval-congress-remains-near-time-low.aspx>
voters
give Congress, 14 percent in 2013.

A 2014 analysis of US political typologies
<http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/26/the-political-typology-beyond-red-vs-blue/>by
Pew Research concludes that only 43 percent of registered voters can be
counted on to vote reliably Republican or Democratic. Among the remaining
57 percent of registered voters, Pew identifies six voter groups who are
increasingly up for grabs in national elections, hence the focus by parties
on niche voting blocs and much-vaunted undecided voters. These voters are
undecided because after 35 years of deliberate political polarization, a
disproportionate percentage are either gig workers or are living with daily
economic anxiety and job insecurity. Neither party represents their
interests. They are splintered and abandoned in both their economic and
political lives.

Knowing that Democratic and Republican base voters are insufficient to
carry important swing states, the presidential candidates for each party
have to find ways to temporarily appeal to the new unaffiliated voter.
Permanent allegiance to either party is unnecessary. Candidates from the
two corporate-funded parties need their votes only temporarily, in one
election. After the election, they are truly disposable; they just "melt
away"
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/07/07/temporary-jobs-becoming-permanent-fixture/2496585/>
without
gaining meaningful political or economic representation.

During the campaign, and between attack ads that now account for 70 percent
of advertising in presidential elections,
<http://mediaproject.wesleyan.edu/releases/jump-in-negativity-2/>the
candidates will be testing a variety of policy pitches to lure these voters
into their column.

*Policy Solutions for Gig Workers*

As a solution to the problem of jobless worker-voters that the gig economy
has created, Clinton is touting vaguely defined tax incentives to induce
companies such as Uber to adopt modest profit-sharing programs. After
announcing this tepid proposal at her July 13 press event, a senior policy
adviser for her campaign told a national media forum
<http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/monitor_breakfast/2015/0714/Hillary-Clinton-has-no-beef-with-Uber-says-top-policy-aide>
the
next day that Clinton has "no beef" with Uber, which she believes is adding
"excitement, opportunity and innovation" to the economy.

In contrast, Bush sees Uber as a perfect model of disruptive capitalism
that advances worker freedom and should be emulated and expanded
nationwide, not changed or regulated. Bush touts Uber and other workerless
companies as models for what a "21st century" outsourced government
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/jeb-bush-uber-120256.html> should
look like.
The candidates share the capitalist faith of their powerful economic
benefactors in market outcomes.

Truly disruptive solutions, such as demanding complete worker ownership
<http://asbcouncil.org/issues/worker-ownership#.VbJO73ja-e0> (because
worker-contractors are the de facto corporate managers in the gig economy)
or providing every person in the United States with a guaranteed income
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/>
 (because work as we know it has become obsolete
<http://www.rushkoff.com/blog/2011/9/7/cnncom-are-jobs-obsolete.html>) will
not be discussed by either party-anointed candidate.

The corporate and Wall Street patrons for whom Clinton and Bush speak, and
who have already flooded their campaigns and their bulging super PACs with
more than $176 million in cash
<http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2015/07/15/presidential-election-already-fueled-by-377-million>,
do not want changes in current lucrative ownership arrangements. The
candidates share the capitalist faith of their powerful economic
benefactors in market outcomes that benefit these job creators
<http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/who-the-job-creators-really-are/?_r=0>
as
sacred and inviolable.

Because the campaign ahead may cost as much as $5 billion
<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/230318-the-5-billion-campaign>,
the argument between Clinton and Bush is not about radical change aimed at
disrupting an economy rigged in favor of their wealthy donors. It is about
the purity of their faith in the mythology of markets. Clinton is a true
believer, but to reach disaffected voters, she might do penance for
disruptive market inequities by offering a few tepid, ameliorative policy
proposals.

Bush is more devout. He is burning with the capitalist fire and campaigning
to convert temp voters to his crusade to cast out demonic government
regulators and liberate worker-voters from the "old order," presumably the
order in which at least some of them had health insurance and pensions.

*From Temp Voter to Permanently Organized Citizen*

Disaffected voters know that they lack powerful institutional
representation and that the Democratic and Republican parties therefore see
them as increasingly disposable, both politically and economically. Voters
see through euphemistic descriptions of a dynamic new sharing economy as an
absurd propagandistic distortion of the underlying reality.

Neither profits nor benefits, let alone ownership and decision-making, will
be shared with temp worker-voters under a President Clinton or Bush. These
corporate-sponsored candidates seek a one-off victory cobbled together from
disaffected temp worker-voters at any cost. Clinton may be the lesser of
the two evils, but they are both captive to powerful economic interests
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/opinion/sunday/frank-bruni-hillary-clinton-jeb-bush-and-fund-raising-for-the-2016-presidential-race.html?_r=0>
that
benefit from a temp economy fueled by contingent worker-voters.

In his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, Vermont's
social democratic senator, Bernie Sanders, is calling for a "grassroots
political revolution"
<http://www.wiscnews.com/youtube_c7f530c1-e999-53db-842b-f41e0aff59f4.html>
predicated
on a mass movement of permanently organized and engaged citizens. Whatever
his political prospects may be in 2016, Sanders is pointing his supporters
in the right direction.

More than 80 percent of voters
<http://home.gwu.edu/~jsides/polcomm.pdf> believe
that negative, polarizing campaigns are undermining democracy. Yet US
politics is now in a state of permanent campaign
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/william-galston-the-permanent-campaign-perpetual-paralysis-1414539559>,
explicitly designed to polarize these same voters. Making politics as
divisive as possible discourages ongoing voter involvement in the political
process, but it increases partisan turnout
<http://mason.gmu.edu/~rpetrie1/Negative%20Campaigning%20Fundraising%20and%20Voter%20Turnout_Feb2014.pdf>.
This superheated campaign environment allows lavishly funded campaign
operatives armed with sophisticated data and media tools to target and pick
off disaffected splinter groups with emotional hot button appeals.

Lacking nationally organized institutional representation, individual
worker-voters are relentlessly assaulted with emotionally laden wedge issues
<http://home.gwu.edu/~jsides/polcomm.pdf>. It is easy to succumb to the
corporate-funded politics of division, but it is a fatal dilution of
political agency.

The only antidote to being treated as disposable temp worker-voters is to
become permanently organized citizen-activists united around a relentless
movement for the re-democratization of political and economic life.
Creating such a permanent movement while maintaining the essential "plurality
of resistance"
<http://www.vanderbilt.edu/AnS/philosophy/_people/faculty_files/_medinafoucaultstudies.pdf>
to
be effective is the greatest challenge that citizens face in confronting a
new temporary political economy predicated on human disposability.

Michael Meurer is President of Meurer Group & Associates,
a California-Colorado political consulting firm. Michael has served as a
Senior Advisor to the California Democratic Party and co-founded the
Courage Campaign, where he served as Deputy Chair.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Labour-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to labour-l+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to labour-l at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/labour-l/CACKppcwgHMDJ%2ByD2y%2B_Ubkh-E6wbbVuayE3n9XDou-pMPqyVOw%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/labour-l/CACKppcwgHMDJ%2ByD2y%2B_Ubkh-E6wbbVuayE3n9XDou-pMPqyVOw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



-- 
*Recent publications*

1. 2014. From Coldwar Communism to the Global Justice Movement: Itinerary
of a Long-Distance Internationalist.
http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/from_coldwar_communism
_to_the_global_emancipatory_movement/ (Free). 2. 2014. Interface Journal
Special (Co-Editor), December 2014. 'Social Movement Internationalisms'.
(Free).3. 2014. with Laurence Cox, ‘Movement Internationalism/s’,
Interface: a Journal for and about Social Movements. (Editorial), Vol. 6
(2), pp. 1–12. 4. 2014. ‘The International Labour Movement in, Against and
Beyond, the Globalized and Informatized Cage of Capitalism and Bureaucracy.
(Interview). Interface: a Journal for and about Social Movements. Vol. 6
(2), pp. 35-58. 5. 2014. 'The Networked Internationalism of Labour's
Others', in Jai Sen (ed), Peter Waterman (co-ed), The Movement of
Movements: Struggles for Other Worlds  (Part I). (10 Euros). 6. 2015.
Waterman, Peter. ‘Beyond Labourism, Development and Decent Work’.
<https://escarpmentpress.org/globallabour/article/download/2338/2433>
Global Labour Journal, 2015, 6(2), pp. 246-50.

*More publications, click [////]*

_______________________________________________
NetworkedLabour mailing list
NetworkedLabour at lists.contrast.org
http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour




-- 
Check out the Commons Transition Plan here at: http://commonstransition.org


P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

<http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20150805/53b0612f/attachment-0001.htm