Introduction
“More People Are Being Classified as Gig Workers: That’s Bad for Everyone” is an opinion piece by Terri Gerstein. However, the article published in the New York Times on January 28, 2024, was an opinion piece emphasizing how gig-worker classification has emerged from Uber drivers and Door Dash carry-outs and beyond the restaurant industry. She confronts these booming gig economies’ social and economic implications as she identifies a complete lack of government intervention in protecting workers’ rights. Gerstein’s (2024) fully developed essay is a case where she demonstrates all the factors involved in such change and what the likely effects on employees, the government, and other local employers could be.
The Argument’s Surroundings and Main Claim
Gerstein’s opinion reflects modern casual employment trends and user applications’ endemic influence on hiring in labor sectors, including hospitality, retail, and janitorial industries. The status of several federal laws and two Supreme Court of the United States rulings make an appearance in the situation; other things for consideration are that the current setup brings profits to corporations who seek to evade different financial obligations via misclassifying employees as independent contractors, whereas workers get harmed, government assistance suffers, and remaining trustworthy forms. Gerstein (2024) contends that the incident whereby workers were tagged as gig employees and Denver Labor’s enforcement actions against staffing companies Instawork and Gigpro negatively impact rights at work and have intervention results.
Intended Audience and Rhetorical Appeals
Intended Audience
From this observation, Gerstein is interested in reaching out to a multifaceted reader base, ranging from policymakers dealing with labor issues, regulators of the economy, and the general citizenry to gig employees. Gerstein only leaves business entities due to being directly linked within such a corporate environment. Thus, it follows from the issues and the language used in the topic. The target is to have a human resources network with a comprehensive range that incorporates as many stakeholders directly and indirectly influenced by or contributing to the situation being examined by Gerstein as possible. With his many attempts at relatability and understandability, he calls forth some reflection reactions, both internally by the viewer and externally from others in this vast audience spectrum.
Rhetorical Appeals
In the article, Gerstein uses logos (appealing to logic) to show real-life examples such as Denver Labor Enforcement actions, existing labor laws, and implications for the affected sectors. Pathos emerges when the audience discovers heartfelt feelings for gig workers and businesses competing uniquely as the reader elicits sympathy towards these groups. Furthermore, the author uses ethos (appealing to character), referring to her broad work experience, to strengthen reliability and appeal to readers’ trust.
Ethos, Persona, and Trust
The article has strong intrinsic character or guiding principles from Gerstein’s rich credentials since she is the head of NYU’s Wagner Labor Initiative, which, interestingly, is a high-profile institution focusing on labor issues. Gerstein was also a known figure in the past for enforcing labor laws, which proved to her how devastated she was when she went into this position because, before that, there were some significant positions where she was consolidating her knowledge and expertise. Thus, it makes Gerstein appear as a trustworthy and committed factual person, as it portrays the validity of the information included in this article as being reliable. Consequently, according to her powerful reputation, profound background, and commitment to dentistry, Gerstein manages to draw her readers’ attention and gain their trust.
Appeal to Logic (Logos) and Myths (Mythos)
The main argument considers rational reasoning and facts as its central supporting foundation. However, Gerstein supports her position by providing enough evidence, citing, for instance, the recent amendment of a federal act signed by Biden. In addition, she touches on the court cases against gig-work platforms and how different cities comply with minimum wage laws. Thus, this evidence-based argument pinpoints the objective claim against such wrongdoing towards fearful societal workers. An integral component of Gerstein’s treatise is her conjecture that this is not limited to highlighted cases such as Uber and Lift. Still, it permeates various industries, both in the US and elsewhere. She argues that not only does it touch on every level of the gig employee, but it also bears out across the whole livelihood industry, and this practically knocks off all refuting beliefs categorically held in society (Gerstein, 2024). Indeed, this broadened reach of her argument helps to highlight its core strength.
Supporting Claims and Premises (Logos, Kairos)
Gerstein backs her arguments by providing a detailed account of the evidence gathered from contemporary cases involving platforms in Denver. By investigating deeply how employment organizations controlled staff functions, Gerstein can highlight the power these people had over the responsibilities of workers. Cruelly, these people often work with century-of-age legislation while not receiving the rights and protection afforded by the established laws for employees, as Gerstein rightfully points out in her detailed analysis. The essence of her argument is Kairos, or the instinct that a moment is the right time for action. The problem is showcased as spectacularly salient, resonating with the pressures of contemporary development and necessitating an urgent implementation effort. Therefore, it is a matter that is made crucial further by the current extraordinarily dynamic and changing dynamics of employment and an increased focus on digital platform sites and temporary hiring, with which Gerstein suggests this has been amplified. Gerstein hypothesizes that a reform regulatory framework that acknowledges the impact of these shifts as viable remedies towards the protection of worker rights becomes imperative in the revolutionizing nature of employment. Her complete dominion of incriminatory evidence accrued from recent cases involving Denver Labor substantiates her argument that its hollowness weighs heavily over its opponents; that’s why it is impossible to deny the truthfulness of this statement.
Rhetorical Techniques (Logos, Pathos, and Ethos)
Given the apparent indispensability of rhetorical devices in this context, Gerstein deploys several rhetorical strategies to convince her audience and make a convincing argument. The author uses Logos to support his position adequately; she provides numerous pieces of evidence that are easily verifiable and which serve to clarify her point. Gerstein (92024) avoids generalizations or baseless arguments in her paper but employs well-detailed research and facts to buttress her points. Therefore, it authenticates her statements and makes them even more challenging to dispute. But she uses Pathos with zeal in describing that emotional feeling against the persecutions directed at workers. Through their passion, she instills sympathy and a sense of injustice in her audience, as they feel something is wrong. Thus, it makes her argument more persuasive to the readers by allowing them to share in her outrage as they are drawn closer to a joint denunciation. Finally, it can be noted that Gerstein uses Ethos in the passage by portraying herself as a professional, reliable specialist. The remark on the subject may be elucidated by her deep knowledge and vast practical experience, which allow her to speak as an authority. This positioning favors credibility, and increased trust in her claims can also be established, leading to an increased effectiveness of an argument. Using these strategies, Gerstein makes a solid argument that looks sound from every aspect: cerebral, physiological, and philosophical.
Shared Beliefs and Values (Pathos, Mythos)
In the dialogue and discussion, Gerstein’s (2024) opinion article has directed her effort to emphasize the need for justice for labor rights. Taking the position that laborers should be recognized and accorded due respect whenever their economic and sociological standing is mentioned, she makes a loud statement affirming to pay homage to the laborers as pillars shaping various countries into prosperities. Above all else, Gerstein’s mission connects with the cultivation of human dignity; according to her, no professional can feel devalued, and nothing less than a fundamental right should be considered. Gerstein equally supports the case for just wages for labor, underscoring it as an integral component of justice meant to prevail in the socioeconomic image. According to Gerstein (2024), the laborer has hard work, pays on time, and exerts some skill for a job; they ought to have an adequate yet reverential return for their input. Although her campaigns and efforts are directed against the ruling elite of a given country, in the process through which they unfold, they end up resonating with public opinion and shared social values, touching those who acknowledge that any functioning society needs dignified work, or shall we even say ‘social IT’ for sustainable development?
Attitude, Style, and Tone (Ethos, Pathos)
In his diction, Gerstein used a noticeably authoritative yet sympathetic tone. She is unassuming in the confident articulation of her viewpoint; she communicates her line straightforwardly. She supports her argument in many proof-rich and solid ways, which bring an impressive immediacy to the claims she is making. It has nothing to do with being fashioned; instead, it implies sympathy and advocates for the part of the labor market often missed—those who had to suffer due to misclassification. These workers can indeed receive speech even though they can no longer speak a language or form words from syllables. Through competent narrative tools like these, Gerstein makes the reader, in part, sympathetic toward these individuals and becomes an effective advocate for them. These choices do not just tell; they influence the readers’ emotions and assumptions, which backs up this persuasive, solid appeal.
Conclusion
Importantly, Gerstein does not dive into the mindsets of companies for which there may be reasonable grounds for classifying workers as independent contractors. Negative consequences: since the topic is complex, she mainly brings out those considered harmful, which makes it simple. Examples of potential fallacies in the Instawork and Gigpro scenarios include generalizing companies’ behavior from select cases and concluding that government interference is the only remedial measure. By these, Gerstein’s argument nonetheless comes out as convincing. It is about the spreading scope of the misclassification of gig workers, highlighting an equal standard between work versatility and customary labor protections. This reasoning is quite enriching. As readers, one needs to treat this issue from both the labor and corporate sides of the coin and understand its depths so that more pronounced telescopic solutions come into view.
Reference
Gerstein, T. (2024, January 28). Opinion: More people are being classified as gig workers. That’s bad for everyone. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/opinion/rights-workers-economy-gig.html?bgrp=t&smid=url-share
write