The gig economy good or bad? Either way, it’s a life changer…


Not fitting in is quite possibly your greatest strength...

By Neil Patrick

Actually it’s a case of angels and demons…

First the demons:

What do you think of when someone says ‘gig economy’? Perhaps it's Uber drivers. Or zero hours contracts. Or people selling their services on Fiverr.

It’s true that these are all aspects of the gig economy. But they are not THE gig economy. I don’t even like the term. I much prefer the expression coined by a friend of mine, Laura Degiovanni at TiiQu. She describes something she elegantly terms, ‘the fluid workforce’.

The fluid workforce describes the aspiration of businesses and skilled workers alike to shift from permanent employment in jobs, to a flexible pool of people which adapts and evolves more quickly to better fit the ever changing requirements of organisations.

This is a natural and logical reaction to a world where change is forever accelerating. Contracts are specific and time bound. And pay is often higher than it would be for a permanent position, because many or all of the overheads of a traditionally contracted full time employee are absent.

At least that’s the theory. The reality for most gig economy workers however is that the unscrupulous have been faster to adopt this new idea than larger and more established organisations. The latter are rarely at the forefront of change because they are more complicated organisations and want more checks and balances. So they are moving, just not very fast.


The myth of tech and a better society


Here’s the rub - the mainstream Uber-teched gig economy is something which does very little to enable most people to prosper. It’s currently more like the bottom rung of the labour market. One where long hours, harsh terms of employment and tedious jobs are the norm. And if you work at Uber, according to whistle blowers, you can add gender inequality, sexual harassment and bullying to that list.

I have never met anyone who said to me, “I love being in the gig economy because I am so well paid”. Much more likely is that the positives they will regurgitate are based around the PR about flexibility and freedom. That’s fine if your earnings are not that important to you. But last time I checked, most people regard pay as a pretty important thing.


NOT my idea of career fulfillment Photo credit: Hipsta.space

The Ubers, Fiverrs, AirBnBs like to describe themselves as disruptors. Radical rethinkers who are applying technology to build a better world for everyone. I don’t think of them in that way at all. I see them as micro-chipped buccaneers who are busy making a killing on the backs of low pay and sometimes even no pay. And thanks to their global internet-based business models, also able to dodge the usual obligations around everything from fair pay and conditions, to transparency and tax.

They don’t get investors buying in because of their radical and visionary improvement of the world. Those days disappeared after the 2000 dotcom bubble burst. Investors buy in because they see growth and profit potential; and if labour costs are low, the profit potential is high for whoever can secure sector dominance.

Low pay is not the only exploitative characteristic involved

Why pay little when you can get work done for free? Every time you post a review on Trip Advisor  about that restaurant or bar you just visited, you are doing their work for them. You might think it doesn’t take much time and you want to tell others so they know about your good or bad experience. But multiply this by a few thousand or million and suddenly, this amounts to a pile of free content acquired for absolutely nothing. Day after day after day...


Cheap and convenient means someone else suffers. Photo credit: LavaBaron

It echoes the old wave of self-service tech at the supermarket, petrol pumps, bank cash machines. These are all ways businesses have found to cut the cost of their services by getting us do their work for them – and it’s easy enough to persuade us to embrace the change when it delivers greater convenience for us.

So the gig economy is fast becoming in many people’s minds a place where career dreams are at best put aside, or at worst permanently laid to rest. But it doesn’t have to be like this…

Now for the angels

I don’t want to come over entirely negatively about this. There are some little niches of joy amidst all this low pay and mind numbing labour. I was recently working on a client assignment for a musical equipment manufacturer. Drums to be specific.

They wanted to upgrade their digital media and marketing strategies. I started looking at YouTube videos posted by drummers and drum manufacturers and compiling data about the views and subscribers. What emerged was that just like every product sector from cosmetics to fashion, cars to gardening, the biggest brands were being completely outgunned online by what I call the ‘boys (and girls) in bedrooms’.

In fact only three corporations rank amongst the biggest 500 YouTube Channels* Despite the multi-million budgets and expensive marketing consultants and agencies, the biggest brand in the drumming sector had less than 10% of the YouTube subscribers that the most successful YouTube drummers had. This is a pattern which we see in just about every sector and every market.

The social media stars are not brands, they are people like you and I

This is a very different gig economy. One where people earn handsomely for doing something they love. And I am part of this as are many other people I know. Most however would never describe themselves as working in the gig economy. But that doesn't mean we are not.

A friend of mine has built a successful and very well paid career as an after dinner speaker and stand up comedian. He's found his niche and has a fully booked diary every week of takers all happy to pay him several thousand pounds for him to do a turn at their dinner or event.

Another friend of mine is an accomplished voice over artist. Their client list is global and includes some of the best known brands in the world. The work is highly paid and is so much in demand that this person is seriously thinking about quitting their 'proper' job so they can do this full time.

Journey found their frontman on YouTube
 Photo credit: Bob Larson/Contra Costa Times


In a more high profile example, the platinum selling band that is Journey found the replacement for their departed singer Steve Perry on YouTube. Perry’s replacement was a man called Arnel Pineda, an unknown singer from the Philippines, who had been posting his covers of Journey songs on YouTube.

These are all tales from within what we could call the gig economy. These gigs are potentially life changing for the better. Others are a return to Victorian workhouses.

In my next post about this, I’ll venture some thoughts about how we can fly with the angels rather than be devoured by the demons...


*Disney, Time Warner and Sony

Carillion reveals the real threat to jobs - debt


By Neil Patrick


The Yas Viceroy Abu Dhabi Hotel built by Carillion. Photo credit:Rob Alter


When I started work on my book with Marcia LaReau, Careermageddon, we did not have an agenda. Our view was that the evidence will take us where it will.

But after three years research, even I was surprised where we ended up as we sought to discover the real destroyers of jobs.

Careermageddon is a politically neutral book. The conventional ‘wisdom’ about jobs from the left is that government must borrow and spend to create jobs. Amongst the right it is that the free market is more efficient, therefore tax cuts and business friendly policies are the best framework.

The trouble with the free market is that if government uses private contractors, it does not absolve itself of risk, because private companies act primarily in the interests of shareholders and investors. And this can lead to some pretty nasty outcomes for employees and customers.

This week we have seen the unravelling of Carillion, one of the biggest construction firms in the UK. It holds numerous government construction contracts including the UK's high speed rail network expansion, HS2. I flagged this three years ago here as an example of government spending folly.

Carillion is massively in debt. The debt burden is so great that the future of the firm and around 20,000 UK jobs and a further 23,000 overseas jobs hang in the balance. It has a £900m debt pile and £600m shortfall on its pension plan.

It is just the latest in a long and sorry catalogue of failed businesses which are massively over borrowed to the point that even the smallest shortfalls in revenues compound over time to become catastrophic.

The biggest threat to jobs which we identified in Careermageddon is not technology. It’s not migrant workers. It’s not globalisation.

It’s debt. Personal debt, corporate debt, and government debt.

Whatever happens to Carillion, the debt spiral will be even more compounded – it won’t be written off, it will just move and spread elsewhere.

Which leads me to three simple conclusions. Government needs to take greater oversight of the debt vulnerability of firms it contracts with. Business needs to borrow less and invest more not in executive bonuses and shareholder dividends, but in long term assets and debt reduction. And people need to reduce their personal debt so they have greater financial resilience when disaster strikes.

It might not be fun, but if you want to make a worthwhile new year’s resolution, reducing debt is a much more worthwhile one than most that I have heard.


Why can’t the BBC tell us what’s really happening?


By Neil Patrick
The Bank of England:
 Remembered where the UP button was yesterday


In my opinion, yesterday was the best news day in the UK since I started this blog. Yet anyone watching or reading the UK mainstream news could be forgiven for assuming quite the opposite.

I'm referring to the news that the Bank of England is raising interest rates for the first time in over 10 years.

The simple and obvious impact of this is that if you are a saver, this is minor good news. If you are a borrower, it’s not. Yet reality is seldom this binary and most people both save and borrow albeit in varying proportions.

So the BBC TV News thought it would be appropriate to ask two types of people what they thought. One who was struggling with a low income, a mortgage and the costs of a young family. The other a retired bloke who relied on his savings income. Naturally enough, they gave totally predictable answers. The saver that it would make little difference to his income and the borrower that any extra costs would be hard for them to bear.

I guess this is the result of the BBC striving to be inclusive; less London centric and eliteist. But it turned much better news than any sports victory, royal wedding or Oscar win, into the overall message that whether you’re a borrower or a saver, there's little to celebrate.

The Guardian’s headline followed a similar vein – More costly mortgages in wake of rates rise’. Buried in this piece was the fact that this amounts to a £22 a month increase on average for homeowners with mortgages. It didn’t mention that those on the lowest incomes will have smaller mortgages and so their increase will typically be much less.

I’m not saying that this isn’t tough for those on the lowest incomes. But this news is a minor revelation. It represents a tentative first step back towards normality from which all will ultimately benefit. This is the real story, but it’s just not reported that way.

The increase was just 25 basis points (0.25%), taking the base rate from its all-time low of 0.25% to 0.5%. This isn’t a hike, it’s a tiny increase. I am old enough to remember when base rates reached 17% and a 1.00% move in either direction barely merited a mention. Yet the BBC described this news as ‘interest rates will be doubled’. Technically correct, but also completely misleading to anyone who doesn’t watch these things closely.

Mark Carney, the Canadian Governor of the Bank of England has proven to be a shrewd judge of when to intervene with rate changes. With inflation at around 3%, high levels of employment (despite poor wage growth) and growing consumer debt, a rate increase has been on the cards for months now.

As central bankers repeat ad nauseum, base rates are a blunt instrument, but they are also an immediate way to cool things down, especially inflation. Carney described it as ‘easing off the gas a little’. In other words, moving further away from the quantitative easing panic button which was pressed repeatedly in 2008 to retain liquidity in the wake of the collapse.

It is also an experiment to see how things react. The FTSE 100 surged:


The pound fell a couple of cents against the US dollar. This is not a catastrophe – it’s a fairly normal adjustment. And it’s part of why a free-floating domestic currency is so helpful in keeping an economy under control. The Greeks would chop off a finger I reckon to have that option.

I predict further small rises leading up to the Article 50 deadline on 29 March 2019, unless there is some drastic reaction which persuades against this path. Carney wants to ensure that whatever form Brexit finally assumes, when it happens, he has the scope to move rates accordingly to keep the UK ship stable.

Forget what the Westminster monkeys on both sides are saying about Brexit. The Bank of England is doing a fine job of preparing us for any scenario. And bear in mind that the BBC and the mainstream press have long forgotten how to tell us the things we really need to know.