The Gig Economy is Actually Smaller Than It Used To Be, Labor Department Says (marketwatch.com) 64
The so-called gig economy is actually slightly smaller than it used to be, according to a new Labor Department report released Thursday that chronicles the jobs market in the age of Uber. From a report: In May 2017, the Labor Department counted 5.9 million people, or 3.8% of workers, in what it calls contingent jobs, which are those that the workers don't expect to last or that workers call temporary. In 2005, the last time the government looked into the issue, there were 4.1% of workers who classified themselves this way. "Taken at face value, the results indicate that the role of non-traditional work arrangements in the U.S. economy has remained largely unchanged during the past 20 years, even as excitement and media coverage of the growth of the 'gig economy' has increased," said Brian Schaitkin, senior economist for The Conference Board.
Danger Will Robinson, does not fit the narrative (Score:2, Funny)
Oh crap, this fact doesn't fit the narrative I heard on TV from my favorite comedian. It must be false.
Re: (Score:1)
It could also mean that people are looking at "sharing" jobs as permanent.
Re: (Score:2)
It could also mean that people are looking at "sharing" jobs as permanent.
It could also mean this research was sponsored by Uber.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's get those newborn babies and geriatrics into full-time employment. Remember, work is a moral obligation and we cannot let any human resources go unmaximized.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
64% of the work-age population is working. I am one of the 36% but not included in the unemployment statistics.
I am a caucasian male with a computer engineering degree and a couple of decades of experience who had to leave the field for a few years. When I tried to return, age discrimination kept me from getting into a job even though I was willing to start at the bottom. I now do odd jobs related to my field off-the-books.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Soubdsike you're part of the 3.8% (gig workers), but also content to commit fraud for a 50% larger paycheck.
Re: (Score:2)
So unemployment is actually 36%, not their phoney bullshit "historic low" 3.9%.
Right. But we don't expect our 5 year olds to go to work in coal mines anymore. The statistics don't count kids, the elderly, or the disabled. The unemployment statistics everyone throws about is trying to count people currently looking for a job. And that's important because they're all competing with each other. (other than tradesmen and professionals and specialists, whom should really look at statistics within their own niche [bls.gov]). The part where the statistic is bullshit is that it ignores people who
Participation rate rose in the 1980s, dropped Obam (Score:2)
You say "historic low"; it should be made clear it's not a record low. The percentage of adults working, the labor force participation rate, was lower than this until the early 1980s. In the eighties, the number of people working significantly increased. It stayed relatively stable at that higher level for 26 years. Then it dropped very significantly from 2008-2016. It's been fairly stable for the last two years.
You can set a data range here to see the trends:
https://data.bls.gov/timeserie... [bls.gov]
If you want to
Typo: Rose, not fell (Score:2)
That should be:
Real unemployment rose under Obama, to pre-Reagan levels.
The percentage of people employed fell. If you want to call it "real unemployment", the amount of people UNemployed rose from 2008-2016, and has been stable for the last two years.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm not convinced labor participation is a good way to calculate real unemployment.
We want to capture discouraged workers (covered by isong labor participation but not the official numbers), but happy single working adult households shouldn't be included in the real unemployment, and probably not the disabled either.
Neither of these metrics measures the under employed though, that's probably the most important number.
How many people are working for more than 10% less than their peak earnings?
How many people
Re: So it's a lie (Score:2)
It's a bullshit number, but we've used the same bullshit number for the last dozen or so administrations.
those that the workers don't expect to last (Score:2)
which are those that the workers don't expect to last or that workers call temporary.
Isn't that all jobs these days . . . ?
I've been with the same employer for more than 30 years, but change jobs every few years.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Isn't that all jobs these days . . . ?
Average job tenure is higher today than it was 30 years ago.
The "Golden Age" of lifetime employment is a myth. It never happened for most people, especially if they were not both white and male.
They are all "contigent" jobs nowdays. (Score:4, Insightful)
3-5 years tops in the tech industry. Unless you do gov work your not getting a pension or even thinking of lasting there till retirement. They wouldn't keep you, but odds are good they wouldn't exist anyway...
Re: (Score:2)
3-5 years tops in the tech industry. Unless you do gov work your not getting a pension or even thinking of lasting there till retirement. They wouldn't keep you, but odds are good they wouldn't exist anyway...
There is a certain amount of truth to this because the moment the economy takes even a slight dip or the company might be slightly less profitable, your job may well vanish. For the most part employment is contingent upon profitability.
Re: (Score:2)
The "Tech industry" is wide and wonderful [stackoverflow.com]. What shitty corner are you working in? Because embedded development has worked out pretty well for me.
Re: (Score:2)
"What a none niche commodity item you where 20 years ago...."
Are you ok? Are you having a stroke?
Did you mean "non-niche commodity item you were 20 years ago...."? Non-niche, as in .... wide-spread? Yes, there's actually a lot of places to find work. I got my start in a tiny-ass little Iowa town. Made the computers that go into meters for oil and gas pipelines. Then a medium sized city had 4 professional engineering firms.
I dunno about commodity... oh, other than IoT devices. Yeah, and arduinos are
Re: (Score:2)
I think that means in 20 years your toaster will be running tensorFlow to find optimal toastyness.
They should be TODAY! And they would be, too, if it weren't for the embedded developers and their little machines. Well, that and the manufacturers and customers who won't eat a couple bucks on putting a real computer in there.
Staffing companies == pimps (Score:1)
Opaque 'company policies', intended to create a gulf between you and the people you're pimped out to.
Work for years, never get more money, living paycheck-to-paycheck? Tough shit, the 'customer' and the 'pimps' all point fingers at each other, claiming it's 'out of their hands', they can't pay you more.
Treated like a second-class (or third, or fourth..) citizen -- because you're a whore.
T
My 0.02 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The gig economy is ultimately not sustainable.
Lawyers have been hanging a shingle and doing "gigs" for centuries. So have plumbers, carpenters, etc.
the recent law school graduate that might be in an area saturated with lawyers might advertise basic services for dirt cheap just to get money
Or he could move to where pay is higher. The principles of supply and demand predate "gigs".
Re:My 0.02 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
What is relatively new though, at least as far as I can see around me in Europe, is that an increasing number of formerly semi-permanent jobs are being turned into gigs.
Perhaps, like in America, this is something everyone "knows" is true, but actually isn't.
Can you cite any evidence that "gigs" are more common in Europe?
Re: (Score:2)
And being a large team of software developers is exactly the same problem. Everyone is fighting for the interesting tasks and trying to avoid being pushed away from software development. Sometimes these are the large tasks that take more time. Maybe it's the tasks that involve signal processing, DSP's, parallel processing, mathematics or those that involve writing new code. Then it becomes like a medieval banquet. Those closet to the king get the juicy chunks of meat. The serfs at the bottom get the throw-a
So Trump is helping people get real jobs... (Score:1)
and for the first time in our history we have more job openings than job seekers. Just sucks for those of us that oppose him that he is keeping campaign promises.
Re: So Trump is helping people get real jobs... (Score:2)
"Not wanting to work" is a protected right the Republicans are attacking? Seriously?
Cutting off free gov't money so that able-bodied adults without dependent children makes sense to everyone UNLESS you are a politician and their votes are a big part of your re-election plans...
Makes sense (Score:4, Interesting)
That makes sense. People take "gigs" to tide them over until they can get a real job. But real jobs are more available now.
There was a bunch of people out of work a decade ago when rising gas prices made the housing bubble burst leading to the Econopocalypse that everyone likes to references with "These hard economic times". But those times are over. We've had steady (if slow) employment growth and now unemployment is creeping below 4%. Down into rates we haven't seen since the 1960's.
Anyone in the gig economy is underemployed (or has REALLY shitty job prospects). As times get better, fewer people need to do shitty gigs to make ends meet.
(And it's less... new. For a while, all those people were being paid with venture capitalist money)
Downgraded (Score:3)
to Meg economy?
Need to look at ... (Score:2)
... the tipping point.
Unemployment is at an all-time low.
That means lots of room for entry-level jobs.
Those jobs pay even if you're taking a smoke, shit, or a coffee break.
When jobs become scarce, the gif economy will expand again.
--
Even so, that number hasn't changed much in 20 years and is so low that it represents "noise."
Re: (Score:2)
When jobs become scarce, the gif economy will expand again.
Excuse me, this is /. and we don't like proprietary formats. We prefer the PNG economy around here..
Re: (Score:2)
Well just SHIT!
You got me.
they just weren't surveyed or answered unemployed (Score:2, Interesting)
Few of the "gig" workers I know would show up on a survey like this. I am a gig tech worker. I don't have an LLC and am paid for tasks or work performed or for an end product via cash or check. From their point of view, I'm essentially unemployed though I make a living.
In the non-tech arena, I know many people in a more rural area who lost traditional jobs in the 2009-2012 period who never returned. They now cut down trees, perform handyman jobs, do construction under-the-table, etc. Their work is steadier
Temp work, not gig economy (Score:3)
Alternatively people aren't saying Lyft/Uber/etc are short term gigs, but instead viewed like a job. Since it's self-reported whether it's short term or not./p.
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively people aren't saying Lyft/Uber/etc are short term gigs, but instead viewed like a job. Since it's self-reported whether it's short term or not./p.
Uber are fast running out of suckers to drive for them as people are realising that you wont earn enough from Uber to cover the costs of running a Citroen C1, let alone a Focus sized car. Without a steady supply of new suckers to replace the old ones who've figured this out, customers are also leaving Uber. This is the same for most "gig" economies. Very few places can support them, something like Deliveroo might work in large cities like London where population density makes it workable or university town
Does not surprise me at all (Score:3)
Just my 2 cents
As proven repeatedly on /. (Score:3)
Gig Economy jobs suck - they're horrible jobs with low pay and high misery components - why shouldn't the Gig economy workforce be shrinking?
Perhaps - just perhaps, with more open jobs than workers looking for jobs, potential "Gig'ers" have better options than leasing a car from Uber, buying Uber's insurance, driving strangers all over town, and hoping to earn more than gas money for the privilege?
I can't imagine why... (Score:2)
... other than maybe folks are realizing that they really do NOT like be day labor, the way their grandparents and great-grandparents were, before unions came in in force.
But we don't need unions. We're happy to be fired at will, told to work "whatever it takes", even if that's 60, 70 or more hours a week, we don't need a life....