MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Uber vs microstock  (Read 14810 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

U11


« on: August 29, 2016, 08:21 »
+4
Can you see something common or microstock is copletely different story?
Quote
It's not just Uber. A growing number of delivery companies are going the so-called "independent contractor" route. Uber, Lyft, Flex, etc. are taking advantage of the fact that people simply don't know what they're getting into. People equate the $X per hour amount with a regular wage and think they're making bank, when in fact it's less than minimum wage (with no benefits). There is no regulatory floor here, and in fact some people working for these companies are probably winding up net negative.

Uber is cheap because people can't do math and don't understand what being an "independent contractor" entails. By the time they figure it out the hard way, Uber has already made their profit and has whole bunch of other ignorant suckers lined up to replace them.

Or put simply, if these jobs were really so easy and lucrative to make a profit, why . would they outsource them to the general public? The answer of course is that by outsourcing to the general public they are no longer are required to pay minimum wages, benefits, or expenses related to transportation. It's the old capitalist ideal: privatize the gains, socialize the losses.
from  http://uberpeople.net/threads/max-chafkin-is-an-idiot.99372/#post-1403030


« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2016, 10:38 »
+3
Honestly, this is not about any company in particular...

that's the nature of self-employment or contracted work.

« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2016, 11:01 »
0
Honestly, this is not about any company in particular...

that's the nature of self-employment or contracted work.
Yes self employment is far from the being your own boss dream for many.

« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2016, 11:23 »
+8
Can you see something common or microstock is copletely different story?
Quote
It's not just Uber. A growing number of delivery companies are going the so-called "independent contractor" route. Uber, Lyft, Flex, etc. are taking advantage of the fact that people simply don't know what they're getting into. People equate the $X per hour amount with a regular wage and think they're making bank, when in fact it's less than minimum wage (with no benefits). There is no regulatory floor here, and in fact some people working for these companies are probably winding up net negative.

Uber is cheap because people can't do math and don't understand what being an "independent contractor" entails. By the time they figure it out the hard way, Uber has already made their profit and has whole bunch of other ignorant suckers lined up to replace them.

Or put simply, if these jobs were really so easy and lucrative to make a profit, why . would they outsource them to the general public? The answer of course is that by outsourcing to the general public they are no longer are required to pay minimum wages, benefits, or expenses related to transportation. It's the old capitalist ideal: privatize the gains, socialize the losses.
from  http://uberpeople.net/threads/max-chafkin-is-an-idiot.99372/#post-1403030


A typically ideologically biased opinion.

Nobody is forcing Uber drivers to join the fleet.
Nobody is forcing photographers to join microstock.

Moreover, once they have joined, then can easily quit as well, if they don't like it. This is valid for both Uber drivers and microstock photographers. But it doesn't happen.
Why?
Because the deal is mutually acceptable. Win-win. Both parties have something to gain from it.

On a side note, my recent experience with Uber was outstanding: clean cars, polite drivers, easy to use app with immediate response. Overall much cheaper (about half the price) than private long term parking or regulated taxis, and much, much cheaper than the official airport long-term parking. A great deal!

Besides, there is no better certification and no better incentive for the drivers to offer a high quality service, than the continuous customer review system.
I talked to the drivers. They were OK with the 75% share they got and happy to work on a second job during their weekends.

Uber is great example proving that competition, relatively free from regulatory burdens, will lead to cheaper, better services, higher productivity and wealth.

Of course, well established taxi companies, a lot of them enjoying monopolistic deals with the local authorities (eg for airport operations) will lobby hard against new competitors, trying to block their business.
Same goes for the taxi driver's unions, equally interested in blocking their own competition.
And the local politicians, stimulated both by the political campaign contributions from the taxi companies, as well as by the votes expected from taxi unions, will have hard time resisting the regulatory temptations. Typical cronyism.

All these blocking efforts are made at the expense of regular consumers, forced to dig deep in their pockets and pay above market prices for those privileged by laws specially made for them.


« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 13:08 by Zero Talent »

U11


« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2016, 13:53 »
+4
I think the point is that _possibly_  [some] uber drivers and micro stock photographers are losing more than gaining but because of the nature of crowdsourcing there are always some new people coming  trying to make it work for them.  So potentially you may have a live business which is unprofitable for the person doing the work

alno

« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2016, 13:58 »
+1

All these blocking efforts are made at the expense of regular consumers, forced to dig deep in their pockets and pay above market prices for those privileged by laws specially made for them.

Well said. You reminded me 'Atlas Shrugged' novel.

« Reply #6 on: August 29, 2016, 14:15 »
+1
I think the point is that _possibly_  [some] uber drivers and micro stock photographers are losing more than gaining but because of the nature of crowdsourcing there are always some new people coming  trying to make it work for them.  So potentially you may have a live business which is unprofitable for the person doing the work

This may be possible, indeed. While morons do exist, overall, the huge majority of people know their own interest, better than anyone else. So they will quit or do something about it, as soon as they realise driving for Uber or doing microstock is too much effort.
Unless they truly enjoy these activities and treat them as hobbies. After all, this is especially true for photographers, hoping to become famous through "exposure" traded against free photos  :) But I doubt Uber drivers will be fooled by similar fame delusions or spend time driving strangers around, as a hobby!  ;D
« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 14:26 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #7 on: August 29, 2016, 14:27 »
+1
Honestly, this is not about any company in particular...

that's the nature of self-employment or contracted work.

Contractors can make excellent money if they are in the right field with a high demand skill and good marketing.  Driving and stock photography may not be the right fields, that's all  :o  Think plumbers, roofers, business consultants, high end photographers, and yes, I'm told some make good money in stock although I am not one of them.   I made more doing two assignments this month than in my whole YTD stock work.  And that was at a "friends and family" rate with possible additional revenue pending from print and dl sales.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 14:32 by CJH Photography »

« Reply #8 on: August 29, 2016, 14:42 »
+2
Honestly, this is not about any company in particular...

that's the nature of self-employment or contracted work.

Contractors can make excellent money if they are in the right field with a high demand skill and good marketing.  Driving and stock photography may not be the right fields, that's all  :o  Think plumbers, roofers, business consultants, high end photographers, and yes, I'm told some make good money in stock although I am not one of them.   I made more doing two assignments this month than in my whole YTD stock work.  And that was at a "friends and family" rate with possible additional revenue pending from print and dl sales.
Thats right it boils down to supply and demand with modern photographic equipment its just too easy to make the kind of pics Microstock demands to make an easy living. If you have a rare/in demand skill and know how to exploit it you will do well. If you do something that almost anyone can do why would yo expect to make $$$$ at it?

« Reply #9 on: August 29, 2016, 15:01 »
+6
My guess is that if  Uber dropped the rates drivers receive as drastically as microstock companies have,  there would be zero Uber drivers left. 

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #10 on: August 29, 2016, 19:21 »
+7
On a side note, my recent experience with Uber was outstanding: clean cars, polite drivers, easy to use app with immediate response. Overall much cheaper (about half the price) than private long term parking or regulated taxis, and much, much cheaper than the official airport long-term parking. A great deal!

I just tried Uber for the first time on a recent trip and my experience was total opposite.

Each time I made a request they never could seem to find where I was even though my map showed exactly where I was standing probably within a couple foot radius. I added the name of the hotel and full address and they went to the back and through it was an apartment building. Marriott Courtyard apartment building?

I watched one driver pass me twice on the Uber map which she then had to drive a mile to come back around. Because of traffic and one way streets this took forever.

During each ride I literally had to pull up a mapping app on my phone to show them where to go. They still missed turns and exit ramps. One guy was totally driving the wrong way and told him to turn around because my destination was literally on the same street a mile in the opposite direction.

I can't remember ever having this happen in a cab. Any cab driver seems to know exactly where to go by just the name of the hotel or even building and never misses an exit getting there.

What I really think is needed is an Uber style app that connects all of the cab companies together. That way you get the convenience of the Uber app with the experience of a real cab driver. The Uber fares may be cheaper but I'm not sure it's worth the hassle.

Maybe in the case of photographers it's worth it to pay extra for an experienced pro.


« Reply #11 on: August 29, 2016, 20:21 »
0
On a side note, my recent experience with Uber was outstanding: clean cars, polite drivers, easy to use app with immediate response. Overall much cheaper (about half the price) than private long term parking or regulated taxis, and much, much cheaper than the official airport long-term parking. A great deal!

I just tried Uber for the first time on a recent trip and my experience was total opposite.

Each time I made a request they never could seem to find where I was even though my map showed exactly where I was standing probably within a couple foot radius. I added the name of the hotel and full address and they went to the back and through it was an apartment building. Marriott Courtyard apartment building?

I watched one driver pass me twice on the Uber map which she then had to drive a mile to come back around. Because of traffic and one way streets this took forever.

During each ride I literally had to pull up a mapping app on my phone to show them where to go. They still missed turns and exit ramps. One guy was totally driving the wrong way and told him to turn around because my destination was literally on the same street a mile in the opposite direction.

I can't remember ever having this happen in a cab. Any cab driver seems to know exactly where to go by just the name of the hotel or even building and never misses an exit getting there.

What I really think is needed is an Uber style app that connects all of the cab companies together. That way you get the convenience of the Uber app with the experience of a real cab driver. The Uber fares may be cheaper but I'm not sure it's worth the hassle.

Maybe in the case of photographers it's worth it to pay extra for an experienced pro.
Give him 1 or 2 stars and you will help other customers to avoid your bad experience by avoiding that bad driver.

This is how bad drivers will not be able to get enough customers to make a decent revenue. They will be forced to withdraw, unless they improve their skills and the quality of their service.
The reviews are a great quality control system and no governmental inspection, regulation or certification will ever do a better job nor guarantee you a good service from "regulated" drivers.

Moreover, I'm pretty certain Uber will even compensate you, up to a certain extent, if you complain to them.



Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

« Last Edit: August 30, 2016, 09:38 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #12 on: August 30, 2016, 00:23 »
+1
I have had nothing but good experiences with Uber, and have used the service in many cities around the world. Now I am looking at becoming an Uber driver to help finance my college studies, unfortunately the local authorities in Vancouver, BC are stalling on allowing Uber to commence operations.. I guess their brown envelopes from the taxi companies are to valuable

U11


« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2016, 07:46 »
+1
talking about good uber experience as customer should be compared with being microstock buyer, and being uber driver should be compared with being microstock  photographer.Otherwise the topic have no meaning.
Sure we can talk about benefits of the new taxi service but we all know them (i assume)

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2016, 10:56 »
+5

Nobody is forcing Uber drivers to join the fleet.
Nobody is forcing photographers to join microstock.

Moreover, once they have joined, then can easily quit as well, if they don't like it. This is valid for both Uber drivers and microstock photographers. But it doesn't happen.
Why?
Because the deal is mutually acceptable. Win-win. Both parties have something to gain from it.

Except that it's not. The owners of Uber are cleaning up, while the "independent contractors" are making less than minimum wage, which is why...

Quote
They were ... happy to work on a second job during their weekends.

I'll bet you dollars to donuts they would be MUCH happier making a decent wage with Uber so they could relax on the weekends, instead of having to work a second job because Uber is using a workaround to avoid paying the legal minimum wage and benefits.

Quote
Uber is great example proving that competition, relatively free from regulatory burdens, will lead to cheaper, better services, higher productivity and wealth.

How will the drivers accumulate wealth making less than minimum wage?

Quote
All these blocking efforts are made at the expense of regular consumers, forced to dig deep in their pockets and pay above market prices for those privileged by laws specially made for them.

God forbid you should pay fair rates, so the drivers who are keeping those cars clean and pretending to enjoy making less than minimum wage while working a second job on the weekends so you'll come back again, can be paid fairly.

« Reply #15 on: August 31, 2016, 11:51 »
+1

Nobody is forcing Uber drivers to join the fleet.
Nobody is forcing photographers to join microstock.

Moreover, once they have joined, then can easily quit as well, if they don't like it. This is valid for both Uber drivers and microstock photographers. But it doesn't happen.
Why?
Because the deal is mutually acceptable. Win-win. Both parties have something to gain from it.

Except that it's not. The owners of Uber are cleaning up, while the "independent contractors" are making less than minimum wage, which is why...

Quote
They were ... happy to work on a second job during their weekends.

I'll bet you dollars to donuts they would be MUCH happier making a decent wage with Uber so they could relax on the weekends, instead of having to work a second job because Uber is using a workaround to avoid paying the legal minimum wage and benefits.

Quote
Uber is great example proving that competition, relatively free from regulatory burdens, will lead to cheaper, better services, higher productivity and wealth.

How will the drivers accumulate wealth making less than minimum wage?

Quote
All these blocking efforts are made at the expense of regular consumers, forced to dig deep in their pockets and pay above market prices for those privileged by laws specially made for them.

God forbid you should pay fair rates, so the drivers who are keeping those cars clean and pretending to enjoy making less than minimum wage while working a second job on the weekends so you'll come back again, can be paid fairly.

You missed the whole point: NOBODY forced these Uber drivers to do what they do. NOBODY is forcing you to do microstock, as far as I understand.  They choose freely to do it. We choose freely to do it! As long as they (and we) continue to do it, it means it is advantageous for them (and us). As simple as that!

They get 75% form the ride. Will more be better? Sure! Everybody wants more!

To continue the parallel, we can only dream to get 75% of our sales from microstock. Yet, both you and me are still moving forward with something between the pitiful 16-17% from iStock and 50% from Alamy.
Despite these abysmal percentages, I am doing twice my state's minimum wage, from microstock. Since this is not my profession I can only be happy with the additional income! I will still be happy even when this additional income will drop below the minimum wage.
I bet with you that full time Uber drivers make more than minimum wage! But even if they only work during their free time, the additional income is a bonus they never had, in the first place!

Would I be happier with more? Sure! Will they be happier with more? Probably!

Now what is fair? It is as simple as: fair is what determines both parties to freely enter in a given transaction.

Do you think fair is different and you should pay more than the driver is willing to work for? Then you are always free to leave a large tip and stay happy! Do the same with your cashier at your local supermarket and everywhere else you feel the employee deserves more than he/she accepted to work for.

Your are free to do this and please, let the others free to decide such things by themselves.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2016, 12:07 by Zero Talent »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #16 on: August 31, 2016, 14:00 »
+2
God forbid you should pay fair rates, so the drivers who are keeping those cars clean and pretending to enjoy making less than minimum wage while working a second job on the weekends so you'll come back again, can be paid fairly.

And that's the catch. What should determine what they get paid?

Right now it's supply and demand. Same as microstock. If there are a ton of drivers who are unprofitable or underpaid because they're only looking at what they're paid and not what profit they're left with after operating costs then that's going to lean toward a generally unprofitable model for many, of not most, drivers. If most drivers quit because the pay or profit sucked, Uber would need to pay more to get drivers. Uber profits no matter what. It's like taking a part time job in a major city where you work 20 hours a week at $8 per hour. After taxes you end up with $110 dollars. Weekly gas, tolls, and parking cost $150. You're literally losing money working. I've been surprised at how many people only look at the $110 and not anything else before accepting the job.

If you get into a forced model, like a union, then pay may go up but you introduce new problems. I worked in a couple unions and one downside in my experience is it protected useless people who in most regular jobs would be fired. And the decent people had to pick up their slack and work harder. Not sure what downsides there would be for Uber drivers with this model but I'm sure there would be some.

Until something happens to regulate pay, drivers need to understand how to run a profitable business. That goes for microstockers too. If everyone moved away from the "at least it's something" mentality, supply would drop and micro sites would have no choice but to offer incentives such as better royalties and/or higher prices to encourage people to submit.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2016, 14:03 by PaulieWalnuts »


Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #17 on: August 31, 2016, 15:59 »
+2

Nobody is forcing Uber drivers to join the fleet.
Nobody is forcing photographers to join microstock.

Moreover, once they have joined, then can easily quit as well, if they don't like it. This is valid for both Uber drivers and microstock photographers. But it doesn't happen.
Why?
Because the deal is mutually acceptable. Win-win. Both parties have something to gain from it.

Except that it's not. The owners of Uber are cleaning up, while the "independent contractors" are making less than minimum wage, which is why...

Quote
They were ... happy to work on a second job during their weekends.

I'll bet you dollars to donuts they would be MUCH happier making a decent wage with Uber so they could relax on the weekends, instead of having to work a second job because Uber is using a workaround to avoid paying the legal minimum wage and benefits.

Quote
Uber is great example proving that competition, relatively free from regulatory burdens, will lead to cheaper, better services, higher productivity and wealth.

How will the drivers accumulate wealth making less than minimum wage?

Quote
All these blocking efforts are made at the expense of regular consumers, forced to dig deep in their pockets and pay above market prices for those privileged by laws specially made for them.

God forbid you should pay fair rates, so the drivers who are keeping those cars clean and pretending to enjoy making less than minimum wage while working a second job on the weekends so you'll come back again, can be paid fairly.

You missed the whole point: NOBODY forced these Uber drivers to do what they do. NOBODY is forcing you to do microstock, as far as I understand.  They choose freely to do it. We choose freely to do it! As long as they (and we) continue to do it, it means it is advantageous for them (and us). As simple as that!

They get 75% form the ride. Will more be better? Sure! Everybody wants more!

To continue the parallel, we can only dream to get 75% of our sales from microstock. Yet, both you and me are still moving forward with something between the pitiful 16-17% from iStock and 50% from Alamy.
Despite these abysmal percentages, I am doing twice my state's minimum wage, from microstock. Since this is not my profession I can only be happy with the additional income! I will still be happy even when this additional income will drop below the minimum wage.
I bet with you that full time Uber drivers make more than minimum wage! But even if they only work during their free time, the additional income is a bonus they never had, in the first place!

Would I be happier with more? Sure! Will they be happier with more? Probably!

Now what is fair? It is as simple as: fair is what determines both parties to freely enter in a given transaction.

Do you think fair is different and you should pay more than the driver is willing to work for? Then you are always free to leave a large tip and stay happy! Do the same with your cashier at your local supermarket and everywhere else you feel the employee deserves more than he/she accepted to work for.

Your are free to do this and please, let the others free to decide such things by themselves.

Why on earth would you work in microstock if you made less than minimum wage? Then you might as well get a job at McDonald's.

Nobody's forcing these drivers to work for ber, but not everyone has the same education or opportunity for a betterr job. And from the article it sounds like Uber is pretty misleading in telling people how much they'll make per hour, when in reality, as they find out later, they're making much less.

There's an unfortunate trend in recent years of corporations hiring freelancers to avoid paying decent wages, avoid offering a decent number of hours, and avoid providing legally required benefits. in my industry, freelance pay stagnated or dropped in the past ten years, and women are gradually forced out of the corporate structure and into freelancing. (However, in comparison to the rest of the country we are still extremely well paid.) Still, it's unfair that huge ad agencies are raking in more and more profit by avoiding paying wages that keep up with inflation and relieving themselves of the expense of providing benefits.

« Reply #18 on: August 31, 2016, 16:44 »
+1

Nobody is forcing Uber drivers to join the fleet.
Nobody is forcing photographers to join microstock.

Moreover, once they have joined, then can easily quit as well, if they don't like it. This is valid for both Uber drivers and microstock photographers. But it doesn't happen.
Why?
Because the deal is mutually acceptable. Win-win. Both parties have something to gain from it.

Except that it's not. The owners of Uber are cleaning up, while the "independent contractors" are making less than minimum wage, which is why...

Quote
They were ... happy to work on a second job during their weekends.

I'll bet you dollars to donuts they would be MUCH happier making a decent wage with Uber so they could relax on the weekends, instead of having to work a second job because Uber is using a workaround to avoid paying the legal minimum wage and benefits.

Quote
Uber is great example proving that competition, relatively free from regulatory burdens, will lead to cheaper, better services, higher productivity and wealth.

How will the drivers accumulate wealth making less than minimum wage?

Quote
All these blocking efforts are made at the expense of regular consumers, forced to dig deep in their pockets and pay above market prices for those privileged by laws specially made for them.

God forbid you should pay fair rates, so the drivers who are keeping those cars clean and pretending to enjoy making less than minimum wage while working a second job on the weekends so you'll come back again, can be paid fairly.

You missed the whole point: NOBODY forced these Uber drivers to do what they do. NOBODY is forcing you to do microstock, as far as I understand.  They choose freely to do it. We choose freely to do it! As long as they (and we) continue to do it, it means it is advantageous for them (and us). As simple as that!

They get 75% form the ride. Will more be better? Sure! Everybody wants more!

To continue the parallel, we can only dream to get 75% of our sales from microstock. Yet, both you and me are still moving forward with something between the pitiful 16-17% from iStock and 50% from Alamy.
Despite these abysmal percentages, I am doing twice my state's minimum wage, from microstock. Since this is not my profession I can only be happy with the additional income! I will still be happy even when this additional income will drop below the minimum wage.
I bet with you that full time Uber drivers make more than minimum wage! But even if they only work during their free time, the additional income is a bonus they never had, in the first place!

Would I be happier with more? Sure! Will they be happier with more? Probably!

Now what is fair? It is as simple as: fair is what determines both parties to freely enter in a given transaction.

Do you think fair is different and you should pay more than the driver is willing to work for? Then you are always free to leave a large tip and stay happy! Do the same with your cashier at your local supermarket and everywhere else you feel the employee deserves more than he/she accepted to work for.

Your are free to do this and please, let the others free to decide such things by themselves.

Why on earth would you work in microstock if you made less than minimum wage? Then you might as well get a job at McDonald's.

Nobody's forcing these drivers to work for ber, but not everyone has the same education or opportunity for a betterr job. And from the article it sounds like Uber is pretty misleading in telling people how much they'll make per hour, when in reality, as they find out later, they're making much less.

There's an unfortunate trend in recent years of corporations hiring freelancers to avoid paying decent wages, avoid offering a decent number of hours, and avoid providing legally required benefits. in my industry, freelance pay stagnated or dropped in the past ten years, and women are gradually forced out of the corporate structure and into freelancing. (However, in comparison to the rest of the country we are still extremely well paid.) Still, it's unfair that huge ad agencies are raking in more and more profit by avoiding paying wages that keep up with inflation and relieving themselves of the expense of providing benefits.

I'm not a photographer. Microstock is only keeping me busy during (some) weekends and vacations.
So, from this point of view, as long as I'm making a profit, the extra income is welcome, even if below the minimum wage. Besides, I like making photos and I can't say the same about working at McDonalds (or driving for Uber, for that matter)

Even if you speak against corporations, you probably know that corporations are not always "raking more profits". Uber, for example, has 1.5 Billion losses for  1H2016. Billions with B!
Why are you not worried that a major employer might go bust, thus depriving all these drivers from the extra cash they are enjoying now?

I repeat, if the Uber is deceiving the drivers, or if the drivers didn't do their maths right when they signed-up, they can always quit and go back where they were before Uber offered them the chance to make an extra buck.

At the end of the day, what are you proposing: to force Uber to guarantee an income for drivers, instead of giving them 75% of the sale?

Let's extend the analogy: do you want microstock agencies to be forced to guarantee an income for all their contributors?

If that's what you want, I will only qualify to "work" for SS, the other agencies will have to "fire" me.
I will end-up losing half of my microstock income, because, based on my current sales, no other agency will be able to guarantee me the minimum wage, while still profit from my "work".

A classic case of noble intentions (better pay for people) ending up with unintended consequences: less pay or no pay, for the people you initially wanted to help.





« Reply #19 on: September 01, 2016, 01:39 »
+1
"I'm not a photographer. Microstock is only keeping me busy during (some) weekends and vacations.
So, from this point of view, as long as I'm making a profit, the extra income is welcome, even if below the minimum wage. Besides, I like making photos and I can't say the same about working at McDonalds". True for many. You can do exactly how much or little you want and unless you shoot models you don't have to interact with those pesky humans or take orders, metaphorically or literally from anyone. Thats why people do it for "peanuts"

gyllens

« Reply #20 on: September 01, 2016, 04:02 »
+1
And this is the thing with micro-stock this is what makes all agencies work on the assumption that some lost some gained. If fifty contributors leave today they are easily replaced by another hundred tomorrow. This is why they can do whatever they want with us and all we can do is either put up with it or bail out at a loss. On this score micro-stock must be a heavenly paradise for an entrepreneur.

« Reply #21 on: September 01, 2016, 04:48 »
+1
And this is the thing with micro-stock this is what makes all agencies work on the assumption that some lost some gained. If fifty contributors leave today they are easily replaced by another hundred tomorrow. This is why they can do whatever they want with us and all we can do is either put up with it or bail out at a loss. On this score micro-stock must be a heavenly paradise for an entrepreneur.
Maybe it was but I doubt more than a very few sites make much money.....when was the last new site to make any impact?

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #22 on: September 01, 2016, 05:15 »
0
And this is the thing with micro-stock this is what makes all agencies work on the assumption that some lost some gained. If fifty contributors leave today they are easily replaced by another hundred tomorrow. This is why they can do whatever they want with us and all we can do is either put up with it or bail out at a loss. On this score micro-stock must be a heavenly paradise for an entrepreneur.
Maybe it was but I doubt more than a very few sites make much money.....when was the last new site to make any impact?

Creavorite?  ;D

« Reply #23 on: September 07, 2016, 20:13 »
0
And this is the thing with micro-stock this is what makes all agencies work on the assumption that some lost some gained. If fifty contributors leave today they are easily replaced by another hundred tomorrow. This is why they can do whatever they want with us and all we can do is either put up with it or bail out at a loss. On this score micro-stock must be a heavenly paradise for an entrepreneur.

I agree except if 50 don't leave we are still getting replaced by 100 new people every week. How do the new people upload 18,000 new a year when we are hard pressed to add 1000?

I'm going with Zero. Nobody is forcing us to do Micro and nobody is forcing Uber drivers to work for a below minimum wage. Do micrstockers make minimum wage for the average person. Not the few percent that make a good wage, of all the people doing this, the returns are paltry, along with the percentage share of sales being being slave labor.

Voluntary slave labor which makes it like what? Anyone know a Microstock pimp who gets referral fees for recruiting us?  ::)

PureArt

  • UK
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2016, 07:36 »
+1
Uber loses right to classify UK drivers as self-employed: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/28/uber-uk-tribunal-self-employed-status

Quote
Uber drivers are not self-employed and should be paid the national living wage, a UK employment court has ruled in a landmark case which could affect tens of thousands of workers in the gig economy.

The ride-hailing app could now be open to claims from all of its 40,000 drivers in the UK, who are currently not entitled to holiday pay, pensions or other workers rights. Uber immediately said it would appeal against the ruling.

Employment experts said other firms with large self-employed workforces could now face scrutiny of their working practices and the UKs biggest union, Unite, announced it was setting up a new unit to pursue cases of bogus self-employment.

Now, keeping in mind this precedent, what do you think? Is it possible to force Microstock Agencies to consider contributors as employees (using a court, trade union)? And it is good (or bad) for us (contributors) to be considered as employees?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
72 Replies
50306 Views
Last post July 08, 2011, 15:22
by cathyslife
36 Replies
27162 Views
Last post January 10, 2013, 06:03
by Anyka
6 Replies
4647 Views
Last post September 10, 2014, 04:45
by 3Stock
16 Replies
6135 Views
Last post September 28, 2016, 09:22
by CJH Photography
53 Replies
10268 Views
Last post February 22, 2021, 11:10
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors