BUSI 343 Week 8 Discussion Board Forum 4 Example

Discussion Board Forum 4: The Future of Labor Relations

BUSI 343 Employee and Labor Relations, Discussion Board Forum 4 Thread and Replies

Thread by [Student Name]

The forum prompt and the classmates' threads are composites; the textbook, research and Scripture cited are real.

Whether app-based drivers and couriers are employees or independent contractors decides whether they can organize under the National Labor Relations Act. My position is that the debate offers a false choice, and that a third path built around portable benefits better serves both flexibility and fairness.

Budd (2012) explains that the Act protects employees, not independent contractors, so a worker classified as a contractor has no protected right to form a union or bargain collectively. Classifying gig workers as employees would bring that protection, along with minimum wage and overtime rules, but it could also push companies to set schedules and limit how many people can work, ending the flexibility many workers chose the work for.

Two kinds of evidence frame the tradeoff. Katz and Krueger (2019) used national surveys to document that alternative work arrangements, including contract, on-call and platform work, grew between 1995 and 2015, though less dramatically than early estimates suggested once measurement problems were addressed. A growing share of work now falls outside the employment relationship the Act assumes. At the same time, Mas and Pallais (2017) ran a field experiment with applicants to a call center job and found that most would not give up much pay to set their own hours, but many would give up a significant share of pay to avoid schedules set unpredictably by an employer. What workers value most may be protection from someone else's control of their time, not freedom for its own sake.

Scripture warns against oppressing a hired worker who is poor and needy, whether a brother or a sojourner, and requires paying wages before the sun sets (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Deuteronomy 24:14-15). That suggests the measure of a policy is whether it protects the most vulnerable workers, not which label it uses.

A portable benefits model, in which platforms contribute to benefits that follow the worker across apps, could preserve flexible scheduling while adding security. A few states have begun experimenting with versions of it.

Reply to Monique

Monique, your thread argued that reclassifying drivers as employees would take away the flexibility that makes the work attractive, and Budd (2012) acknowledges that employment status brings obligations that can reduce scheduling freedom. Research suggests the flexibility you describe has real value.

Chen et al. (2019) used detailed data on when ride-hail drivers chose to work and estimated that drivers earned more than twice the surplus they would gain in a less flexible arrangement, because they could drive when their own time was least valuable, such as after a day job or when children were in school. A schedule set by a dispatcher would erase much of that gain. Paul tells the Thessalonians to work quietly and earn their own living (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, 2 Thessalonians 3:12). Work done on one's own schedule can still be honest, quiet work. Still, could flexibility be protected by law while adding minimum earnings standards for hours spent driving?

Reply to Brian

Brian, your thread assumed most ride-hail drivers depend on the work as their main job, which made your case for full employee status strong. Budd (2012) reminds us that labor policy should start with an accurate picture of the workforce.

Hall and Krueger (2018) analyzed Uber's administrative data and a survey of its drivers and found that many drove part time, often alongside another job, and cited flexibility and supplemental income as reasons for driving. A full-time driver and a weekend driver may need different protections, since the weekend driver often has health coverage and a pension through another employer while the full-time driver may have neither. Proverbs calls on its readers to speak up for those who cannot defend their own rights (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Proverbs 31:8). As a middle ground, would a policy that adds protections once a driver passes a set number of weekly hours address both groups?

References

Budd, J. W. (2012). Labor relations: Striking a balance (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Chen, M. K., Chevalier, J. A., Rossi, P. E., & Oehlsen, E. (2019). The value of flexible work: Evidence from Uber drivers. Journal of Political Economy, 127(6), 2735-2794. https://doi.org/10.1086/702171

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Hall, J. V., & Krueger, A. B. (2018). An analysis of the labor market for Uber's driver-partners in the United States. ILR Review, 71(3), 705-732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793917717222

Katz, L. F., & Krueger, A. B. (2019). The rise and nature of alternative work arrangements in the United States, 1995-2015. ILR Review, 72(2), 382-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793918820008

Mas, A., & Pallais, A. (2017). Valuing alternative work arrangements. American Economic Review, 107(12), 3722-3759. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20161500