Pay to Work

November 1, 2020 5:23 AM

Large corporations like Disney and Airbnb have outsourced their customer service to Arise Virtual Solutions. In turn, they’ve subcontracted work to “agents” who have to buy their own equipment, pay for their own training and certification, and pay monthly service and platform fees, before finally getting paid themselves (Propublica & Planet Money).
posted by adrianhon (38 comments total)

Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store.
posted by beagle at 5:40 AM on November 1, 2020 [45 favorites]

Status Report

Capitalism: Working as intended
posted by tommasz at 6:13 AM on November 1, 2020 [14 favorites]

“a typical employee has a utilization rate of 65 percent because you’re paying for their lunch, breaks, and training.”

Arise can’t assign regular schedules to individual agents because they’re not officially employees. So to guarantee it can deliver the labor force that corporate clients are paying for, the company over-recruits agents for each client, a former Arise executive told ProPublica. That way, the former executive said, “when the need comes, you have people with extra capacity lying around.”

Fuck everything about this, I do not like the exploitative capitalist system.
posted by Meatbomb at 6:17 AM on November 1, 2020 [23 favorites]

gig (noun)
1: a pronged spear for catching fish
2: an arrangement of hooks to be drawn through a school of fish in order to hook their bodies

See also: gig economy.

We've just been pronouncing it wrong all this time.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:18 AM on November 1, 2020 [31 favorites]

You mean it's supposed to be pronounced with a soft G sound, like how some people say GIF like it's a peanut butter?
posted by hippybear at 7:01 AM on November 1, 2020 [3 favorites]

I think it's supposed to be pronounced "horrific scam", as in "late capitalism is a horrific scam". I might have the phonemes wrong in some places though.
posted by fight or flight at 7:11 AM on November 1, 2020 [20 favorites]

I finally signed up to give ProPublica a monthly donation.
posted by ropeladder at 7:16 AM on November 1, 2020 [9 favorites]

So how many WAH folks get their properly ergonomic home workspace and all of its services paid for by their employer? You're effectively paying to work if you're not.
posted by scruss at 7:21 AM on November 1, 2020 [2 favorites]

Four Yorkshiremen "AND pay me owner for permission to come to work."
posted by Mogur at 7:55 AM on November 1, 2020 [8 favorites]

So how many WAH folks get their properly ergonomic home workspace and all of its services paid for by their employer?

Properly ergonomic? I'm pretty sure our dining table isn't all that ergonomic.
posted by Thorzdad at 8:16 AM on November 1, 2020 [4 favorites]

Are there employers who spend a lot of money on ergonomics for their desk workers? I assumed it was all sort of "this is the desk and this is the chair" sort of purchases that were done in good faith but not really focussing on ergonomics other than the basics. It would be a very fancy workplace that was all "let's get all ergonomic with our office furniture".
posted by hippybear at 8:22 AM on November 1, 2020 [3 favorites]

@doctorow: "chickenization, Arise style"[1,2,3]
posted by kliuless at 8:26 AM on November 1, 2020 [1 favorite]

Are there employers who spend a lot of money on ergonomics for their desk workers?

I don't know if it counts as a "lot" of money, but I was given $1K to buy an adjustable desk for WFH, which I don't need to return unless I leave in like 6mo (which has already passed, so I guess it's mine). Then again, tech company, so maybe $1K means I got screwed?

(also, Arise are clearly bastards and this was utterly predictable in late-stage-USA)
posted by aramaic at 8:28 AM on November 1, 2020 [2 favorites]

My workplace actually has been giving out at least a dual-monitor setup and a thin client (we have all the computers virtualized) to anyone who asks for it to work from home, but they don't pay the internet bill. Unless you don't have a home internet connection, then they'll give you a hotspot. As for workspaces at home, no. In the office, they do have an ergonomic assessment for everyone when they start, plus they installed adjustable standing desks in every cubicle.

Say it with me folks: UNIONS.
posted by mrgoat at 8:33 AM on November 1, 2020 [37 favorites]

Mr Goat, yep, same here, and you've hit the nail on the head on why this is standard at this employer!
posted by esoteric things at 8:41 AM on November 1, 2020

So how many WAH folks get their properly ergonomic home workspace and all of its services paid for by their employer? You're effectively paying to work if you're not.

I do, with the exception of my internet connection--which I was already happily paying for myself, so I don't need my employer to cover that. But otherwise, they ensure I have everything I need to work from home.

I'm very lucky, and I know that.
posted by Annabelle74 at 8:48 AM on November 1, 2020 [1 favorite]

It's basically impossible now to participate in the economy without the moral equivalent of crossing a picket line multiple times a day. It doesn't have to be this way.
posted by klanawa at 9:54 AM on November 1, 2020 [12 favorites]

My company gave us $1000 each for work-from-home equipment (and sent me a big monitor, which wasn't counted against that allowance) and they've reimbursed home internet, and mobile service as well for people whose job requires them to be on call, for at least ten years.

Yup, also a full-time employee in tech, how'd you guess?
posted by potrzebie at 10:46 AM on November 1, 2020

No other industry has the money to spend on it anymore.
posted by rhizome at 10:54 AM on November 1, 2020 [5 favorites]

Also these companies suck. There is so much stress and misery behind these stories.
posted by rhizome at 11:01 AM on November 1, 2020 [3 favorites]

So how many WAH folks get their properly ergonomic home workspace and all of its services paid for by their employer? You're effectively paying to work if you're not.

Federal employee here - I get the princely sum of $0. My agency doesn't even provide laptops since our systems are set up for BYOD (everything is web-based apps, Office 365, Citrix, etc). Since March I've spent over $2k out-of-pocket for a new laptop, monitor, desk, and a not-very-ergonomic chair so I can have the "privilege" of not being forced into the office.

My wife's private-sector employer is a bit more sensible - laptops are standard-issue, she borrowed monitors from the office, and they paid her $200 for misc WFH expenses.

I don't know for sure but I get the impression that, outside of tech, my situation is probably the more common one.
posted by photo guy at 11:57 AM on November 1, 2020 [7 favorites]

I just get the laptop, and I can schlep around the monitor/mouse/keyboard from office to home if I want. Mouse, yes, keyboard, no, monitor I put in the place I expect to use it the most weekly-ish. I don't get two complete setups.

This subcontract, over-staff, pay shitty scheme seems guaranteed to provide shitty customer service. Which the company clearly doesn't care about. I hate that. If I'm in that company, I'm going to be making noise about "pick one: Good customer service or stop spending money on pretending. Half-assing is expensive."
posted by ctmf at 12:15 PM on November 1, 2020

Oh, I do have to certify that my at-home work environment meets all the safety rules I would follow in the office (lighting, lack of trip and fire hazards, etc.) I guess I would be out of pocket to get up to that standard, but I already am. I "get" to work from home with whatever was already on my desk, possibly exchanging a tower-style computer for a laptop. No extra money for any related expenses. (Also a federal employee) But i sure don't have to pay to access the VPN or whatever, that's just ridiculous.
posted by ctmf at 12:19 PM on November 1, 2020

I like not this timeline. Let us have another.
posted by The Underpants Monster at 12:47 PM on November 1, 2020 [7 favorites]

If I'm in that company, I'm going to be making noise about "pick one: Good customer service or stop spending money on pretending. Half-assing is expensive."

We need to figure out a way to make it more painful more quickly for companies to hire these villains. A real fear that to be found out will have catastrophic effects on their bottom lines, which means people stop using them. This is hard to do in the US where capitalistic strategies are self-justifying, but it's not a rule of nature. There's a vulnerability somewhere.

The business model must be destroyed, and while here in California we have Proposition 22 as a step in that direction, it's not going to be enough. Perhaps unions are the defense against the finance- and regulatory-hacks these companies are premised on, but I'm not sure, and I'd hate to hang all of my hopes on it.
posted by rhizome at 12:53 PM on November 1, 2020

I work in the business intelligence section of a fortune 90 company and they haven't offered me anything for WFH. They sent me a webcam that I didn't ask for. I had to buy a new headset because if I requested one it would probably take 6 months to arrive...like the webcam.
posted by Young Kullervo at 12:57 PM on November 1, 2020 [1 favorite]

Rhizome, proposition 22 is literally the opposite of a step in the right direction. The right direction is the destruction of the employees as contractor model, which is what all of these things depend on. The law as it exists in California is the step in the right direction, enforcing the law as it exists is the next one.
posted by rockindata at 1:05 PM on November 1, 2020 [14 favorites]

I’m currently in a fight with HR to get my in-office ergo setup installed. Our HR company sent a “safety expert” to evaluate my station four weeks ago and nothing has changed.

I yearn to go back to WFH where my set up has been nicely honed for years for the benefit of my personal use, versus triggering neck and shoulder pain within an hour of being at my work desk..

(I’m also arguing with management that I should be able to work from home twice a week)

But overall this makes me cry for the current economy. (I’m in CA, so have been shouting against Prop 22 for a couple months).

I hate that these kinds of human rights violations never get people to boycott companies the way that, say, being pro-🏳️‍🌈 does.
posted by itesser at 1:47 PM on November 1, 2020 [3 favorites]

I don't consider employees as contractors to necessarily be a bad thing, if contractors are actually treated like contractors, rather than employees. Some people, myself included, prefer it.

What is a problem is the misclassification of employees, patently abusive contract terms, and a lack of any reasonable means of enforcement thanks to forced arbitration and the inability to recover litigation expenses.

There has to be a way to stop the abusive practices without throwing the good parts that NNT people and those with physical disabilities often find advantageous relative to even a reasonably good employee-employer relationship. Sadly, finding a solution is made much harder by a pervasive culture of cheating that ignores the spirit of any regulation in favor of rules-lawyering their way through any possible loophole. To most companies, especially the large ones, anything goes as long as it improves the bottom line and isn't certain to attract expensive lawsuits.

It would probably help if we had a culture that shunned unethical practices rather than celebrating the ingenuity of those who manage to subvert the intent of any and all rules and regulations.
posted by wierdo at 1:49 PM on November 1, 2020 [5 favorites]

Rhizome, proposition 22 is literally the opposite of a step in the right direction.

Ah shit, I completely flubbed that thought. Voting it down is the step in the right direction.
posted by rhizome at 2:14 PM on November 1, 2020 [6 favorites]

Almost everything about this is bad, but what stands out is the hypocrisy of calling people independent contractors and then not allowing them any independence. Arise's platform fundamentally walls off a segment of the labor market, creating both a barrier to entry for competitors and a way to keep "service partners" committed (i.e. indebted). And in their defense? They call it "free market". Just awful.
posted by dmh at 4:24 PM on November 1, 2020 [4 favorites]

This is horrifying.

Horrifying and to be completely expected from the status quo of neoliberalism that we have no chance of changing for at least another 4 years. If we're lucky, the workers can get means-tested vouchers for learning how to code.
posted by Ouverture at 8:09 PM on November 1, 2020

Is it better than an MLM?
posted by amanda at 5:40 AM on November 2, 2020

Say it with me folks: UNIONS.

Write this in 500-foot high, flaming letters on the side of a mountain. I don't work in tech, but in a public university system that's provided everything I need to teach from home effectively (which involves more than a bit of specialized gear, since I teach music), and we've done a pretty good job of making equipment/spaces/hotspots/etc. available to our students as needed, too--and when the pandemic started, there was no question that this is what we aimed for as standard, because my union is outstanding. (Implementation has been rocky and often less-than-timely, but our imperfect work is at least trying to do the right things.)

Prop. 22 and the entire gig economy as it exists needs to die quickly, and we need widespread, grassroots labor organization and collectivism in the private sector again. Unions work and are really important to quality of life, and politically right-wing public safety workers like cops know this, which is why they think that all socialism and collective organization is dangerous and of the devil except for their unions, which you will have to pry from their cold, dead hands because they will never give them up.

(Of course, with universal health care, the burden of health care provision would be removed from employment/employers altogether, which would considerably reframe this conversation. The most foundational problem with jobs and employment in the U.S. is that employers must provide too much; if employers only needed to provide safe workplaces with clear compensation terms, the purely transactional nature of work-for-hire would be much more clear, less existentially important, and much less morally fraught.)
posted by LooseFilter at 8:10 AM on November 2, 2020 [8 favorites]

I, like many other people, have also provided the computer, peripherals, internet and furniture required for my work-at-home during the pandemics. I even bought a computer which I might not have at that moment. But I really do feel that it's very different in both quality and scale. It's a) an emergency, unplanned procedure, b) I could have borrowed a laptop, but I wanted to have control over the machine and what was loaded on it for my personal use, and c) I get paid very well for my work. I know that people who are in even higher-status professions have things like laptops provided to them for free, but I've also worked as a barista who had to buy all new uniform-compliant shirts before I was even paid, so using my already-paid-for internet and my home computer to work at my very comfy-job doesn't feel like a hardship. Given that it's only happening due to the pandemic (and in normal times, I'm provided with everything I need to work from computers and on-call IT support to paperclips and post-its), I don't there is a comparison.

We should talk about what employers require workers to provide, but let's start with people on minimum wage, not the comfy middle class who can comment on Metafilter during work hours (like me). Let's talk about servers or retail people being required to purchase certain clothes, labourers to provide their own safety equipment, unpaid training sessions - heck, let's talk about the downloading of basic training onto workers paying college tuition.

As for requiring workers to purchase specific equipment and dedicated phone lines, and not paying them for waiting/on-call time? That's just monstrous. I was even disgusted that Rogers Communications was one of their customers - and I didn't think Rogers could do anything bad enough to surprise me anymore (Rogers is the AT&T of Canada).

Arise has downloaded all of the costs to their so-called contractors, but none of the control. Control over not just when, but also HOW you complete work is an essential part of being a true contractor, as well as having multiple clients and charging substantially more per hour worked than any worker to cover those downloaded costs.

We absolutely need strict legislation/regulation to stop firms wrongly categorizing workers as contractors. But I think we can also make financial incentives against even using contractors as a way to save on labour costs (as opposed to being able to access temporary expertise): a contractor minimum wage of maybe $30, $40, $80 an hour? If you need an expert, that's what you would pay. If you don't need an expert, you can hire an employee.

Is it better than an MLM?

Actually, it sounds rather like one - or worse, since you don't just spend money, but also do labour and aren't paid for it.
posted by jb at 1:02 PM on November 2, 2020 [6 favorites]

Say it with me folks: UNIONS.

I recently got a union job for the first time in my life. I've been working for small to medium sized businesses for onwards of 20 years.

It's fucking insane. The contract is surreal.

They make you take your breaks. They don't let you stay late to finish work. You just get cost of living adjustments each year and reviews and raises on a schedule. You can't get fucking fired for no fucking reason. You're mandated a ergonomic evaluation on hire. I'm lucky that it's a pretty strong union, but holy balls the amount of background stress that I don't have to carry because I know that I'm not going to be asked to violate health code or end up on an OSHA's most wanted poster. Everyone should have a union, syndicate or something comparable.

So yes: UNIONS.
posted by furnace.heart at 10:21 PM on November 2, 2020 [12 favorites]

Voting it down is the step in the right direction.

Proposition 22 passed. :(
posted by rhizome at 11:34 PM on November 4, 2020

They make you take your breaks

Indeed, I'm in mild trouble right now for not having used all my leave this year. Technically, I can only roll over 240 hours to next year, and I lose the rest, and that should be my own fault and my choice.

In practice, we do not let people lose their leave, because that leads to people feeling like they have to compete with each other to look more dedicated by not taking as much leave. Leaving the poor person who just wants to get the time off they were promised looking like the slacker asshole.

So I have to turn every remaining holiday into a 7-day weekend to get under the 240-hour mark or else. And I'm not even in the union! I'm management. But the culture permeates the whole org and helps everyone.
posted by ctmf at 6:28 PM on November 5, 2020 [2 favorites]