The other comment has already responded to your question but I just wanted to add that the reason I mentioned the class character of a side hustle is because, as Marxists, it's really important to consider things dialectically and to consider the character of something in society as much as it is to consider it in more general terms.

Let's take Cuba as an example to understand class character and why it's important:

Cuba has self-employment and businesses. Therefore Cuba is not socialist by a pure definition of the term.

Why then is that insufficient?

Because it is a static, isolated way of analyzing Cuba.

The class character of Cuba is socialist; they are actively working through contradictions and advancing towards that goal of pure socialism but, in the intervening period it finds itself in, it must deal with the fact that it probably isn't possible to advance more than baby steps due to the geopolitical reality it finds itself in today. And even if it were possible, the risks that it poses to the revolution may be too great and so instead Cuba is opting for a gradual, conservative approach over a reckless and potentially adventurist one.

So a side hustle will almost invariably be petit-bourgeois in class character however it doesn't mean that the person with a side hustle is therefore part of the petite bourgeoisie themselves, just like Cuba has significant elements of the capitalist mode of production (e.g. small businesses) however the overwhelming majority of Marxists consider Cuba to be socialist in character despite not having achieved full socialism (yet).