“Redefining ‘Employee’ In the Gig Economy: Shielding Workers From the Uber Model,” is an article by Ben Steinberger (2018) that explores the type of relationship between firms and independent contractors. Unlike permanent employees, independent contractors are exposed to a wide range of problems that accrue because of the nature of their job. For instance, independent contractors are not exposed to any legal entitlements yet Uber relies heavily on them compared to their employees. From this realization, terminating the relationship with the independent contractors has had a significant impact on the firm’s public image and its identity in the taxi-hailing business. A subsequent study by Mattia Martini, Dario Cavenago, and Laura Mariani (2018) highlights the different aspects that play a critical role when establishing relationships with employees. Given that independent contractors generate output that equips Uber with a competitive edge in the market, the lagging outcome indicators undermine its relationship with different stakeholders.
According to Steinberger (2018), Uber undermines the legal doctrines that dictate the nature of relationships with its employees. Importantly, legal statutes stipulate various approaches that firms can use to approach different scenarios in the competitive business environment. Corporations are expected to create an enabling environment where they can support independent contractors and other stakeholders who contribute towards the realization of desired outcomes in the contemporary market. Since the gig economy has largely shaped the way technological firms do business, there is a need to focus on various deliverables that influence the changing needs of individuals in their immediate environment. However, many courts have specified their inability to examine the relationships between employers and their employees because of the informal clauses that govern operations in the work environment.
When terminating independent contractors, firms such as Uber may be unable to adhere to the stipulated legal obligations that are supposed to guide the entire process of termination. Insider information is a critical piece of data that enables investors and other stakeholders to make informed decisions, which have a significant impact on their investment portfolios. When terminating employee contracts, employers encounter individuals who are willing to share sensitive information to competitors among other risky tendencies (Reid, 2018). From this realization, there is a thin line that influences the measures adopted by employers and their ability to create perfect scenarios that yield a win-win situation. Besides, the law has not been amended to address modern issues that influence the thought process of individuals. Although there are certain laws and regulations that limit fraud and abuse in the modern workplace, it is imperative to consider the best approaches that should be used to handle employee misappropriation in the workplace.
In line with the Uber’s case about its relationship with independent contractors, firms are expected to create a favorable environment that fosters meaningful interactions with different stakeholders. For instance, the taxi-hailing firm can revoke the status of independent contractors and improve the work conditions to shape the perspectives of individuals towards the operational performance of the corporation (Kalter, Bollen, & Euwema, 2018). Likewise, aligning the company interests with the changing needs of individuals reduces the probability of the emergence of different legal conflicts and risks during termination. Instead, engaging the affected parties to establish dominance and create viable solutions that yield win-win situations is highly important to the realization of various outcomes in the contemporary business environment.