Summary of the Key Points
This article discusses the public opinion sparked by Zhang Dandan's remarks, criticizing the moralistic criticism and personal attacks on scholars by the media, and emphasizing the need for a rational discussion of the real issues surrounding flexible employment. It also objectively analyzes the dual nature of flexible employment—on one hand, there is the helplessness of young people who are forced into this situation, and on the other hand, it represents a progressive trend globally. The article proposes specific solutions to the social security issues associated with flexible employment, such as establishing a national pension system, reducing social security contribution rates, and innovating the collection methods.
I. Is Zhang Dandan Being Unfairly Criticized? The Media Should Look at What She Has Done Over Time
Zhang Dandan was criticized for her remarks, but the article points out that she has long been a scholar focused on public welfare. Three to four years ago, she warned about the high youth unemployment rate and advocated for raising the wages of migrant workers. She also suggested breaking down regional barriers in social security and improving protections for flexible workers. Although her recent statement did not cover all aspects of social security, the media's immediate personal attacks are a form of emotional venting—using a celebrity's opinion as a scapegoat, praising or criticizing them based on personal preferences without considering their long-term stance. This kind of hostility makes it difficult for rational discussion to take place and discourages experts from speaking the truth.
II. Is Flexible Employment a “Cover for Shame”? Indeed, Some Young People Are Forced to Choose This Path, but We Can’t Generalize
The main reason for the public's dislike of flexible employment is that some people make this choice out of necessity: for example, college graduates who cannot find stable jobs end up delivering food or doing odd jobs to make a living, which reflects the pressures of the job market. Statistics also show that flexible employment can distort unemployment figures (for instance, people without a formal job may be counted as part of the flexible workforce, lowering the unemployment rate). However, the article argues that we cannot dismiss flexible employment entirely; it is not entirely a matter of helplessness, as there are other aspects to consider.
III. Flexible Employment Is a Global Trend That Can Even Lead to Higher Earnings
The article provides data to illustrate this point:
1. Flexibility Is a Global Trend: Flexible employment accounts for 39% of jobs in the United States and 36% in Japan, with developed countries even introducing “digital nomad visas” to attract flexible workers. This is a result of technological progress, as work is no longer confined to factories; the internet has made jobs more flexible and reduced the exploitation of workers by capital.
2. Flexible Employment Has Long Existed in China: In 2008, there were 260 million flexible workers in China (such as restaurant workers and nannies), but this number decreased to 200 million in 2024, suggesting an improvement in the quality of employment. The increase in the number of flexible workers is due to the fact that they are now often college graduates who should have stable jobs, drawing more attention.
3. Higher Earnings Than Traditional Jobs: For example, a farmer in Shandong may earn 10,000 yuan a year, but a delivery worker or ride-hailing driver can earn 30,000 to 40,000 yuan a month—this is one reason why young people are willing to take on these jobs.
IV. How to Solve the Social Security Issues for Flexible Workers? Establishing a National Pension System and Reducing Contribution Rates Are Key
The article suggests three solutions to address the social security concerns of flexible workers:
1. Establish a National Pension System (First Pillar): Regardless of whether someone is a flexible worker or a regular employee, as long as they are a Chinese citizen, they should have access to a basic pension in old age (for example, in Japan, people over 65 receive about 3,000 yuan per month, which is sufficient for living expenses). The current first pillar of China’s social security system is too weak, leaving farmers and flexible workers without adequate support in their old age. Establishing such a system would solve this problem.
2. Reduce Social Security Contribution Rates: Currently, flexible workers contribute 29% of their income to social security (with the lowest contribution in Beijing being 2,089 yuan per month), which is more than twice the self-employment tax rate in the United States. This rate needs to be reduced to below 18% to encourage more people to contribute.
3. Innovate the Collection Method: If companies use temporary workers to avoid social security obligations, a tax could be levied on the labor services provided (with the tax rate controlled at 10% or less). Alternatively, companies like Meituan could contribute 50% of the social security costs for their workers, which would not hinder business development while still providing adequate protection for the workers.
V. Finally: Stop Criticizing and Focus on Solving the Real Problems
The article calls for a shift in approach: instead of focusing on a single statement by a scholar, we should address the core issues surrounding flexible employment—how to provide better options for those who are forced into this situation and ensure that those who choose it voluntarily have access to social security. This is the true purpose of the discussion, not just venting emotions.
In summary, flexible employment is not a problem in itself; it has its challenges, but it also represents a progressive trend. The key is to improve the support systems so that flexible workers have adequate security in their old age and during times of illness. The media should adopt a more rational approach to solving these issues.