Precarity in the Amsterdam taxi industry

(1)

Precarity in the Amsterdam Taxi Industry

Bachelor Thesis: Economic Geography of Outsourcing

Degree: Future Planet Studies Major: Social Geography Supervisor: Jeroen Merk Second Reader: Martin Bavink

Student: Roeland Koelman - 11042176 Email: roelandkoelman@googlemail.com Date: 18/05/2018

(2)

Roeland Koelman 11042176

Abstract

Amsterdam’s taxi market is experiencing significant changes as a result of deregulation. The free market has allowed Uber, the ‘on-demand’ ride sharing app, to thrive. Uber has been criticized of avoiding local regulation and unfair competition in the many cities where it has been introduced, including Amsterdam. Uber’s aggressive business model has seen it become a giant in the gig economy, while consequently impacting local taxi markets and its own drivers. Not only are taxi drivers directly affected through the rise of Uber in Amsterdam, the the labour securities of Uber drivers are also disputed. Therefore, the research question investigated throughout this paper is: “ _{How is precarity experienced by taxi and Uber drivers} within Amsterdam’s changing taxi industry?”

This bachelor thesis aims to answer this question by analysing three important forms of labour security as defined by Standing (2014): employment security, job security, and income security, the absence of which pinpoint how precarious labour conditions are experienced. Data concerning how precarity is experienced in Amsterdam’s taxi industry was collected through conducting qualitative interviews with Uber and taxi drivers alike. Additionally, academic literature as well as local news articles and documentaries were used to collect extensive relevant information. Building on the experiences of the workers of the local taxi market, the effects of place specific regulations on the labour securities of the Amsterdams taxi and Uber drivers were examined.

This paper reaches the conclusion that precarity is experienced in Amsterdam’s taxi market, mainly in the form of income insecurity and is more strongly experienced among taxi drivers than Uber drivers. Its most compelling manifestation derives from the unique data gathered through individual interviews and how the paper essentially creates a model for future analyses of precarity in economic sectors by examining employment, job and income securities.

(3)

Introduction

In recent years Uber has evolved into a corporate giant within the gig economy through outsourcing its chauffeuring services to anyone with a car and a certified taxi license. In many major cities throughout the world, especially in Amsterdam, Uber has become a key part of the city’s taxi industry. Uber boasts flexibility, freedom and entrepreneurial ethos to its drivers, while customers are offered cheap taxi rides that often fall under the price of normal street taxis. Although the ride sharing company proudly promotes its ethos of ideal working conditions for drivers, the labour conditions for workers active in the gig economy are disputed among social geographic research (Rogers, 2015; Wallsten, 2015; Aloisi, 2015; Malin & Chandler, 2016).

The gig economy, also known as the sharing and platform economy, is a broad term coined to describe the jobs and monetary value created by ‘on-demand’ apps and websites that allow people to meet local demand for their services, tools, homes, or rides in exchange for cash-free payments (De Stefano, 2016). Through technological advances and the increased practicality of apps, the amount of gig companies has been able to grow substantially, including the types of services offered through these platforms. People have gained the ability to monetize on their homes for a weekend through Airbnb, rent out their time to help people with odd jobs, and share their cars with strangers to bring them to their destination with Uber. Over the few years of their existence, these platforms have developed from niche markets to become big players in the now phrased gig economy. Users who sign up to work with the apps do so as independent contractors, who are flexible to determine their own working hours and subsequently a growth in professionalism among such users has enabled people to earn a living solely through ‘on-demand’ apps. .

Additionally, the increased professionalism and global reach of these new industries, consequently form substantial competition for the traditional hotel and taxi industries world wide (Wallsten, 2015). Evidently, wherever Uber is allowed in cities, its aggressive business model has impacted regular taxis. This is because by not legally declaring itself as a regular taxi firm, Uber often surpases local regulation on taxis and is able to determine its own prices and labour agreements. Through flooding taxi markets with cheap services, Uber aims to destroy its competition and own the marketplace (Cannon & Summers, 2014). Furthermore, social geographers have raised concerns about Uber’s business model, arguing that Uber is

(5)

able to offer its highly competitive prices through underpaying its partners and undermining working conditions (Wallsten, 2015; Malin & Chandler, 2016).

The rise of Uber as a dominant competitor within the global taxi industry has caused strikes and uproar among local taxi drivers (Wallsten, 2015). Taxi drivers claim the ride-sharing app competes with unfair prices, as Uber does not face the same quality and fare regulations as established taxi firms (Wallsten, 2015). In a handful of cities, Uber has been successfully resisted from entering local taxi markets; in the Netherlands however, Amsterdam’s once heavily protected taxi industry has recently been characterized by decentralization. The free market has allowed the surge of Uber, resulting in an exponential increase in the number of taxis in the city over the course of the last few years (Parool, 2016).

A decentralised taxi market in Amsterdam has lead to a changing industry, characterised by a surplus of taxis. While a few studies have looked into the labour conditions of Uber in the USA, little literature exists analysing changing labour conditions of taxi and Uber drivers in Amsterdam, with the increasing dominance of ride-sharing app. This thesis paper will therefore aim to shed light upon the labour conditions of both Uber and regular taxi drivers in Amsterdam. Specifically, this will be done through analysing how precarity is experienced by the drivers of Amsterdam’s taxi market, through analysing how drivers experience labour security, while also examining how it is influenced through regulation on a local and national level. In order to do so, primary source data was gathered through qualitative semi-structured interviews with Uber and taxi drivers alike and secondary source academic literature was used extensively, namely Standing’s (2014) article regarding growing precarity .

Uber has been criticized of undermining the working conditions of its independent contractors, in the form of poor labour security in order to offer highly competitive prices (Rogers, 2015). Local taxi industries have likewise felt the effects of this as they are forced to compete with the transnational ride-sharing app. National and local regulation have the opportunity to protect local industries, yet in the dominant neoliberal political and economic climate the free market is often left untouched. This research thesis will dive into how these themes of precarity, regulation and labour conditions are experienced by both Uber and taxi drivers in Amsterdam. In doing so this thesis aims to answer the following research question: How is precarity experienced by taxi and Uber drivers within Amsterdam’s changing taxi industry?

(6)

To help answer the overarching research question the following sub questions were created:

- How is job security experienced by Uber and taxi drivers in Amsterdam? - How is income security experienced by Uber and taxi drivers in Amsterdam? - How is work security experienced by Uber and taxi drivers in Amsterdam?

(7)

Method

This research paper will aim to analyse various forms of precarity experienced by drivers in the taxi industry in Amsterdam by examining three types of labor security. The three types of labor security are: employment security, job security and income. However, it is important to begin by highlighting the distinction between n street taxi drivers and contract taxi drivers. Unlike contract taxis, certified street taxis (also known as TTOs) are allowed to pick up customers from the street, hence the name, as well as at the official pickup points located around the city (FNV, 2017). Contract taxi’s employees on the other hand, that have shifts and receive an hourly wage because contract taxis work with predetermined rides with businesses and festivals, for instance (FNV, 2017). For the purpose of this research paper, only certified street taxi labor conditions will be analysed, as its drivers, like those of Uber, are classified as independent contractors. Therefore, when taxi drivers are mentioned, the reference is therefore made to drivers working with street taxis.

In order to obtain data to explore these concepts, this study acknowledges academic literature, as well as news articles and documentaries that record the new labour conditions of Amsterdam’s taxi industry. Apart from this academic research, primary data was gathered by interviewing street taxi and Uber drivers on their experiences and attitudes towards their labour conditions and securities in a changing industry, the regulations on national and local scale that shape these conditions, and how they cope with these changes. This paper will now explore and evaluate the distinct research methods that will be used throughout this paper.

Literature Research

Secondary data relevant to the taxi industry in Amsterdam was found and used, in order to gain an analytical understanding of the changing taxi industry on a global and local scale. This was done to strengthen as well as weaken certain claims by drivers, while also allowing for arguments from different backgrounds to be heard. Secondary data included existing studies, documentaries about the taxi industry in Amsterdam, and interviews with a local policy maker and a spokesperson for Uber Netherlands. Additionally, news articles were also used in adding perspective to certain themes. However, such articles will be analyzed critically, as news articles are not peer reviewed and may contain strong biases.

(8)

Semi-structured Interviews

In order to capture the experiences of the Uber and taxi drivers central to the main and sub-questions, interviews were conducted to form a substantial part of the data used in the results section. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded with Atlas.ti, in order to organize and analyse the findings of the different interviews. The advantages to the semi-structured interview style, is that pre-prepared useful questions can be asked in a adaptable manner, while also allowing the interviewer to respond to specific answers given by respondents. In addition, by having the same pre-prepared questions for each respondent, it allowed for the experiences to be compared and contrasted.

Taxi drivers were approached and interviewed at the pick-up points at Amsterdam Central Station and Amstel Station. while Uber drivers were contacted through social media and through taking rides with the app. In total 10 interviews were conducted: six with taxi drivers and four with Uber drivers, where each interview ranged from 10 to 90 minutes. Such interviews proved to be especially valuable for the research on hand, due to the experience and in depth knowledge the respondents had to offer. For example, one respondent illustrated the labour conditions for both regular taxis, as well as for Uber, as prior to his experience as an Uber driver, he had worked as a taxi driver for 22 years. The interviews with taxi drivers were useful in gaining in-depth knowledge about the way in which taxi drivers have experienced change in the taxi industry, while also clarifying who they hold accountable for increased precarious labour conditions. In addition, the interviews conducted with Uber drivers clarified how working within the gig economy is experienced by those working in it, in that both negative and positive experiences were shared. Furthermore, the interviews were insightful by shedding light onto the coping strategies of both Uber and taxi drivers, since they shared their adaptations to improve their labour securities. Specifically, when interviewing Uber drivers a point of interest was uncovering how they experience the unique labour standards (rating system, wage, etc.) of working with the app.

Key to collecting reliable data through semi-structured interviews was avoiding undesired techniques such as respondent validation, which happens when the researcher manipulates the questions or the respondent to get a response that is inline with their findings (Bryman, 2012). In order to avoid this, as well as other forms of confirmation, the questions will be formulated in an open and neutral manner to ensure an honest response from the

(9)

drivers (Bryman, 2012). Open questions were asked ranging from themes uncovering how labour conditions and securities were experiences, as well as thoughts about national and local (de)regulation, and coping strategies used by drivers to improve their working conditions. While the challenge of conducting objective interviews was met throughout the interviews, the interviews had some limitations. Unfortunately the goal of 20 interviews in total was not reached, due to a lack of response from previously contacted Uber drivers, who ended up declining phone and skype calls made to conduct interviews. Although the amount of interviews conducted was limited because of this, useful and representative data was still collected, allowing for the analysis of precarity in the Amsterdam taxi industry.

(10)

Concepts and Theories

In order to understand the changing Amsterdam taxi market analytically, as well as contextually defining the problem, this section will discuss and define a few relevant concepts that will be used throughout this thesis. In order to do so, concepts will first be examined in and of themselves, after which they will be linked to existing knowledge about their relation to the case of Uber and the gig economy. Besides for identifying the broader scope and definitions of the concepts, they will also be expanded through examining existing literature relevant to the case of the taxi industry. These main concepts include the gig economy, changing relationships of employment, globalisation and deregulation, and precarity, drivers. In addition to the latter, four forms of labour security will be illustrated that are essential to analysing precarious labour conditions in the taxi market.

Gig Economy

Technological advances have given rise to these digital platforms, offering services ‘on-demand’ to users as soon as they are requested. In this thesis, the gig economy will refer to the growing sector of transnational corporations, that offer ‘on-demand’ services via online platforms, who’s workforce is made up of independent contractors. The gig economy has also been defined as “the collection of markets that match service providers to consumers of on-demand services on a gig basis” (Donovan et al., 2016: 1). This definition highlights the changing production process of ‘on-demand’ services, that has come about with their digitization. These ‘on-demand’ services range from renting out rooms and homes with Airbnb, sharing rides with Uber, to matching local demand for odd-jobs with TaskRabbit (De Stefano, 2016). Through the digitization of services, companies can save production costs by reducing the need for administrative employees, as administrative and logistical tasks are performed by the platforms themselves (De Stefano, 2016).

Advocates of the gig economy give several arguments in favour of labour conditions in the new economy. For instance, it has been said that many flexible jobs have been created in a short time frame, although exact figures are difficult to predict (De Stefano, 2016). In the case of Uber, Hall & Kruger (2017) argue that the platform offers an easy way to earn a side income. In their study, it was shown that 60% of Uber drivers, also had either part-time or full-time jobs. It is therefore argued that platforms in the sharing economy give people an

(11)

opportunity for flexible employment; one where individuals can dictate their own working hours. Central to this is the entrepreneurial ethos of gig companies, stating that their contractors are their own boss (Mailin & Chandler, 2016).

Changing relationships of employment

Likewise to the changing production processes, relationships of production have also changed. Independent contractors in the gig economy are hired and given jobs through online platforms, shifting labour relationships away from traditional employment relationships, to digital ones. Traditional labour relationships consist of social relationships both vertically with employers, and horizontally with colleagues (Castree et al., 2004). How Castree et al. (2004) identify labour relationships may not be relevant anymore however, due to increasing numbers of workers active as independent contractors as well as the digitization in the workplace (Friedman, 2014; Manyika et al., 2016). Digital employment relationships found within the gig economy change employment relationships, as platforms distribute jobs, payment, and administrative tasks, replacing vertical embodied employer relationships with digital employment relationships (Friedman, 2014). This creates an increase in individualization in the workplace, as social contact is brought to a minimum. Moreover, the gig economy increases the separation between job and place, for instance with Uber, certified drivers can login and work wherever they like (as long as it is allowed by the (local) government). This shifts the traditional conceptualization away from the notion of workers being unavoidably place-based, due to the location of their workspace, to the idea that workers themselves can choose where they drive for Uber (Castree et al., 2004).

Furthermore, changing employment relationships have also developed from companies decreasing their legal responsibility and accountability to ensure labour protection and rights, as the workforce of gig companies are classified as independent contractors (Aloisi, 2015). In doing so, companies active in the gig economy have created a new form of outsourcing, where independent contractors can easily sign up to start earning through such online platforms, serving as the workforce and backbone of the industry. By classifying the workforce as independent contractors, gig companies are able to set their own terms for payment, as minimum wage is not required, while also making the hiring and firing process extremely easy. A central question to the gig economy is its justness, since it is argued that in many cases the independent workforce are _{de facto employees for the companies, meaning}

(12)

that they are dependent on them as employers and deserve the rights and pay as they would if they were _{de jure employees (Aloisi, 2015). Regardless of this question, gig companies} continue to hire their workforce as independent contractors, shifting responsibility and accountability away from the companies, and instead to the independent workforce themselves.

Globalisation, (De)regulation and Localisation

Besides for the rise of the gig economy, labour conditions are also affected by other factors on a global and local scale. One of the most prominent factors affecting labor conditions is globalisation, which aims to increase economic growth through decentralizing the role of government (Standing, 2014). As Mudge (2008) notes, the political face of neoliberalism consists of a locked-in political ‘common sense’, that favours the needs of businesses over those of workers and unions. Essentially, Mudge (2008) indicates that neo-liberalism is built on upholding the superiority of individualized, market-based competition.In the neoliberal economic and political atmosphere, platforms of the gig economy have been allowed to flourish beyond their roots of Silicon Valley reaching markets worldwide. Deregulation on some national levels have further promoted the neoliberal agenda, advocating free-markets, privatisation and the restructuring of workplace relations (Standing, 2014). It is argued that by allowing the gig economy into the free market, it will lead to increased market efficiency, and local economic growth, while workers can experience more flexible labour conditions. Neoliberal discourse presumes the desirability of the flexibilization of work, normalizing the way society thinks about changing employment relationships (Cockayne, 2016).

This research paper will look into ways in which the deregulated gig economy effects local industries and its workers, as problems that it causes for workers are often ignored by governments, who promote neoliberal policies. Illustrating that transnational platform companies may not always be beneficial to local economies, companies like Uber have been accused of aggressive tax planning, allowing them to avoid paying large amounts of tax on local profits (Stewart & Stanford, 2017). Moreover, Rogers (2015) argues that by weaving its way past regulations and its innovative software, Uber is contributing to the creative destruction of the regular taxi industry. The increased globalised reach of gig platforms has proved to have significant impacts on local industries, through forcing traditional hotels and

(13)

taxis to compete with the prices of transnational gig corporations (Wallsten, 2015; Stanford, 2017). The taxi industry has been hurt wherever Uber decides and is allowed to offer its ride-sharing services. Due to the stiff competition Uber poses to the taxi market, taxi drivers in New York have been been forced to adapt to this competition through improving the quality of their services or risk losing even more customers (Wallsten, 2015). In some cases in the United States of America, taxi drivers stated that they defected their positions to join Uber to protect their income, as regular taxis were losing business (Moon, 2017). Another point of concern for taxi drivers is that the app has shown to be more time efficient for the drivers, due to the fact that during the time in which they are active, Uber drivers have 30% more rides than the average taxi driver (Cramer & Krueger, 2016).

Interviews conducted with Uber and taxi drivers covered the stances of respondents on current policies relevant to the Amsterdam taxi industry, to examine how local and national regulations are experienced by these drivers.

Precarity

As previously touched upon, neoliberal policies have enabled companies to pursue flexible labour markets, which took the form through wage flexibility, employment flexibility and job flexibility (Standing, 2014). While labour markets have become more dynamic on a global scale, the amount of insecure workers has grown as well, since employment became far less stable and less protected (Standing, 2014). An example of this phenomenon is illustrated in the changing manufacturing industry in the the Netherlands after the 1980 economic crisis. During the crisis, traditionally permanent contracts, were replaced with insecure flexible contracts, that saw men lose 14% of their income, in order to compete with transnational companies who outsourced production to countries with cheap labour costs (Klein Hesselink & Van Huren, 1999: Remerey et al., 2002). Here the concept of precarity comes to light. Precarity is defined as insecure and anxious labour conditions in the neo-liberal age, Standing (2014) labels the class of workers experiencing this as the precariat. When discussing independent contracted labour, Standing (2014) differentiates between ‘independent’ contractors, such as lawyers and accountants who have a secure income, and on the other hand ‘dependent’ contractors, who may be labelled as independent, yet depend heavily on other parties for their task (and therefore income) allocation. When discussing precarity

(14)

among independent contractors, it is therefore stated that “those who are dependent on others for allocating them to tasks over which they have little control, are at greater risk for falling into the precariat” (Standing, 2014: 16). Furthermore Standing (2014) highlights how precarious labour can be identified when it lacks the seven forms of labour security. As some of these securities may be more relevant than others in studying changing labour security in the Amsterdam taxi industry, three of the most relevant forms of labour security are analysed throughout this thesis.

The first form of labor security explored is _{employment security, defined as} “protection against arbitrary dismissal, regulations on hiring and firing, imposition of costs on employers for failing to adhere to rules and so on.” (Standing, 2014: 10). In the case of Uber, the ride sharing app evaluates its drivers based on a one to five star rating system. Drivers are always trying to achieve a five star rating as a drop in their overall rating could lead to serious implications, such as the suspension or even termination of their account (Malin & Chandler, 2016). In addition, ‘surge’ pricing is the increased fare charged by Uber when demand in a particular area goes up substantially. As Uber drivers earn more during this time, they are popular times to work, yet drivers have complained about receiving poor ratings due to customers that are unhappy with the extra fee (Malin & Chandler, 2016). This thesis therefore aims to explore if and how Uber drivers experience the rating system, as well as studying how Uber’s hiring and firing policies are experienced, as related to employment security. Simultaneously, research was conducted with regular taxi drivers to see if employment security has changed with the deregulation of the Amsterdam taxi market.

Secondly, precarity will be analysed through the scope of _{job security. Job security is} the “ability and opportunity to retain a niche in employment, plus barriers to skill dilution, and opportunities for ‘upward’ mobility in terms of status and income.” (Standing, 2014: 10). This is mainly relevant for regular taxi drivers because their traditionally protected labour position in Amsterdam has been compromised through the deregulation of the taxi market. Due to this, taxi drivers have lost their ‘niche’ in employment, as they now compete with drivers in service with the global giant Uber (Wallsten, 2015). Job security will therefore be examined through how it is experienced on a short-term, and long-term scale. The latter of which will also be a point of interest for Uber drivers, as the app is actively investing in self-driving cars, perhaps affecting job security in the long term. How Uber drivers see their future relationship with Uber rises an important analytical discussion.

(15)

Lastly _{income security will be explored in the context of the Amsterdam taxi market,} defined as “assurance of an adequate stable income, protected through, for example minimum wage” (Standing, 2014: 10). Research will be conducted to analyse how income security is experienced by Uber and taxi drivers, through asking drivers if they believe they are able to make an adequate, and importantly, stable income. By being classified as independent contractors, neither Uber or taxi drivers receive a minimum wage or vacation money, as contractors need to work for an income (Barkhuysen, 2016). A point of interest is therefore to see how drivers experience income security, and what factors may affect it. Furthermore, global taxi markets have shown to increasingly favour the cheap fares offered by Uber, leaving traditional taxi drivers with less customers and income (Isaac, 2014). The impact the market competition Uber poses on the income security of taxi drivers, will therefore be central to exploring precarity among taxi drivers in Amsterdam.

Studying how these three forms of labour security are experienced by both Uber and taxi drivers, will help in analysing precarity in the Amsterdam taxi market, and acts as the core of the research conducted. Without income, job, or employment security drivers in the Amsterdam taxi industry are likely to experience precarious labour conditions marked by uncertainty and insecurity.

(16)

Historical background

This section will describe the historical context of the taxi industry. The recent history of the taxi market of Amsterdam has seen 4 phases of deregulation and reregulation as result from changing national policies regarding the sector.

The market during the late 20th century was a heavily regulated one. Taxi Centrale Amsterdam (TCA) alone owned the rights to hand out taxi permits in the city. This allowed for the directors of the TCA to have a monopoly on the permits, limiting the amount of taxis in the city, as well as driving up the cost to purchase a taxi permit. Taxi permits that allowed drivers to work for the TCA were kept in circulation as they were sold from retiring drivers to new drivers for up to 300,000 Gulden, which converts to roughly 136,000 Euros to date (Hoffman, 2015). Due to the high costs of the taxi certificates, there were limited drivers in the capital, meaning they had to stick to a roster as well as having to answer to incoming orders. Driving for the TCA at the time was profitable to both the TCA directors and the drivers, and was considered to be burden free besides for the loans taken out to afford the licence (Hoffman, 2015). The regulated taxi industry of Amsterdam permanently changed however, when the liberalisation of the taxi industry was announced in 2000. By deregulating the taxi industry Minister Jorritsma of Economic Affairs aimed to increase the competition within local taxi industries to ensure customers better prices and higher quality services (Meijer, 2011). The new passenger transport law 2000, also known as the taxilaw, allowed new firms that met the requirements needed to become a taxi company, giving them the right to give out taxi permits (Wet Personenvervoer, 2000). By doing so, the permits that had put taxi drivers working for the TCA in debt, became worthless. This sparked fury, protest and resistance amongst many TCA drivers, and became known as the taxi war (NRC, 2000).

Originally the protests focussed around dissuading the lawmakers, however protests came too late as the law was implemented shortly after word had spread among the taxi drivers. Once the law had become effective from 1st of January in 2000, the taxi war shifted to a battle between the TCA and its first competitor: Taxi Direct, as drivers working for the TCA wanted to protect their niche in employment (Volkskrant, 2000; Hoffman, 2015). The start of Taxi Direct, founded by entrepreneur Remko Weingarten, sparked a conflict between the taxi firms that escalated in the form of intimidation, vandalism, blockades, as well as fights at the pickup points (NRC, 2000; Hoffman, 2015). The rivalry at the pickup points

(17)

would last, as the TCA believed the pickup points should remain exclusively available for TCA taxis (NRC, 2000). The TCA refused offers of compensation, as well as turning down offers to divide access the pickup points in the city, showing that the only offer it would accept is going back to the way things were (Volkskrant, 2000). As the violence of the taxi war continued in Amsterdam, the city police set up a taskforce finding those involved in violence and arresting those found guilty (Hoffman, 2015). The action undertaken by the police and the fact that business Taxi Direct was not running well, lead to the suppression of the conflict. When all was said and done however, Minister Jorritsma’s plan was proven to be unsuccessful. The liberalisation of the taxi market had instead of leading to a decline in fare prices, lead to the increase of fare prices by up to 25% even though there were more taxi drivers active in Amsterdam, many of which were self employed (Parool, 2009; Trouw, 2005).

As the free reign of the growing number of taxi drivers in the capital continued, the quality of taxi services had also been proven to be deteriorating in the city. Taxi drivers, or ¨taxigangsters¨ as Het Parool (2009) called them, would intimidate, overcharge customers, and refuse them if they only needed a short ride (Poort & Weda, 2008). Amsterdam failed to control the behavior of taxi drivers mainly around the pickup points at central station and Leidseplein. The unjustly nature of the taxi market hit its peak when a customer was beaten to death in the summer of 2009 after an argument about the fare price had escalated (Parool. 2009). This lead to a call for more control over the taxi market, as the free unregulated market initiated in 2000 had once more shown its negative side. This call was answered in the form of a new national taxi policy that would take the form of direct involvement and re-regulation of the taxi market by the state as well as the city government (Trouw, 2009; Huizinga, 2009). In her letter to the chairman of House of Representatives, minister Huizinga (2009) of infrastructure called for a new taxi policy that would be accepted and implemented from the year 2011. The policy declared that the state would facilitate the framework for the general rules and quality requirements for taxi drivers such as the obligation of taxi drivers to accept rides, know the popular routes to ensure professionalism, as well as clearly identifying the fare meter (Huizinga, 2009). Importantly, legislative power was given to the municipalities to set their own rules to maintain and control the quality of taxi drivers and organizations. (Huizinga, 2009; Trouw, 2009). In order to regain control over the quality of the taxi market in Amsterdam, new rules were established by the city, reigning in the authorizations of the

(18)

self employed taxi drivers, for instance through disallowing their access to the pickup points in the city (Huizinga, 2009). Pick up points would now only be available to taxis driving for certified taxi organizations, also known as _{Toegelaten Taxi Organisaties (TTO),} _{failure to} adhere by the rules of TTO drivers could lead to temporary or indefinite license suspension (Huizinga, 2009; Trouw, 2009). In this way the municipality gained the ability to hold street taxis accountable for their actions, as drivers who missbehaved or didn’t meet the new quality controls could face serious consequences.

After the taxi policy implemented in 2011, the taxi market was relatively calm and controlled until Uber launched in Amsterdam at the end of 2012 (Parool, 2013). It marks the beginning of a new era in the taxi market in which regional taxi companies in the Netherlands compete with transnational parties who use apps to connect local drivers with their own cars to customers. Uber offered UberLux and UberPop, the latter of which was later declared illegal under Dutch law, as it allowed anyone with a car to drive customers to their destination without requiring the drivers or cars to uphold to the standard taxi rules (Parool, 2015; Mansveld, 2015). Although UberPop saw a wave of resistance from both policy makers as well as taxi drivers, newly appointed minister Mansveld of infrastructure stated that Uber and similar digital taxi platforms have a “positive impact on the market and are not negotiable” (Mansveld, 2015). Moreover, Mansveld called for the parliament to pass a new taxi law to strengthen the opportunities for digital companies to compete in the taxi industry, including the removal of the law that all taxis have a fare meter in the car, as companies like Uber now had the ability to show the fare price on the app (Mansveld, 2015). With Mansveld in control and the new taxi law being passed, the taxi market was liberalised once more, as individuals regained the power to become self-employed taxi drivers (Mansveld, 2015). Furthermore, the new laws allowed for transnational companies like Uber to set up digital platforms in Dutch cities, adding a new wave of competition into the market (Parool, 2016). The result was that the amount of taxi drivers in Amsterdam grew exponentially. In the first half of 2015 Amsterdam counted 72 new taxi drivers, whereas the same period in 2016 counted 382 (Parool, 2016).

It can be said that over the last two decades the taxi industry has experienced many changes as a result of local, national and even transnational drivers. How these factors are experienced by taxi and Uber drivers in Amsterdam will be explored in the following sections.

(19)

Hypothesis

This research paper will argue that forms of precarity are experienced by both taxi as well as Uber drivers in Amsterdam, since Uber drivers experience income insecurity due to low fares, whereas taxis continue to lose job security since they no longer hold a niche in employment. However, this paper is not stating that all Uber drivers will have predominantly negative experiences with working for the app. Yet, there will likely be concerns voiced by Uber drivers, such as a lack of adequate income and employment uncertainty, due to the flexibility of being an independent contractor. As for taxi drivers, this essay expects to find many of them experiencing precarious labour conditions, resulting from decreased income security due to the stiff competition of Uber. Additionally, when studying and coping strategies of taxi drivers in relation to their rivalry with Uber, this paper expects two opposing outcomes: either taxi drivers have adapted to the prominence of Uber by driving for the app themselves or for those taxi drivers who are angry at the stiff competition of Uber, this paper expects forms of resistance through protests via social media and the real world.

(20)

Results

Employment security

Due to the nature of the labour relationship that Uber has with its partners, the hiring and firing process is legally extremely easy for the ride sharing company. Uber labels its partners as independent entrepreneurs, and therefore does not uphold the same collective labour agreement (CAO) as regular taxi drivers (Verweij, 2017). Due to this fact, Uber has its own legal contract with its partners, giving them no legal protection from arbitrary dismissal (Malin & Chamber, 2017;). Drivers can be deactivated or suspended when they break Uber’s code of conduct, consisting of numerous guidelines that need to be followed (Uber, 2017). The main reason why drivers may be deactivated results from low ratings given by customers. On their legal webpage informing partners why they may be deactivated, Uber (2017) states that falling below the specific minimum rating after receiving multiple warnings will lead to a permanent or temporary ban. It is also stressed that each city has its own minimum rating, as each city has its own standard for rating drivers (Uber, 2017). For Amsterdam, interviewed Uber drivers state that the minimum rating lies around 4.5-4.7 out of five stars.

Although most respondents themselves did not experience employment insecurity because of the rating guidelines, one respondent explained that he understood why some drivers may experience stress because of the rating system. He argues that the rating drivers receive is from the opinion of the customer, who each have different criteria for giving a five star rating. He also adds,_{“the bad thing is that you never get feedback … so maybe there is} nothing you can really do about it” (Imtiaz, personal communication, May 03, 2018). It can therefore be argued that the fate of the employment of Uber drivers is in the hands of the subjective ratings of their customers. A part-time Uber and regular taxi driver complains how this subjectivity leads to lower ratings in unavoidable situations, such as slight damage to the car that will take a few days to repair. Stating that he has to keep working, he further complains about the absurdity of the pickiness of customers as to what constitutes as a high star rating, stating _{“even though you’ve had a great drive, because of the damage you will} still receive a bad rating.” He adds to the severe impact that ratings may have for Uber drivers, stating that if a driver gets _{“removed because of it, they can’t earn a living anymore.}

(21)

People are really getting dependent on Uber” (Anonymous, personal communication, May 10, 2018). Not only can drivers be banned because of their rating, their accounts may also be discontinued when they cancel a certain amount of rides. One driver mentions how this was mainly a problem in the early stages of Uber in Amsterdam, as he would receive trips that were cost inefficient. Besides from this statement however, drivers did not express employment insecurity due to this guideline.

While also being classified as independent contractors, taxi drivers are more protected from dismissal, due to the established collective labour contract (CAO) that applies to all TTO taxi drivers (FNV, 2017). Employers may only dismiss drivers under specific circumstances and reason (FNV, 2017). Additionally, through the help of the Federal Dutch Trade Union (FNV), drivers are able to receive compensation for loss of income resulting from being fired on the spot. Furthermore, the FNV has helped with ensuring employment rights are respected in the taxi CAO (Van dijk, 2018). Nonetheless, taxi drivers complained about stricter regulation regarding penalties for breaking municipal rules set up after the call for stricter regulation in the 2009 updated taxi policy. Penalties for minimal rule breaking can leave taxi drivers temporarily suspended, which caused employment insecurity experienced by respondents. One respondent says, _{“if you block traffic you can get your licence} suspended for a month, … the second time you can even get a licence suspension for three months to a year. So in other words, as soon as you are connected to a TTO, you can get your bread robbed from you by the city” (Sjonnie, personal communication, April 4, 2018). Sjonnie’s comment illustrates how strict regulations can lead to temporary employment, and thus a lack of income. Respondents also complained about the city’s tough enforcement on taxis, saying _{“it’s harassment. … you’re working here and then they just come and ruin your} work. Not everyone is here for fun” also adding, _{“it’s unfair...if I can’t work for three weeks,} then I don’t have an income for three weeks, because you work for yourself” (Anonymous, personal communication, May 10, 2018). In this sense, stricter regulation for regular taxis has lead to increased employment and income insecurity experienced by taxi drivers in Amsterdam, as harsh penalties exist for minor offenses.

When comparing employment security experienced by taxi and Uber drivers, a few point can be observed. Both taxi and Uber drivers experience employment insecurity in different ways. Due to Uber avoiding the established taxi CAO, Uber is able to set its own terms of labour with its partners, including the effortless dismissal of its drivers when they

(22)

fail to adhere to Uber’s guidelines. On the other hand, taxi drivers reep the benefits of a universal CAO, yet still face employment insecurity as a result of strict punishments on local legislation. Furthermore, taxi drivers complained how taxi regulations were only enforced on the regular taxis and not on Uber drivers. One driver states, “ _{Uber is unfair competition you} know? Because Uber doesn’t get recognized as a taxi firm, but as a platform. But if you bring people from A to B, then to me you’re still a taxi firm” _{(René, personal communication, April} 4, 2018). It is worrisome that Uber itself can set the rules for labour conditions, away from established agreements and union protection, undermining those of regular taxis in Amsterdam. Precarity is therefore experienced by taxi drivers, resulting from harsh regulations that lead to employment insecurity. At the same time, the lack of regulation on Uber’s labour contracts also reduces the employment security of its partners, although this was not experienced by most respondents.

Job Security

Job security is sustained when workers are able to retain a niche in the market, meaning that... (Standing, 2014). In the short term, Uber drivers experienced job security, mainly due to the app’s strengthening position in the Amsterdam taxi industry because of its user friendliness and increased popularity (Stanford, 2014). The app’s success is expressed by its drivers, who note that Uber’s market position results from a extremely user friendly platform and worldwide accessibility. This is evident from the fact that the _{“use of Uber in London and in} Jakarta is exactly the same. It doesn’t make a difference” (Thomas, personal communication, April 17, 2018). Uber also offers transparency and security for customers that is often hard to come by in the taxi industry, as the app traces and shares the fastest route with customers. Uber profiles each of its drivers and as one of the interviewees noted, _{“the fear with the taxi} service is: what kind of person is driving me? Am I going to have to pay too much? Am I going to make a detour? … with Uber these fears are gone” (Thomas, personal communication, April 17, 2018). Although Uber drivers currently hold a niche in employment, due to the deregulation of the taxi market in Amsterdam over the last few years, Uber drivers may be facing competition from other ride-sharing companies in the near future. As Rogers (2015) highlights, Uber sits at the top ride-sharing industry, yet their position is not stable, since its business model is easy to replicate. Other ride-sharing companies, such

(23)

as Lyft already pose serious competition to Uber in the United States (Rogers, 2015). Evidently, job security may be experienced by Uber drivers in the short term, however the future of Uber is less certain, which thus creates job insecurity.

Capitalism has pushed technological innovation and increased automatisation in many developed countries, creating greater economic value at faster rates (Adriaanse, 2016). This continuing development has seen the demand for unskilled labour significantly decrease in size, leaving many unemployed and insecure (Adriaanse, 2016; Standing, 2014). Thus, the question arises: how _and _{if Uber drivers can be protected from this. Due to drivers being} independent contractors, the answer appears to be simple: they are not protected from unemployment and insecurity. Adriaanse (2016) confirms this by noting that Uber’s contracts with its employees are flexible arrangements, offering little employment security in the long-run. The long-term perspective of Uber therefore may lead to precarious conditions; possibly Uber drivers will be replaced with self driving cars in the future in order to save personnel costs. Uber proudly promotes its investment in the technological innovation of self driving cars and drones, the first of which is already being introduced in the Pittsburgh (Uber, 2016). As put by Maria Ludkin, “Uber drivers contribute to the market position of a company which might not need them anymore later on” (Verweij, 2017). If Uber’s plans are in fact executed, Uber drivers can be considered precariat in the making, lacking employment security (Standing, 2014). Therefore, this shows how neoliberalism’s endowed support for market supperioty and cost efficiency prevails over individual security within the workplace.

This last point is an interesting point for analysis, as a lack upward mobility restricts the job security of Uber drivers, in that they cannot improve their labour conditions (Standing, 2011). Thomas, an Uber driver interviewed for this paper, further elaborates on how driving for Uber full time lacks long-term perspective: _{“if you have projects on the side} it’s super fun, like for me. But, if Uber is your only job, I find it very oppressive. You then begin to realize: Am I really going to do this until I’m 67? I think that in 15 years, maybe even all taxis will be replaced by self-driving cars and other technologies. So you know the perspective is limited; it’s not as if you can grow within the company” (Thomas, personal communication, April 17, 2018). As Thomas mentions, if Uber is the only source of income in your life it can be rather limiting, as upward mobility in terms of status and income is limited. When workers depend on Uber for employment, precarity exists because of long term job uncertainty. When asked about if he experiences job insecurity because of

(24)

self-driving cars in the future, another Uber driver, Imtiaz, noted that _{“if you plan on working} with Uber your entire life then I would be concerned in 20 or 30 years, but if you plan on doing it for five years or so, like me, then it is not a problem” _{(Imtiaz, personal} communication, May 3, 2018). Furthermore, another respondent seemed to confirm Imtiaz’s argument that Uber is a good source of income in the short term, but not in the long term, by stating that “ _{I do not see [Uber driving] as my dream job...I see it as something temporary...I} don’t see myself doing this for 10 years_{” (Pedja, personal communication, April 19, 2018).} The only examples given of potential opportunities for upward mobility described by Uber drivers, were through investing in vehicles allow respondents to work for the more profitable segments of the Uber app, such as UberBlack and UberVan. This would require a hefty investment however, as drivers would have to pass a tramway exemption exam and pay off a luxurious car, which as one driver buying a Tesla states, “is also an investment of 90,000 euro”_{(Imtiaz, personal communication, May 3, 2018).}

Not only do Uber drivers experience job insecurity, taxi drivers also experience such instability, as many expressed concerns for the existence of the regular taxi in Amsterdam. Evidently, the niche in employment that was traditionally experienced by taxi drivers has diminished, as many drivers complain that the free market will cause them to lose their jobs. One taxi driver angrily expressed that _{“if the law continues like this, we do not have a} future…[Amsterdam] used to have 900 taxis…now we have 7.000 taxis,” _{the taxi driver} further noted that in Amsterdam, “we have bikes, illegal taxis and buses...how are we supposed to earn a living?” (Anonymous, personal communication, 10 May, 2018). Overall, the taxi drivers seem to blame both Uber and the government for their decreased job security; one interviewee emphasized that _{“Uber has pushed it so far that they even changed the} Dutch law, so now every Average Joe can get a taxi license, which is slowly ruining the industry”_{(Sjonnie, personal communication, 4 April, 2018). Erol, a long-term taxi driver,} described how part of the reason regular taxi drivers are losing their job security is due to the fact that the TCA did not invest in their future, claiming that _{“they ruined it for the drivers”} (Erol, personal communication, April 14 2018). When explaining why he left the TCA to drive for Uber, Erol states how the TCA has, _{“become a dinosaur, and you know what} happened to the dinosaurs: they all became extinct” (Erol, personal communication, April 14 2018). For Erol increased job security was a significant reason in why he switched to Uber, claiming that Uber with its revolutionary app has replaced the market position of the

(25)

traditional taxi. He adds, _{”you can be against everything, but at some point you have to} realise that modernisation happens, and you have to go with the flow, not against it” (Erol, personal communication, 14 April 2018).

Uber and taxi drivers experienced job security differently, due to the different market positions of both parties. Uber drivers have shown significant stronger short-term job security, due to its thriving position in the Amsterdam taxi industry. However, in the long-term, job security for Uber drivers appears to be less certain. This is mainly due to the fact that Uber’s position at the top of the taxi market is full of uncertainty in the future. Simultaneously, Uber is investing in self driving cars that may replace drivers in the distant future, which further adds to a lack of long-term perspective for drivers, thus fueling job insecurity. Taxi drivers have directly experienced job insecurity, as deregulation means increased competition and decreased amount of customers, which leads to precarity since their position in the market grows in uncertainty. Ultimately, job security is an essential part of labor security and because such job security has rapidly declined in the taxi services due of the rise of Uber, precarity is especially prevalent in this important industry.

Income security

Income security is characterized by an adequate and stable income (Standing, 2014). As previously introduced in the conceptual section of this paper, independent contractors do not benefit from minimum wage. For this reason, taxi and Uber drivers experience less income security than an average wage employee, as they do not have access to an entirely stable income. For instance, taxi drivers have a set income per kilometer, while Uber is able to determine its own tariffs. Although Uber offers an efficient platform where drivers are able to receive a high amount of rides, income per kilometre is exceptionally low, leading to reports about Uber drivers earning less than the minimum wage (Kruyswijk, 2018). On the other hand, taxi drivers benefit from a higher tariffs, yet struggle from a decreasing amount of customers. For this reason, an important analytical comparison must be made between the income security experienced by Uber and taxi drivers.

Income security was experienced differently among the interviewed Uber drivers. While some believed their income with Uber to be adequate, others stated how the tariffs should be increased. Income from Uber depends on the amount of rides a driver completes,

(26)

“it’s entirely up to you how much you drive, and therefore also what your hourly tariff becomes” (Erol, personal communication, April 13, 2018). From the earnings a driver makes during the day, Uber charges a 25% commission, with one respondent claiming that the commission has been increased to 30%. Part-time Uber drivers seemed to experience less income insecurity, as one driver claims to earn more with Uber than he did while working as a hotel manager for 12 years (Pedja, personal communication, April 19, 2018). Another driver mentions how income also depends on what day you drive, arguing that _{“if you drive} Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, you can make €4,000 a month” (Thomas, personal communication, April 17, 2018). Both respondents also had other sources of income, perhaps adding to their overall income security, while full-time drivers experienced less income security, complaining about high costs and insufficient profits. Erol comments, _{“I think the} income could be higher, because now I have an average of 20 rides a day, while at the TCA I only had 11” (Erol, personal communication, April 13, 2018). He mentions how the tarif does not adequately cover the costs he makes with Uber, adding that _{“taking an Uber is} cheaper than taking public transport…I don’t think those tarifs should be so close together” (Erol, personal communication, April 13, 2018). An interviewed taxi driver shares Erol’s concerns about Uber’s tarifs by noting that he stopped working for Uber due to low income; “at the end of the ride Uber is in the plus, and you’re in the minus. You have to buy your own car, pay for your own fuel and insurance…it’s not worth it” (Anonymous, personal communication, May 10, 2018). Moreover, as a result of increased amount of taxi drivers in Amsterdam, taxi insurance has increased exponentially, further adding to the costs of drivers. For example, Imtiaz, an Uber driver, mentions that he _{“previously paid €450 per quarter for} all-risk insurance, and that now he pays €360 per month”_{, nearly three times as much} (Imtiaz, personal communication, May 3, 2018). In order to cover the high costs and relatively low incomes, interviewed full-time Uber drivers declared 40 to 50 hour work weeks. The implications of this is that Uber drivers experience precarity, due to the fact that they do not receive an adequate income to cover steep costs.

Not only was inadequate income experienced by Uber drivers, drivers also complained about a decrease in their income stability, for example, Imtiaz highlighted that “in three hours you can make 30 euros, or 100 euros...sometimes you go home with a loss” (Imtiaz, personal communication, 4 May 2018). This is predominantly due to to increased waiting times for new rides, resulting from a spike in the number of Uber drivers active in

(27)

Amsterdam. A factor influencing this spike is the separation between job and place, as an Uber driver from another part of The Netherlands can chose to work in Amsterdam to benefit from its large user base. This is confirmed by an interviewee, who comments that _{“you have} to wait much longer, and Ubers income guarantee isn’t met anymore” (Imtiaz, personal communication, May 3, 2018). Another respondent adds to this by stating that _{“because of} the increase of drivers in the city, you are assigned fewer trips…I’ve only been driving for six months, but I can see it more and more” (Pedja, personal communication, 19 April, 2018). Uber drivers express how they experience income insecurity due to the growing amount of drivers in the city; drivers are less assured of a stable and adequate income due to this surplus. To combat this, Imtiaz suggests reducing the amount of new drivers that are accepted by Uber, or oblige drivers to stay in their own cities (Imtiaz, personal communication, May 3, 2018). With Uber showing no signs of implementing these suggestions however, and apparent deregulation of Amsterdam’s taxi market, the increase in the amount of drivers and resulting income insecurity experienced by Uber drivers is likely to continue.

Although Uber drivers have experienced increased waiting times, those experienced taxi drivers and their resulting income insecurity experienced was proportionally greater. One taxi driver expressed significant income insecurity, as he had been waiting for a ride at Amstel Station for roughly three hours, _{“I’ve had four rides since I started at four this} morning. I’ll show you how much I’ve earned: €55...from four in the morning;; it’s almost 12 now,” he further added, “what is €55? With that I still have to pay taxes, fuel, maintenance…I have to buy food and clothes...I have a wife and children” (Anonymous, personal communication, May 10, 2018). When asking if Uber was to blame, he said _“yes, they’re stealing our work” (Anonymous, personal communication, May 10, 2018). To cope with the loss of income, another taxi driver said that, _{“these days we have to work six days if} we want to earn a living” (Sjonnie, personal communication, April 4, 2018). Losing customers to Uber significantly creates an decrease in income security experienced by Uber drivers. Additionally, taxi drivers are forced to buy a new car every four to six year to meet municipal quality regulations, while also having to pay for increased insurance prices.

In sum, both Uber and taxi drivers experienced income insecurity. Erol who worked with the TCA for 20 years before joining Uber says how compared to regular taxis, income per kilometre is lower for Uber drivers, however due to the high frequency of rides, income is more time efficient (Erol, personal communication, April 13, 2018). Furthermore the degree

(28)

of income stability experienced among Uber drivers was also greater than those of taxi drivers. Erol further mentions that although he has to work harder to make his income goal, he’d _{“rather be working the entire day, and know roughly how much I’m going to be earning} in a day” (Erol, personal communication, April 13, 2018). Uber’s increasingly dominant position in the Amsterdam taxi market has directly affected the income security of taxi drivers, leading to drivers experiencing precarity. Imtiaz understands the frustrations of taxi drivers, saying “insurance prices are shooting up, clientele is going down and every five years they need to buy a new car for €50,000”, while also adding, _{“the government has dictated a} price of €2.20 per kilometer for taxis, and Uber charges a rate of €1.10, that is literally half” (Imtiaz, personal communication, May 3, 2018). The taxi drivers interviewed experienced strong forms of income insecurity, as well as resulting precarity. What once was a protected and profitable profession is now marked by uncertainty. With Uber’s increased competitive advantage and clientele base, and the lack of regulation levelling the playing field, the future for taxi drivers does not look promising.

(29)

Discussion

Through analysing labour security in the Amsterdam taxi market, the level of precarity experienced by Amsterdam taxi drivers, including Uber drivers, was identified and compared. The results showed clear instances of precarity, experienced through various forms of interrelated labour insecurity. Although taxi and Uber drivers are labelled as independent contractors, labour insecurities experienced in a changing industry have shown that they are in fact ‘dependent’ on an industry that thrives and provides for them. However, interestingly, forms of labour securities were experienced differently by taxi and Uber drivers, despite both being independent contractors in the same city.

When studying employment security in Amsterdam’s taxi industry, research showed that Uber drivers face flexible labour contracts that allow drivers to be dismissed with ease, when Uber’s guidelines are not met. The most worrisome guideline states how Uber drivers who have a rating below a 4.5 out of five stars may be banned from the app. Surprisingly, while concerns were raised regarding the subjective nature of the rating system, no interviewed Uber drivers directly experienced insecurity that resulted from the minimum rating guideline. Perhaps, this was due to the fact that all respondents had exceptionally high ratings, ranging from 4.8 to 4.9. Nevertheless, the fact that Uber drivers face highly flexible contracts remains problematic, due to Uber avoiding established CAO contracts that encompass employment protections for all taxi drivers. With the growth in professionalism and number of full-time Uber drivers, employment security should be improved through demanding the ride-sharing app to adopt the same CAO agreements. On the other hand, while taxi drivers cannot be dismissed as easily as Uber drivers, harsh regulations imposed to improve the quality within the taxi sector has caused these drivers to experience employment insecurity, as rules on tire pressure and illegal parking are strictly enforced, and punishments leave drivers temporarily unemployed for up to several months.

In addition, job security also emphasised long-term precarity for Uber drivers and imminent precarity for regular taxi drivers, as predicted in the hypothesis. Uber drivers showed confidence in their market position and experienced little job insecurity in the short term, explained by the dominance of the app in Amsterdam, taking over the niche of employment that used to belong to taxi drivers. In addition, as expected, taxi drivers thus experienced imminent precarity, expressing uncertainty about the future of the regular taxi in

(30)

Amsterdam due to decreasing clientele. Although in the short term Uber drivers experienced job security, the future of Uber appears to be less certain. With increasing competition from fellow ride-sharing apps and Uber’s investment in self-driving cars, along with minimal opportunity for upward mobility in terms of income, it remains to be seen how long Uber drivers will maintain a niche employment in the Dutch capital. For part-time temporary Uber drivers this may not be significant, however for those depending solely on income from Uber, job insecurity and precarity is looming in the years to come.

Moreover, as predicted, income insecurity was experienced most by workers in the taxi market of Amsterdam. The free market has proved itself to be harmful to the income of Uber and taxi drivers, as the surge in number of taxis in the city leads to longer waiting times and less earnings per hour. Additionally, Uber offers a fare that is often half of what is charged by taxis. While this may be good for Uber’s competitive advantage over regular taxis, it results in income insecurity experienced by its drivers. Furthermore, Uber drivers do not receive adequate earnings to cover steep costs. The same can be said for taxi drivers, who are losing income to Uber while costs remain high. Income stability has also decreased in the sector due to the longer waiting times, which was surprising for Uber drivers, as long waiting times were mainly predicted to be experienced by taxi drivers. This already indicates how the long-term issues of Uber seem to be catching up to short-term gain, as the increase in Uber drivers, especially part-time drivers, hurts those who are solely dependent on income from Uber. Ironically, the same job insecurity that affected taxi drivers with the increase of Uber, seems to now affect Uber drivers, as more people want to earn incomes from Uber. In addition, a lack of minimum wage due to the independent employment relationships of drivers means that workers in the taxi industry rely on a healthy market where they are able to earn an adequate income. To date however, the opposite is the case as deregulation in the Amsterdam taxi market is characterised by precarity, resulting from diminishing income security.

It is also important to note that the free market has lead to increased precarity experienced by drivers in the taxi industry in Amsterdam. Consequently, the section will elaborate on certain policy recommendations that should be considered to improve the labour securities of taxi and Uber drivers. First and foremost the municipality should even the playing field between regular taxis and Uber, to ensure fair competition between the two. Imposing the same or similar regulations on Uber that exist for taxi firms, will guarantee

Precarity in the Amsterdam taxi industry