How Should Gig Workers Be Classified?

To the Editor:

Re “Hustle Till It Hurts: Gig Work’s Luster Dims” (Sunday Business, May 28):

The questions and concerns raised by freelance and gig work are important ones, but we need to stop trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

As a lawyer who has spent her career analyzing work force policy, hearing from women, single mothers and people with disabilities who feel left out of traditional work models, we need to address what’s missing from the conversation: the bigger policy picture.

In America, the social safety net is tied to employment status, and worker classification laws are complicated and nuanced. Because of this, workers who want flexibility to choose when, where and how often to work have to choose between sovereignty and certainty.

I urge policymakers to consider legislation that addresses these barriers by decoupling benefits from employment status, developing a thoughtful alternative model as other countries have done, and partnering with business leaders and educators to expand resources for workers to understand their classification status.

Only then can we tap into the talents of a vast, diverse work force and build a more inclusive, innovative and sustainable economy.

Regan Parker
Portland, Ore.
The writer is the general counsel and chief public affairs officer for ShiftKey, a digital platform that connects independent licensed professionals with health care facilities.

To the Editor:

Your article rightly states that there is not a clear consensus on how some gig workers, such as ride-share drivers and freelance writers, should be classified under current employment laws. But when it comes to the highly regulated health care industry, there’s no room for debate: Nurses and nursing assistants should be classified as employees.

The recent rise in digital health care staffing platforms gives nurses more flexibility, allowing them to work shifts as they please rather than full time at a facility. However, some of these staffing platforms improperly claim that because their nurses work gig-style schedules, they can be classified as independent contractors.

These companies save themselves money but put the nurses and facilities where they work at risk. Nurses don’t control when they start and end their shifts. They are supervised and perform their responsibilities according to strict guidelines.

When properly enforced, the Fair Labor Standards Act enables nurses to enjoy gig-style schedules without losing the employee-related benefits they deserve.

Tony Braswell
Tampa, Fla.
The writer is the president and founder of Gale Healthcare Solutions.

A Trump Scenario: Losing in Court, but Winning the Presidency

To the Editor:

Former President Donald Trump’s indictment might very well culminate in his being convicted on felony espionage charges while running for and possibly winning the presidency. Inexplicably, the Constitution does not preclude this.

The surreal, disheartening and illogical nature of such an outcome is underscored by current employment prohibitions in the U.S. for convicted felons. Those with felony convictions cannot work in the banking, real estate, health care and insurance industries. Additionally, professions that require a license, including those involving lawyers, teachers and psychologists, preclude felonious applicants. Beyond this, several states have their own employment restrictions for individuals with felony backgrounds.

In light of this, the idea that Mr. Trump could conceivably occupy the Oval Office for four more years, despite his being a felon, should this be the case, is proof that the framers of the Constitution were not prescient enough to anticipate how sordid our nation’s politics would become.

Mark Godes
Chelsea, Mass.

To the Editor:

In my view, Democrats would do well to turn off the indictment news and focus on defeating Donald Trump. Jack Smith’s clear indictment offers, to those willing to read it, compelling evidence of the flood of corruption that surged through the White House during the Trump presidency and will hopefully persuade some more moderate Republicans to abandon him. But winning a conviction without defeating him at the ballot box leaves us in the same dark hole or worse off than before.

Few who still support Mr. Trump after learning about the details of the indictment will change their decision based upon Mr. Smith’s success in the courtroom. The specter of Mr. Trump losing in court and winning the election would do enduring damage to the nation.

Mr. Trump must be defeated the hard way, at the ballot box.

Larry Lobert
Grosse Pointe Park, Mich.

Supporting World Heritage Sites

To the Editor:

Re “After a Six-Year Hiatus, the U.S. Will Rejoin UNESCO in July, Agency Says” (news article, June 13):

Thank you for your reporting that the United States plans to rejoin UNESCO. And for highlighting the importance of World Heritage sites, designated by UNESCO. Many Americans — and citizens of other nations — have visited and been inspired by World Heritage sites in the United States, including the Statue of Liberty, Yellowstone National Park, Chaco Culture National Historical Park and many other places.

However, the United States last paid its World Heritage Committee dues in 2011. Congress and the Biden administration should pay our current year dues (estimated at less than $600,000) and past unpaid dues.

The United States has continued to participate in the World Heritage program, including recent designations of Frank Lloyd Wright buildings, including the Guggenheim Museum, and pending nominations of Hopewell Ceremonial Earthworks in Ohio and the Historic Moravian Church Settlements in Bethlehem, Pa. Advocates are also working to nominate U.S. Civil Rights Movement Sites and the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.

Full U.S. engagement with World Heritage requires paying our share of the program’s costs. It would also permit the United States, a catalyst for the creation of the World Heritage program, to reassert our global leadership in heritage preservation, including such challenges as the reconstruction of World Heritage sites in Ukraine.

Thomas Cassidy
Arlington, Va.
The writer is a trustee of World Heritage USA.

Young Voices for Climate Action

To the Editor:

The devastating Canadian wildfires make it imperative that we include everyone in climate advocacy, particularly young voices. These wildfires are stark reminders of the escalating climate crisis and the urgent need for change.

Young voices are essential in demanding systemic transformations, as this is just one chapter in an existential fight that will persist for the rest of our lives.

My climate advocacy is a matter of self-defense. I grew up in Portland, Ore., a place struggling with climate change. I have witnessed wildfires approaching my city and threatening my home, river ecosystems collapsing and their species being put at risk of extinction. The battle we face is not limited to a single fire season or year; it is a fight for our collective survival.

Young people will bear the brunt of these disasters. Our future is at stake. Our voices must be heard. We did not ask for the fight against climate change, yet it is a battle we have shouldered since birth. We are ready to contribute our collective power to improve our future.

Samantha Block
Falls Church, Va.
The writer is a student at Bryn Mawr College.