So the new buzz after flexible working is Slivers of Time the concept as covered by The Guardian reports that sections of society are unable to work because of time constraints.The argument is that some work is better than no work, claimants are allowed to make a certain sum before it affects their benefits. Tesco has announced ‘slivers of time’ as an alternative to eight hour shifts and a way to enable employees to book certain hours of overtime. Okay, so far so good. With previous columns I have called for the recognition of informal work performed by women to be recognised as economic activity and, according to the slivers of time model, it can be.
A look to the website of slivers of time ltd reveals that is a social enterprise company set up explore the notion of ‘markets for all’, in that socially disadvantaged people should be able to access markets and sell their labour at their discretion. In a paper (to download) from the website Whigham Rowan explains and illustrates the example of how the system works.Basically you put yourself on the website, cite hours in which you are able to work and the rate per job. The potential employer then looks over the website and picks out a candidate.The more jobs you do the higher rating you get (think the star rating on seller websites such as Amazon and e-bay).
The idea of slivers of time in a non corporate sense is an idea directly taken from the examination of informal micro-economics performed in low income areas such as council estates (I know I’m from one). I remember a down on his luck painter , painting my portrait for £30 , the girl over the road being paid a fiver for babysitting me, two pairs of tracksuit bottoms being traded for 3 hours of gardening etc…
This informal market is problematic, mainly because people who aren’t on benefits (if the Daily Fail be believed) and are comfortably well off believe that informal earning is lucrative, however, for the babysitter it is not, for the person who does someone’s ironing it is not. The informal market is only lucrative for individuals such as drug dealers and money lenders.The informal market also has the same problem as the legitimate labour market- the markets flood and saturation of labour occurs, thus lack of employment , formal or informal.
Ok then, informal work is only lucrative for individuals who indulge in dealing narcotics and money lending, so this idea for people on benefits to do legitimate jobs without the fear of prosecution for being being a benefit cheat and to improve their later employability chances when the market settles down is no bad thing in theory. However, as I looked to affiliated partners to slivers of time I see that the TUC is cited. I went to the TUC website to search for a paper on their finding (usually very good) but find nothing but a press release, puzzling. More questions come to mind:-
1)If you transfer informal to formal work, where is the safety net such as the one provided for in the formal market sector? Sick pay, Maternity leave etc. As a person offering your labour on this kind of site are you, in the case of being ‘picked’ by a local business for say, three days work, entitled to the rights in place for contracted workers? Join a union you may say, but if you were on a base level of income (such as ‘benefits’) and have a fluctuating income based on your labour being picked by a user on this website, would you really have the money spare to pay subs to a union?
2) The demographic this scheme has been touted to help suffer from lack of self confidence. If someone who is fresh out of university can’t get a job and then advertise themselves on this site , what chance does a long term unemployed or incapacity benefit have? Is there going to be a certain criteria that has to be met by candidates selling labour?If so, is this another example of the ghetto-risation of the poor much like out of town council estates?
In theory, as with headline stories it sounds too good to be true , for me its no coincidence that the Con-Dems announced that they would be including the happiness index into configuring the nations GDP the same day as the slivers of time is approved by big business.What we can see clearly now is what the government plan to do about the shortfall in jobs in the public sector, some can volunteer to run services and the lucky ones , depending on their rating , may actually get paid for short contracts but without the long term benefits.
