3 ms·

I think decimated vocational education is a symptom not a cause. If manufacturing paid a living wage, we'd figure out a way to get people prepared to do it. I

by x0x0 11y ago

I think decimated vocational education is a symptom not a cause. If manufacturing paid a living wage, we'd figure out a way to get people prepared to do it. It doesn't, and baring unions, never will again.

douche 11y ago
Actually, voc tech careers do pay a pretty healthy wage, for certain things. Welders, electricians, plumbers, HVAC, mechanics, those are all still decent paying jobs. Hard, more dangerous than white-collar work, but you can make respectable money doing them. It's getting so the certifications are getting a little onerous, but it's still better than dumping tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars into a college education. Especially for those that don't have the wherewithal or temperament to do school
- x0x0 11y ago
  I can verify that's not true for electricians, at least in WI -- father is an electrician. For his generation, it was true. For the current generation, it's no longer the case.
- joezydeco 11y ago
  Aren't most of those positions typically union jobs?
dwc 11y ago
I think this is correct. I am not sure if unions would help at this point, unless they can lobby for laws to prevent moving manufacturing out of the country. Paying lower wages for manufacturing (as well as other lower costs) being the reason for why those jobs went somewhere else in the first place. Where "went somewhere else" means companies actively decided they wanted to stop manufacturing here and do it somewhere cheaper, and not hassle with unions.
asuffield 11y ago
It's certainly possible for unions to prevent manufacturing that pays less than a living wage. It's not clear to me how they could ever cause it to happen. The big problem that hasn't been mentioned so far in this thread is the other side of the equation: it's not enough to make the job pay a living wage for the workers. It must also produce a product that consumers want to buy, which means producing it at a price those consumers are willing to pay. There is a very direct relationship to consider here, because the consumers and the workers are often the same people. If one worker takes one week to manufacture an item which that worker is not willing to buy at a price of one week's wages, then they should not expect to be able to make a living from this. What unions can do - and frequently have done - is raise the minimum price of goods and transfer some fraction of this to the manufacturing workers. If this makes the goods too expensive, then the factory closes down because people aren't buying them. The cost of labour is substantially lower in various Asian countries. That isn't going to change, and you've effectively stated that you're unwilling to accept paying local labour similar rates. The conclusion you should be drawing from this is that the only way to make manufacturing work in this environment is to massively improve the productivity per unit of labour. You need to be getting away from people assembling things with their hands, and towards workers who build and maintain manufacturing automation. Sadly, when this opportunity arose in the recent past, it was those same unions who tried very hard to block it, and were successful in that goal - manufacturing is still a laborious manual process. Want to change this? Stop learning how to weld. Learn how to build a welding robot.
- imtringued 11y ago
  >If one worker takes one week to manufacture an item which that worker is not willing to buy at a price of one week's wages, then they should not expect to be able to make a living from this. The manufacturing industry is not the tech industry. You can't produce physical goods with just your brain. Raw materials and machines play also part in the manufacturing cost, not just wages.
  - asuffield 11y ago
    Indeed, but the statement remains true. If it takes one week of labour to produce something that one week's wages won't buy, the price is clearly too high to sell. The correct price will have to be somewhat lower than this, for the reasons you state (among others).

by x0x0 11y ago

douche 11y ago

Actually, voc tech careers do pay a pretty healthy wage, for certain things. Welders, electricians, plumbers, HVAC, mechanics, those are all still decent paying jobs. Hard, more dangerous than white-collar work, but you can make respectable money doing them. It's getting so the certifications are getting a little onerous, but it's still better than dumping tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars into a college education. Especially for those that don't have the wherewithal or temperament to do school

x0x0 11y ago
I can verify that's not true for electricians, at least in WI -- father is an electrician. For his generation, it was true. For the current generation, it's no longer the case.
joezydeco 11y ago
Aren't most of those positions typically union jobs?

dwc 11y ago

I think this is correct. I am not sure if unions would help at this point, unless they can lobby for laws to prevent moving manufacturing out of the country. Paying lower wages for manufacturing (as well as other lower costs) being the reason for why those jobs went somewhere else in the first place. Where "went somewhere else" means companies actively decided they wanted to stop manufacturing here and do it somewhere cheaper, and not hassle with unions.

asuffield 11y ago

It's certainly possible for unions to prevent manufacturing that pays less than a living wage. It's not clear to me how they could ever cause it to happen. The big problem that hasn't been mentioned so far in this thread is the other side of the equation: it's not enough to make the job pay a living wage for the workers. It must also produce a product that consumers want to buy, which means producing it at a price those consumers are willing to pay. There is a very direct relationship to consider here, because the consumers and the workers are often the same people. If one worker takes one week to manufacture an item which that worker is not willing to buy at a price of one week's wages, then they should not expect to be able to make a living from this. What unions can do - and frequently have done - is raise the minimum price of goods and transfer some fraction of this to the manufacturing workers. If this makes the goods too expensive, then the factory closes down because people aren't buying them. The cost of labour is substantially lower in various Asian countries. That isn't going to change, and you've effectively stated that you're unwilling to accept paying local labour similar rates. The conclusion you should be drawing from this is that the only way to make manufacturing work in this environment is to massively improve the productivity per unit of labour. You need to be getting away from people assembling things with their hands, and towards workers who build and maintain manufacturing automation. Sadly, when this opportunity arose in the recent past, it was those same unions who tried very hard to block it, and were successful in that goal - manufacturing is still a laborious manual process. Want to change this? Stop learning how to weld. Learn how to build a welding robot.

imtringued 11y ago
>If one worker takes one week to manufacture an item which that worker is not willing to buy at a price of one week's wages, then they should not expect to be able to make a living from this. The manufacturing industry is not the tech industry. You can't produce physical goods with just your brain. Raw materials and machines play also part in the manufacturing cost, not just wages.
- asuffield 11y ago
  Indeed, but the statement remains true. If it takes one week of labour to produce something that one week's wages won't buy, the price is clearly too high to sell. The correct price will have to be somewhat lower than this, for the reasons you state (among others).