rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Working and dying in the sharing economy

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

Photo: flickr/Wayne S. Grazio

Like this article? rabble is reader-supported journalism. Chip in to keep stories like these coming.

The National Day of Mourning reminds us that for many, workplaces remain dangerous locations. Each year, Canada's national unions take a moment to remember the lives stolen by unsafe workplaces.

Labour codes across Canada have been written to try and limit the number of workplace accidents. Regulations are meant to enforce labour code laws and fine managers or bosses who willfully or through neglect put their employees into harm's way.

These protections are the result of years of activism from unions and are one of the ways that unions have helped protect non-unionized workers. You have the right to refuse unsafe work, for example, regardless of whether or not you're unionized.

There's no question that these protections have saved lives, but accidents still happen. It's why organizations like the Ontario Federation of Labour have continued to focus on workplace deaths as a core part of their campaigns work.

And, there are legislative gains still being made. This past December, the NDP government in Alberta introduced new health and safety legislation to finally allow the Ministry of Labour into accident sites on farms to investigate.

At the heart of these laws is the logic that the state has a responsibility to manage risk, especially when the tendency of capitalism is to download risk onto the cheapest unit, often a disposable worker. Thanks to labour code regulations, the worst elements of capitalism have been massaged or managed, keeping millions of workers alive, safer and with recourse in the case of an accident or exploitation.

It's the collective ownership of risk that makes any of this possible: there are consequences when a boss skirts legislative responsibilities or puts someone into harm's way. The risk shouldn't be borne by an individual employee alone.

Collectively, we have a baseline from which to demand more.

Right-wing forces have always sought to undermine these protections. Regulations get in the way of profits, ensuring worker safety is expensive and, for a shareholder group that only cares about making stupid amounts of money, the death of an individual worker, while lamentable, doesn't really impact the robotic and heartless capital class.

Drawing these lines in the sands is easy: people vs. profit, safety vs. production and collective risk vs. individual tragedy. Most people line up on the Left of the equation.

So it's perhaps surprising that the hype around the "sharing economy" has so muddied these lines, despite where this capitalist wolf in hippy sheep clothing so clearly lies. On the Day of Mourning, it's worth asking: who pays when someone dies working in the sharing economy?

Uber is perhaps sharing economy's most successful and controversial endeavor. By operating in a market that's highly regulated, and thumbing their noses to those regulations, they've effectively demonstrated that they're uninterested in dealing with thorny issues like insurance, registration and other workplace health and safety matters.

Uber-related incidents causing death or injury happen. Yesterday, an Uber driver narrowly survived a bullet, shot at the passenger he was driving. Sexual assault has been common (hereherehere and here, for example). Aside from public statements made by Uber PR representatives, there are no workplace-related regulations that can be used to help ensure the safety of drivers or their clients.

Uber has threatened to leave the City of Toronto if the city votes to regulate the service, and will not operate in Calgary because of the city's proposed regulations. Among the regulations that many Toronto councilors have called for have been higher wages, standardized insurance rates and safety training.

If a taxi driver is involved in an incident, the municipal or provincial authorities have the responsibility to step in. These processes need to be improved, but they're certainly better than nothing.

The same risk exists for other elements of the sharing economy. Just imagine food-borne illness and related health and safety risks that are likely as the food-based sharing economy grows.

For a generation of millennials for whom neoliberalism has annihilated their communities, new business models could be a way to tell the system to go to hell. Dine at Chez Lisgar, for example, and you'll pay your hosts in wine. But while the sharing economy promises this kind of outcome, the reality is quite different.

These industries exploit the fact that people want more, or better, from their economy. That the benefits touted by Uber (freedom! flexibility!) are actually tied into the broader systemic challenges inherent in precarious work. After all, if you can make a good living in a regulated industry, and be safe, why would you choose operate in a hitchhike-for-fee service?

Exploiting workers for profit can happen in any industry and the worse the exploitation, the greater the likelihood for serious injury or death. Advocates of the sharing economy might conveniently forget about the need for health and safety legislation and regulation, but we, the subjects and clients of this new economic order, cannot.

The National Day of Mourning is a day to remember the dead, especially from the past year. But it's also a time to imagine our future: to call out emerging exploitative practices that, if not stopped, will result in injury and death. Rather than waiting for the next victim, we must call for improvements to these industries now.


Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.