Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seventy percent of the U.S. economy is based upon consumer spending, spending driven 4.3 million retail salespersons, 3.9 million cashiers, 2.9 fast food workers, 2.2 customer service reps, and 2.1 stock, warehouse and material handlers the vast majority of whom we describe as "unskilled" workers. But when I watch shows like Undercover Boss or talk with retail managers, it becomes clear, at least to me, that there are considerable set of skills involved in these jobs. Everyone, can't be a successful food preparer, everyone can't be a proficient stock clerk particularly in a day and age where production schedules and proficiency have become finely tuned standards. Yet we don't hold these hard working Americans in high regard which considering the derision heaped upon these workers when they seek better compensation. So, while some lament the loss of the stigmatization associated with public assistance, we have at the same time stigmatized those who work in the largest segment of our economy.
It's certainly a plus to have specific skills related to the job at hand but, as I used to remind prospective employees, there are also general skills that always transfer well--the ability to adapt to changing priorities, working well in a team setting (and alone, if required), working well under pressure, punctuality, etc.
“If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as a Michaelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, 'Here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.”
Seventy percent of the U.S. economy is based upon consumer spending, spending driven 4.3 million retail salespersons, 3.9 million cashiers, 2.9 fast food workers, 2.2 customer service reps, and 2.1 stock, warehouse and material handlers the vast majority of whom we describe as "unskilled" workers. But when I watch shows like Undercover Boss or talk with retail managers, it becomes clear, at least to me, that there are considerable set of skills involved in these jobs. Everyone, can't be a successful food preparer, everyone can't be a proficient stock clerk particularly in a day and age where production schedules and proficiency have become finely tuned standards. Yet we don't hold these hard working Americans in high regard which considering the derision heaped upon these workers when they seek better compensation. So, while some lament the loss of the stigmatization associated with public assistance, we have at the same time stigmatized those who work in the largest segment of our economy.
Having been at all phases of this in my life (hourly employee, manager, business owner), I found/find the tendency is to pay someone based on their replaceability scale. Business is business, and in the end, there is either a shareholder or an owner to answer to.
An individual can be a very good employee for you, but if they can be replaced rather easily, and with a minimal training effort and expense, then you must look at a situation very carefully before you begin to pay well beyond a specific positions ceiling. At this point, typically at review time, when an employee has in your mind reached that ceiling, that employee would be apprised as to why they were no longer being raised beyond the typical cost of living increase. But at the same time, I would push them to possibly further educate themselves for a higher seat on the pole, if I felt the employee had the potential.
I myself always preferred to promote from within, but I've found quite a few employees simply aren't looking for the added responsibility, and would rather toil at their current positions, picking up cost of living increases as they come. Ultimately there is some burn out, quality of work suffers, and no one wins.
These people are going to face increasing pressure as automation really starts kicking in. And people are right, they get paid for replacability, NOT for value of work or desirability of work.
An interesting conversation to have with people is this-If we paid everyone $1,500 a month, would you still go to work at your current job?
Low paid workers in low stress jobs with good management often say yes. People in high stress or unpleasent jobs say no. Highly paid people say yes generally.
I worked at a chicken processing plant, making barely over minimum wage. I would have quit in a instant if it didnt mean I would be homeless and never see my kids again. Think about that. At that point in my life that was the choice. Thus....that job was vastly underpaid. And I still feel like that.
And what happens to us as these jobs get edged out by automation? And they WILL. I've seen automated coffee shops that create perfect coffee every time over and over. I've seen automated slaughterhouses, and much more. These things are just getting off the ground, but its accelerating.
Step 1-they outsource.
Step 2-when the outsourcing is cheaper to replace with machines......they do.
Look at Foxxconns plans to introduce 1 million+ robots to replace workers.
Once things like that happen, I think we're going to have to consider some form of basic income (Switzerland has recently looked at this route and are having a vote on it). Otherwise...we will have no consumers to drive our economy. We will in effect kill our economy through greater efficiency.
These people are going to face increasing pressure as automation really starts kicking in. And people are right, they get paid for replacability, NOT for value of work or desirability of work.
An interesting conversation to have with people is this-If we paid everyone $1,500 a month, would you still go to work at your current job?
Low paid workers in low stress jobs with good management often say yes. People in high stress or unpleasent jobs say no. Highly paid people say yes generally.
I worked at a chicken processing plant, making barely over minimum wage. I would have quit in a instant if it didnt mean I would be homeless and never see my kids again. Think about that. At that point in my life that was the choice. Thus....that job was vastly underpaid. And I still feel like that.
And what happens to us as these jobs get edged out by automation? And they WILL. I've seen automated coffee shops that create perfect coffee every time over and over. I've seen automated slaughterhouses, and much more. These things are just getting off the ground, but its accelerating.
Step 1-they outsource.
Step 2-when the outsourcing is cheaper to replace with machines......they do.
Look at Foxxconns plans to introduce 1 million+ robots to replace workers.
Once things like that happen, I think we're going to have to consider some form of basic income (Switzerland has recently looked at this route and are having a vote on it). Otherwise...we will have no consumers to drive our economy. We will in effect kill our economy through greater efficiency.
At first contemplation it seems to me that a direct monthly stipend for everyone of majority age (with some reasonable adjustments for things like age, family size and your primary income) would be far more helpful and vastly preferable to any amount of social entitlement programs and it would be far, far easier to execute and require far, far less bureaucracy.
In order to execute this, however, I think that the U.S. would have to become a tax haven for international business in order to start drawing money from overseas and some drastic adjustments to other government assistance programs would be necessitated.
Also, at some point we're going to have to start building/mining/producing things that the world needs and wants to buy and in order to get to that point we're going to have to let the market correct itself.
Hmm...Its debatable. That $1,500 a month example I qouted would require us to double our federal tax rates. But it would go to everyone. Net affect would be a floor on income. I for one would like it a lot despite being one of the losers on the tax side, but I would always know....I'd be OK.
On the plus side, we could eliminate welfare, food stamps, unemployment, and social security. And many many other government agencies. And by giving it to everyone we would not have any additional paperwork beyond the initial amount. Less bureaucracy.
But...doubling all of our federal taxes.
BTW we make a lot of things the world needs and wants. Aircraft, industrial equipment, food, oil (yes we are now a exporter of oil), and many many other items.
Seventy percent of the U.S. economy is based upon consumer spending, spending driven 4.3 million retail salespersons, 3.9 million cashiers, 2.9 fast food workers, 2.2 customer service reps, and 2.1 stock, warehouse and material handlers the vast majority of whom we describe as "unskilled" workers. But when I watch shows like Undercover Boss or talk with retail managers, it becomes clear, at least to me, that there are considerable set of skills involved in these jobs. Everyone, can't be a successful food preparer, everyone can't be a proficient stock clerk particularly in a day and age where production schedules and proficiency have become finely tuned standards. Yet we don't hold these hard working Americans in high regard which considering the derision heaped upon these workers when they seek better compensation. So, while some lament the loss of the stigmatization associated with public assistance, we have at the same time stigmatized those who work in the largest segment of our economy.
I am not sure if shows like Under Cover Boss should be a reference point for any serious debate. That said, I feel that you are simply playing with words by using "unskilled" worker out of context. No one says that a waiter or clerk is unskilled in the true sense of the word. The word unskilled is used to differentiate workers for mostly legal reasons - an engineer that immigrates from a foreign country is considered a "skilled worker", and a store clerk is considered "unskilled" - this does mean that the store clerk is really unskilled.
Next we come to the hierarchy of positions. For many reasons, we consider "skilled jobs" that require a STEM education to be good for the economy. Innovations in STEM create Billions of $$ and millions of jobs. In general, a software engineer is more valuable to an economy than a store clerk. A store clerk that is great at his job cannot stimulate an economy at the same scale or level as a software engineer.
No-one demeans "unskilled jobs" .... but to create and sustain MANY such jobs, you need skilled jobs ....
Unskilled is an accurate term, as it is used truly to distinguish b/w jobs where one must apply having skill sets already, and those where folks w/o the skill sets they would get at the job can apply, and learn them on the job.
Naturally, those who came with skill sets were paid more, as their numbers are fewer, hence, they have a better spot on the supply/demand curve.
These people are going to face increasing pressure as automation really starts kicking in. And people are right, they get paid for replacability, NOT for value of work or desirability of work.
An interesting conversation to have with people is this-If we paid everyone $1,500 a month, would you still go to work at your current job?
Low paid workers in low stress jobs with good management often say yes. People in high stress or unpleasent jobs say no. Highly paid people say yes generally.
I worked at a chicken processing plant, making barely over minimum wage. I would have quit in a instant if it didnt mean I would be homeless and never see my kids again. Think about that. At that point in my life that was the choice. Thus....that job was vastly underpaid. And I still feel like that.
And what happens to us as these jobs get edged out by automation? And they WILL. I've seen automated coffee shops that create perfect coffee every time over and over. I've seen automated slaughterhouses, and much more. These things are just getting off the ground, but its accelerating.
Step 1-they outsource.
Step 2-when the outsourcing is cheaper to replace with machines......they do.
Look at Foxxconns plans to introduce 1 million+ robots to replace workers.
Once things like that happen, I think we're going to have to consider some form of basic income (Switzerland has recently looked at this route and are having a vote on it). Otherwise...we will have no consumers to drive our economy. We will in effect kill our economy through greater efficiency.
Why would your situation have anything to do with what the job is worth? I don't understand the logic.
I think paying everyone a minimum of $1500 is giving in to failure. When I worked fast food, I busted my hump, and my team set service records. We all had a strong work ethic. Menial jobs like that are not meant as careers or for people past a young age. They don't require much more than smiling, learning a few tasks, and hustling. If you're a single mom at 25 with three kids, well, it's still just flipping burgers. A 16 year old will do it to put gas in his car, and no one should have to pay $15 an hour because of your situation.
An individual can be a very good employee for you, but if they can be replaced rather easily, and with a minimal training effort and expense,
When I left journalism I took a job as a manager at Target while my wife was in grad school, so I beg to differ. Yeah, we could find warm bodies to replace folks that quit, we could train them and spend a good sum of money doing background and drug test but it would take us months to weed out the new substandard replacements, identify the folks who could actual do the job and bring productivity back up to par, so it does cost quite a bit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
