A BUSINESS expert has postulated a rather believable concept: that nine out of ten permanent, traditional workers would have to pack their bags.
That's to make way for permanent freelancers, people you can tap into on an as-needed, or rostered basis. You'd have a lot more of them than you would have permanent, office, staff. It plays on the technological advances we have, with communication across the world, and the breakdown of traditional working models which millennials, an aggressive "I want" culture, and the decline of unions have helped foster.
A member of my family works from home, on a roster, preparing documents for international companies, as an "overnight" service for firms in London.
As a manager, I like a model which could produce a higher quality product. The trouble is we are tampering with some pretty strong fundamentals of society. The biggie is that not everyone is excellent, or driven enough, to succeed under this kind of regime. A lot of people need the security that comes with traditional employment, and unions help protect and preserve that. Not everyone is equal in capability, despite the drive to National Standards. Some might argue we already have a society which routinely fails those less capable, leading to unemployment and crime, but all societies have that.
Employers have a right to pursue excellence. But my point is that a model of outstanding contractors on rosters risks creating greater separation between the less capable and the young, and the driven and the flexible. It may suit people who would otherwise retire, but like the idea of using their years of experience on a rostered basis.
