Uber, the giant of private transportation services through technological application, has begun the fight in public opinion against a final labor regulation in Mexico. This week’s publication of a demographic study on the “flexibility” that those using the platform as a means of economic existence strive for is a strategy to influence citizens and public policy makers –as he did in California, where it has its corporate headquarters—. The poll comes at a time when the legislative and administrative batteries in Mexico are preparing to discuss and amend the working conditions of Uber drivers and delivery people and similar platforms.
With the poll findings The idea is to be implanted that managers and delivery people prefer the “flexibility” of choosing hours and working time over job security, as if “flexibility” and job security are opposites that cannot be enjoyed at the same time. The study states that 90% of those who offer their working capital to the platforms “prefer to control their own schedule, even without benefits, to have a fixed schedule with more benefits” from questions in which the respondents are never mentioned which they the benefits they give up in exchange for “flexibility”.
It may seem like a paradox that a company that bases its business on innovation refuses to innovate in terms of labor protection, but it is precisely this contradiction that feeds Uber and other companies of the so-called “platform economy”: looking for profits based on the labor market uncertainty. We know: Uber has flourished the most in countries where labor laws do not protect their workers.
The ultimate labor regulation of Uber — and of the industry in general — will take place in a particularly challenging year for the company since it began operations in Mexico in 2013. In addition to the regulatory risks, Uber will be forced to respond to the arrival of Lyft, its main competitor in the United States. Unlike DiDi or Beat, which also participates in the taxi market by application (transport network companies, in the official jargon influenced by the Uber lobby), Lyft has business and business models similar to those of Uber and it represents your most direct competition.
In addition to the potential medium-term benefits that Lyft’s adventures may bring to consumers, which promote lower prices or increase the quality of services — or both, if we are lucky — can improve working conditions for those who generate revenue through these companies. is done only through the regulatory framework.
It is urgent to change the law to incorporate and protect those who exist through the platforms. In the Federal Congress, there are several initiatives to reform the Federal Labor Act and the head of the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare, Luisa María Alcalde Luján, expressed the need to change the status quo.
It is estimated that more than 500 000 people work for applications such as Uber, Rappi, DiDi, Cornershop and the like without job security: neither basic salary nor social benefits; no sick leave, accident or maternity / paternity leave, no health insurance, no accident insurance, no retirement fund or housing. Nothing: them and their circumstances.
For Uber, in particular, it will not be unprecedented to try to influence public policymakers. It has done so in the past to avoid state regulations affecting its business model in terms of competition — it participates in a market dominated by traditional taxis — and has managed to avoid the Treasury allowing the payment of tax contributions such as ISR on drivers and delivery people. Soon we will see an increase in prices for final consumers to save corporate accounting from the 2% tax that has just been approved in Mexico City for delivery and messaging platforms.
But now the challenge is different: the federal government has shown sensitivity in the labor issue by adopting commitments to the new North American trade agreement and combating the contractual simulation of subcontracting, outsourcing or outsourcing models. Uber’s public policy advisers know this, which is why they started the fight in public opinion by releasing their “flexibility poll”.
Do not be fooled: Uber is corporate propaganda to defend the model of exploitation and uncertainty on which its business is based. Flexibility and job security can coexist. This fight is for the future and quality of life for drivers and delivery people.
Editor of El Economista online
Economy
Journalist. Since 2010, he has been editing the digital version of El Economista in Mexico City. Master in Transparency and Personal Data Protection of the University of Guadalajara. He has a specialization in telecommunications and information technology law. His personal blog is Economicon.
Reference-www.eleconomista.com.mx