Lizzy wrote:

---

an article from cnn.

i have not been able to stop thinking of this article.  It is just so thought-provoking.  I am not sure i agree with his "solution" per se. but the premise is very interesting. 

I don't know what the long-term outcome will be, but I don't think we can continue down a path where wages are kept low and people still expect a good standard of living.  I think that there should be more jobs that pay well and put people in the middle class.  for example, my sister works at a nursing home (she will  never make very much) but the company could afford to pay her more but it is such a entry level job that they don't "need" to especially since their job requirements are not strict, ie. anyone could get a job there - they are not picky at all. (which is sad actually). 

but, i think the sh** will start to hit the fan when more and more educated people find themselves out of work and out of luck - i read this article today, which touches on that aspect. 

i wonder how it will all turn out.

---

 I didn't get to read the articles I am at work but regarding the bold, Joe and I were just talking about this.  There are so many people looking for work that companies are able to hire for less because they have someone who needs a job so bad they are willing to take it. 

It is more so in manufacturing fields right now (Joe's field) but will eventually cross over to more jobs and I agree, the shit will hit the fan then.

There are so many factors that go into the discussion. I agree, minimum wage jobs just don’t cut it these days.* I am constantly flabbergasted that people have to get by (and pay for rent, food, daycare, etc) on a minimum wage job. But, on the flip side, I am equally flabbergasted by people who feel entitled to be paid a high wage for entry level positions that require no specialized skill or education without having proven their mettle.

(I’m not convinced a nursing home can afford to pay more. The cost of insurance for nursing homes is HUGE. They also have to do background checks, and tons of reporting to regulatory bodies which increases the costs of their overhead. They have huge turnover (which is not addressed by simply paying more, the jobs by their nature attract people going to school, single parents, odd schedules, etc, so people "move on" alot.) which drives up their costs. All of the health care reform has also increased the costs of any benefits they provide. And the cost of unemployment insurance is not cheap.)

I am not defending crappy employers, and yes, there are lots of big companies that could do with a little more redistribution from highly paid CEOs, and don’t get me started on law firm salaries in larger markets, but, I also think that there are a lot of employees out there who expect to come directly into a high paying position with flexible hours, yet they bring with them no loyalty, no work ethic and aren't willing to take any responsibility for their own actions or the company. If they are unwilling to invest their career in the company, the company has little incentive to invest in them, because it is a losing proposition. Frankly, those employees ruin it for everyone else. They drive up overhead, insurance, etc. Then they sue their employers for letting them go when they underperform.

This is part of what bugs me about the willingness of people to bash Wal-Mart. There are huge opportunities for advancement in the company and others like it for people that work hard (are reliable, trustworthy, etc) and stick around. They offer lots of jobs, yet, get slammed for putting smaller companies out of business.

Okay, rant over. I know this is not true of everyone or every situation, and I don’t have any answers, just more points for discussion, but I struggle with people’s sense of entitlement these days. Defending too many clients from employment and personal injury claims I think are BS I guess. I should have one of my plaintiff’s lawyer friends come write a guest column from the other side. ;)

* Interesting that the guy in the article got a year’s severance and was making $24k/year for 2 1/2 years on unemployment I’m sure that was not his ideal situation, but it’s a far cry from minimum wage. (if my calculations are right). So, your topic is sort of two topics. Are there jobs for the many unemployed? And also are the jobs available paying decent wages? I guess I am just addressing the “decent wages” question.

Erin wrote:

---

crystal wrote:

---

It is very sad, but being in IT a lot of my work was creating programs to replace humans.  Even the jobs of computer programmers are changing as now there is software that does half the work for you, making it easier for Joe Schmoe to come in and write the programs.

-- Edited by crystal on Thursday 22nd of September 2011 01:30:56 PM

---

 Agreed.  And with technology, companies expect more production out of their employees. 

You are addressing the question of whether or not there are as many jobs available that pay decent wages, and I have to say, I agree - increased technology = decreased need for people, in the face of an increasing population of workers (that now spans many generations since older workers refuse or cannot afford to retire. Remember our parents generation had lots of "retirement" parties to attend? These days, it seems retire ment is nothing to celebrate, it is either because someone cannot physically work any longer, or they are facing termination in lieu of...) 

---

 Just an example that sort of shows the above.  There used to be 7+  admin assistants in our division only a few years ago.  Each Dean had their own, most major offices in student affairs had 1+.  We are down to 2 dinosaurs that are protected neck deep by the union, and 1 who is just a rock star.  Why?  We all do all our own scheduling, all our own budgets with budgeting programs, handle all our own phone calls, blah blah blah.  The dinosaurs will be replaced with student workers at most once they retire.  I see a day not too far in the future where we have one admin.  And that one admin is simply the person that keeps track of our physical receipts and is sort of a checks and balance to make sure none of us get audited by the business office.  Oh, and we went from three deans to 2.  Overnight. 

With smart phones, etc- there just isn't the same need for bodies in the central office.

 

That is a LOT of good paying, awesome benefit jobs lost permanently.  And that is just one tiny corner of what is happening all over this univerisity.