3 ms·
It's still a social construct - all the laws, even nations, are social constructs. I'm saying there should be no special benefits for employees.
by antisoeu 6y ago
It's still a social construct - all the laws, even nations, are social constructs. I'm saying there should be no special benefits for employees.
- arcticbull 6y agoAnd I'm saying there should be no special benefits to management :)
- antisoeu 6y agoThere aren't any.
- arcticbull 6y agoCan managers not fire people?
- tengbretson 6y agoA manager can terminate a work contract. In most parts of the world, the worker on the other side of this contract also has that same ability to terminate the work contract, so I'm not sure if I would consider that a "special benefit."
- nec4b 6y agoCan you fire your plumber, dentist, lawyer,...?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- danans 6y ago> It's still a social construct - all the laws, even nations, are social constructs. So? Social constructs have a lot of teeth in the real world, and always have. Wishing them away won't have any effect. > I'm saying there should be no special benefits for employees So are you arguing that those benefits (i.e. health insurance) should be universal? Or are you making the argument that only those in a position to pay should have access to those things?
- antisoeu 6y ago"Wishing them away won't have any effect." Laws and social constructs can be changed. As for health insurance (as an example), how do you justify giving health insurance to employees, but not to other people, like self-employed people?
- arcticbull 6y agoI don't which is why I support socialized single-payer medicine. However, to address your question more directly, contractors are employees as well. It's not the job site's responsibility to provide health insurance, it's their employers. Contractors still have employers, you know.
- danans 6y ago> Contractors still have employers, you know. This is true for vendors, but direct 1099 contractors are self employed.
- arcticbull 6y agoI would argue that they still have an employer, themselves, who is responsible for providing that health insurance.
- antisoeu 6y agoThat's nonsense. In your terms then, just let everybody be self-employed and contract them, rather than employ them. That's the same result I want, that people are responsible for themselves and making a contract with somebody to do some work for you doesn't come with any additional baggage. Just plain money for work.
- Apocryphon 6y agoThat would be doable if the U.S. had a robust social safety net for all these contract workers, namely health insurance for those in between jobs. Right now relying on employers for insurance has been a terrible hassle.