5 ms·

I can't remember the last time I talked with a fast food employee that I thought was incompetent. Most of the time, I'm shocked at how capable they are given h

by tcbawo 9y ago

I can't remember the last time I talked with a fast food employee that I thought was incompetent. Most of the time, I'm shocked at how capable they are given how little they are probably making.

derefr 9y ago
I don't think the parent poster was talking about incompetence; rather, they're referring to staff who have no organizational power to do their job—people who are not empowered to help you, but rather are required to go get someone else every time anything you'd assume would be "their job" (i.e. the reason they are being paid, as human, to work there) happens. In most chain fast-food restaurants, if the shift manager does a rotation taking orders, those orders go much more smoothly, and the line moves 10x quicker. Because, under that setup, the person with the responsibility for the order is also the person with the power to ensure the order happens correctly.
bamboozled 9y ago
Honest question, do you ever think about not eating there if you know the staff are getting screwed over financially? My logic is if they have such little regard for their staff, they probably don't have much regard for my health. That and I just think it's cruel to work people like robots.
- maxerickson 9y ago
  Opting out of the part of the economy they do have the leverage to participate in isn't going to increase their economic leverage.
- nefitty 9y ago
  Your logic is similar to what led me to vegetarianism, and what makes me feel guilty for not being full-on vegan. My mind immediately jumps to excuses and rationalizations, "I'm not rich enough to be picky", "We're all just cogs", "It's too much effort to care", etc. I'm going to take some time to consider your comment more. It has unearthed some deeply-buried cognitive dissonance...
  - NoGravitas 9y ago
    My go-to rationalization these days is "there's no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism". Combined with "individual lifestyle choices can't produce the systemic change we need to solve the problem those lifestyle choices are aimed at fixing".
- Trundle 9y ago
  This seems to me to be the same argument people use for boycotting companies that use foreign sweatshop labor paid cents on the hour to make clothing and it doesn't make sense to me. If working like a robot is cruel, why are people doing it? Because it's better than their alternatives? Ok then, how exactly does taking that option away from them help? I'm all for a strong welfare state, universal income, state funded scholarships, and other "lift people up" sort of activities but I just don't see how punishing companies for utilising low value labour does that.
  - Qwertious 9y ago
    " If working like a robot is cruel, why are people doing it? Because it's better than their alternatives? Ok then, how exactly does taking that option away from them help?" The idea behind boycotting sweatshop labor is that it creates a market for non-sweatshop clothing, which creates a better-paid alternative for the people working like a robot.
    - Joeboy 9y ago
      Additionally consumer boycotts tend to be directed at specific companies and serve a specific purpose, eg. trying to institute cross-industry agreements or get compensation paid to workers or their families after factory fires or collapses or whatever.
    - lmm 9y ago
      Does it work? What kind of changes (if any) do these boycotts effect - e.g. do they lead to better working conditions abroad, or just eliminate foreign jobs in favour of onshore ones?
    - icebraining 9y ago
      Assuming it doesn't create a market for actual robots.
  - dkersten 9y ago
    As sibling comment says, sweatshop labour (or underplayed employees in food chains) reduce the cost of the product/service, undercutting the businesses that don't have predatory practices, who then cannot compete and go out of business leaving the ones that underpay their staff as the only option and "better than the alternative" only because the alternative has been driven out of business by these practices. Besides, why support something that perpetuates human misery? (I mean that as a philosophical question, not trying to judge anyone. I buy stuff from companies that I probably shouldn't buy from too all too often...)
- khedoros1 9y ago
  Honest answer: No. Not in any serious sense. How would you do that practically? I suspect that there are very few places around me where I could purchase any form of food, where the staff isn't "getting screwed over financially".
  - bamboozled 9y ago
    Have you ever made yourself a sandwich?
    - Asooka 9y ago
      Yes, but time is money and I wish to exchange some of my money for some of your time so that I can have more time to myself doing things other than making sandwiches.
      - bamboozled 9y ago
        Yeah, I bet you save heaps of time by not having food with you and having to go buy it. Besides, give me one piece of scientific evidence that can prove time actually = money, do you think that staying at work till 5pm every day provides value just because you're in the office? I doubt it.
        lmm 9y ago
        > Yeah, I bet you save heaps of time by not having food with you and having to go buy it. Yes? I could go to the office canteen if I didn't want to walk around the corner. Most of the time I do though. (And making sandwiches at home means you still have to buy and store the ingredients). > Besides, give me one piece of scientific evidence that can prove time actually = money, do you think that staying at work till 5pm every day provides value just because you're in the office? I doubt it. It gets me paid. It gets me paid more than I'd be paid to make a sandwich. If I could switch to a 28-hour work week and get paid the same hourly rate then I would, and maybe then I'd have enough free time to make my own sandwiches (though probably not, tbh, making sandwiches is less fun than programming). But that's not easy.
labster 9y ago
I visit the same Taco Bell where the Hindu man sued them for providing him with a beef burrito instead of a bean burrito. He was understandably upset, and eventually got money to bathe in the Ganges, etc. as compensation. A year later, we got the telescreens right below the drive-thru speaker. "Is your order correct on the screen?" Technology improves, and everyone's experience gets better. So it goes. And sometimes it's better to remove some of the human element so that mistakes/incompetence is limited.

by tcbawo 9y ago

I can't remember the last time I talked with a fast food employee that I thought was incompetent. Most of the time, I'm shocked at how capable they are given how little they are probably making.

derefr 9y ago

I don't think the parent poster was talking about incompetence; rather, they're referring to staff who have no organizational power to do their job—people who are not empowered to help you, but rather are required to go get someone else every time anything you'd assume would be "their job" (i.e. the reason they are being paid, as human, to work there) happens. In most chain fast-food restaurants, if the shift manager does a rotation taking orders, those orders go much more smoothly, and the line moves 10x quicker. Because, under that setup, the person with the responsibility for the order is also the person with the power to ensure the order happens correctly.

bamboozled 9y ago

Honest question, do you ever think about not eating there if you know the staff are getting screwed over financially? My logic is if they have such little regard for their staff, they probably don't have much regard for my health. That and I just think it's cruel to work people like robots.

maxerickson 9y ago
Opting out of the part of the economy they do have the leverage to participate in isn't going to increase their economic leverage.
nefitty 9y ago
Your logic is similar to what led me to vegetarianism, and what makes me feel guilty for not being full-on vegan. My mind immediately jumps to excuses and rationalizations, "I'm not rich enough to be picky", "We're all just cogs", "It's too much effort to care", etc. I'm going to take some time to consider your comment more. It has unearthed some deeply-buried cognitive dissonance...
- NoGravitas 9y ago
  My go-to rationalization these days is "there's no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism". Combined with "individual lifestyle choices can't produce the systemic change we need to solve the problem those lifestyle choices are aimed at fixing".
Trundle 9y ago
This seems to me to be the same argument people use for boycotting companies that use foreign sweatshop labor paid cents on the hour to make clothing and it doesn't make sense to me. If working like a robot is cruel, why are people doing it? Because it's better than their alternatives? Ok then, how exactly does taking that option away from them help? I'm all for a strong welfare state, universal income, state funded scholarships, and other "lift people up" sort of activities but I just don't see how punishing companies for utilising low value labour does that.
- Qwertious 9y ago
  " If working like a robot is cruel, why are people doing it? Because it's better than their alternatives? Ok then, how exactly does taking that option away from them help?" The idea behind boycotting sweatshop labor is that it creates a market for non-sweatshop clothing, which creates a better-paid alternative for the people working like a robot.
  - Joeboy 9y ago
    Additionally consumer boycotts tend to be directed at specific companies and serve a specific purpose, eg. trying to institute cross-industry agreements or get compensation paid to workers or their families after factory fires or collapses or whatever.
  - lmm 9y ago
    Does it work? What kind of changes (if any) do these boycotts effect - e.g. do they lead to better working conditions abroad, or just eliminate foreign jobs in favour of onshore ones?
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Assuming it doesn't create a market for actual robots.
- dkersten 9y ago
  As sibling comment says, sweatshop labour (or underplayed employees in food chains) reduce the cost of the product/service, undercutting the businesses that don't have predatory practices, who then cannot compete and go out of business leaving the ones that underpay their staff as the only option and "better than the alternative" only because the alternative has been driven out of business by these practices. Besides, why support something that perpetuates human misery? (I mean that as a philosophical question, not trying to judge anyone. I buy stuff from companies that I probably shouldn't buy from too all too often...)
khedoros1 9y ago
Honest answer: No. Not in any serious sense. How would you do that practically? I suspect that there are very few places around me where I could purchase any form of food, where the staff isn't "getting screwed over financially".
- bamboozled 9y ago
  Have you ever made yourself a sandwich?
  - Asooka 9y ago
    Yes, but time is money and I wish to exchange some of my money for some of your time so that I can have more time to myself doing things other than making sandwiches.
    - bamboozled 9y ago
      Yeah, I bet you save heaps of time by not having food with you and having to go buy it. Besides, give me one piece of scientific evidence that can prove time actually = money, do you think that staying at work till 5pm every day provides value just because you're in the office? I doubt it.
      - lmm 9y ago
        > Yeah, I bet you save heaps of time by not having food with you and having to go buy it. Yes? I could go to the office canteen if I didn't want to walk around the corner. Most of the time I do though. (And making sandwiches at home means you still have to buy and store the ingredients). > Besides, give me one piece of scientific evidence that can prove time actually = money, do you think that staying at work till 5pm every day provides value just because you're in the office? I doubt it. It gets me paid. It gets me paid more than I'd be paid to make a sandwich. If I could switch to a 28-hour work week and get paid the same hourly rate then I would, and maybe then I'd have enough free time to make my own sandwiches (though probably not, tbh, making sandwiches is less fun than programming). But that's not easy.

labster 9y ago

I visit the same Taco Bell where the Hindu man sued them for providing him with a beef burrito instead of a bean burrito. He was understandably upset, and eventually got money to bathe in the Ganges, etc. as compensation. A year later, we got the telescreens right below the drive-thru speaker. "Is your order correct on the screen?" Technology improves, and everyone's experience gets better. So it goes. And sometimes it's better to remove some of the human element so that mistakes/incompetence is limited.