5 ms·

US Employees Say They’re Losing the Upper Hand as Layoffs Mount

36 points by aruanavekar 4y ago

IceMetalPunk 4y ago
Thanks to the paywall, I can only read the headline and first two paragraphs. From those, here are my thoughts. Many Americans, especially among those calling themselves "patriots", will loudly proclaim their pride in how free citizens of America are. And at least as many Americans, if not more, will tout the glories of capitalism as the best economic system in existence, and even demonize socialism (which they often conflate with communism). And yet, to summarize the headline and those two first paragraphs: "Capitalist overlords are threatening employees with potential poverty, starvation, and homelessness at such high rates that they are now more scared to disobey or leave said overlords, even if they're miserable under them." Ah, yes. Capitalism in the US: a bastion of freedom, where slavery has been illegal since 1865 (unless it's economic slavery as opposed to physical force).
- sharemywin 4y ago
  https://archive.ph/Q1KrD https://archive.ph/Q1KrD
  - IceMetalPunk 4y ago
    TIL! Thank you! Now that I've read the whole article... my original comment stands.
ProjectArcturis 4y ago
Anecdotally, I've gotten a lot less recruiter spam over the last few months.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
dominotw 4y ago
Massive hiring slowdowns everywhere. Yet HN seems to not understand what the fuss is about. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32496608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32496608
- 5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
  large part of hn crowd are very wealthy, or having the capitalist flavoured entrepreneurial mindset. the s&p is up 2,000% since i was born. property use to be 2-3x of salary, now for me its closer to 20x. gambling on crypto shit-coins is literally my only hope.
  - liketochill 4y ago
    Your partner will work too though so property is 10x of household income instead of 20x one person salary.
    - prirun 4y ago
      And because both spouses have to work now to make it, you will have to pay daycare to raise your kids for you. Let's hope they do a good job. So no, your calculations are wrong.
      - suggestion 4y ago
        It's a chicken and egg situation though. Both spouses "have" to work because both spouses started working. It should be no surprise that if you nearly double the labor pool that labor devalues and household income is split between the laborers.
        jprd 4y ago
        the what now? Are theorizing that women wanting to be more than just a domestic servant and baby factory _devalued_ household earning potential by splitting it between two people?
sharemywin 4y ago
It's funny because I've never had my own office at the "office" the best I had was a decent sized cubical. The worst was sharing a room with 50 other people. Yet, at home I have an office where I can concentrate when I need to. So, I don't see what the big push is to get people back in the office. If you want a better company culture, when I worked for a consulting company we had people all over the city so they way they did it was to have a company meeting once a month at a hotel or restaurant and some kind of after party.
- asdajksah2123 4y ago
  > So, I don't see what the big push is to get people back in the office. It's interesting to me that so many people post their amazement at why employers (more specifically, middle and upper management) would want employees back to office, without actually thinking about why. So let's try that. Here are some possibilities: 1) They are sadists who just like to make life worse for their employees. But this makes little sense because it means that the middle managers, upper management, etc.'s lives are also miserable because they will also need to come into office. 2) They are control freaks who just want to control their employees. Even assuming this is broadly true across the majority of companies, it's fairly evident that online tools provide far more control than anything in person. But let's keep this as a possibility. 3) They want to save costs. Doesn't pan out. Getting rid of expensive office space, and offloading the rental, electricity, internet, etc. costs onto the employees seems much cheaper. 4) They are resistant to change. Also doesn't make sense. All these companies made massive changes within the span of a few weeks to ensure everyone can work remotely. If anything, bringing people into the office is the change. 5) They wrongly believe that employees would be more efficient in the office. This is a possibility. 6) They correctly believe that employees would be more efficient in the office. Also a possibility. Also, the fact that tech firms like Google and Facebook, which have some of the most sophisticated employee tracking/measuring systems were among the first to push for RTO there may be some data behind this, although the accuracy of the data depends on how it's being measured. 7) They just want to hang out with the only friends they have. People at work. Does not track either. Why not use the cost savings of RTO to have weekly or biweekly meetups if this is what they want. 8) They think that employees will be easier to retain if they bring them to the office. Doesn't make sense since so many have resisted coming to office. 9) They are worried that with remote work the more expensive US employees will be easier to replace and they don't want to fire their friends/colleagues. This can be a possibility but seems too "emotional". Of these options that I could think of right now the following seem possible. 1) They are control freaks who need people to be around to be physically. 2) They wrongly believe employees are more effective in the office. 3) They rightly believe employees are more effective in the office. 4) They are sentimental and don't want to make it easier to fire their friends/colleagues. Any other ideas? Why are companies insisting on RTO if it's such a slam dunk?
jjk166 4y ago
While the number of job openings have dropped 11% from their all time high in April, they're still almost exactly the same as this time last year, which is 41% higher than the prepandemic all time high. Unemployment is the lowest its been in 50 years with every gender and race having their lowest unemployment rate in the past 240 months. The total number of unemployed persons is also the lowest in at least 10 years with a 5% drop from last month alone. Initial jobless rates and quits have been holding pretty much constant for the past 12 months. While the quits rate has gone down from its all time high of 3 to 2.8, that's still .4 higher than it ever was prepandemic. YOY Wage growth remains over 10%, a level not seen since the early 80s. Labor still very much seems to have the upper hand in the current market.
- rekabis 4y ago
  TL;DR: this article is likely “spin” trying desperately to blunt the tsunami of workers moving to better their own conditions at the expense of arrogant and entitled employers who traditionally have had all the power in the employment relationship. sad trombone noises
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago
  > Labor still very much seems to have the upper hand in the current market. Serious question but like... the people I interact with at like... Chipotle, Dunkin Donuts, Starbucks... They're still making $14-$16/hr no matter what, right? Tight labor market or not? Is that "upper hand"?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - jjk166 4y ago
    The wendys by me is offering $23/hr for walk in hires. And given federal minimum wage is $7.25 even $14-16/hr is still pretty damn good. The median individual income in 2019 was $35,977 or $17.29/hr. Median individual income now is $44,225 or $21.26/hr an increase of 22.8%. The fact is most of these jobs would normally be staffed by young and uneducated people who have few other prospects at that stage in life. However shifting demographic trends mean that there simply aren't as many such people to fill these positions as there were in the past. There are fewer people entering the workforce than exiting it due to retirement, and a greater percentage of young people pursue higher education. Before the pandemic even hit, the US achieved full employment and it was becoming difficult to hire unskilled labor. A lot of low wage positions were only filled by virtue of people not wanting to leave to look for other opportunities. With the pandemic, the decision to move was made for a lot of them. Further, a lot of people who were on the cusp of retirement did so slightly early, and many who would have gotten jobs just for the sake of having something to do did not. Combined with an unanticipated boom in various industries like online shopping, there was an has been a severe worker shortage for some time now. Low wage earners are seeing the largest improvement in the current job market.
phone8675309 4y ago
Workers in the US (tech or otherwise) have never had the upper hand. They've just been able to get screwed with lube in the last few months as companies burn through the last of the cheap credit they can get.
- pharmakom 4y ago
  True but downvoted for such a crude analogy.
nr2x 4y ago
Bluff.
jdgoesmarching 4y ago
> But in a new survey conducted by the Harris Poll for Bloomberg News, 58% of respondents said they believe companies have more leverage in the job market these days, an increase of five percentage points from January. A Bloomberg poll has a 5% change from January. I won’t say that’s insubstantial, but there’s been a suspicious uptick in “workers are losing power” stories from the corporate mouthpiece pubs. Feels like a narrative is being pushed prematurely.

36 points by aruanavekar 4y ago

Thanks to the paywall, I can only read the headline and first two paragraphs. From those, here are my thoughts. Many Americans, especially among those calling themselves "patriots", will loudly proclaim their pride in how free citizens of America are. And at least as many Americans, if not more, will tout the glories of capitalism as the best economic system in existence, and even demonize socialism (which they often conflate with communism). And yet, to summarize the headline and those two first paragraphs: "Capitalist overlords are threatening employees with potential poverty, starvation, and homelessness at such high rates that they are now more scared to disobey or leave said overlords, even if they're miserable under them." Ah, yes. Capitalism in the US: a bastion of freedom, where slavery has been illegal since 1865 (unless it's economic slavery as opposed to physical force).

sharemywin 4y ago
https://archive.ph/Q1KrD https://archive.ph/Q1KrD
- IceMetalPunk 4y ago
  TIL! Thank you! Now that I've read the whole article... my original comment stands.

ProjectArcturis 4y ago

Anecdotally, I've gotten a lot less recruiter spam over the last few months.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

dominotw 4y ago

Massive hiring slowdowns everywhere. Yet HN seems to not understand what the fuss is about. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32496608 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32496608

5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
large part of hn crowd are very wealthy, or having the capitalist flavoured entrepreneurial mindset. the s&p is up 2,000% since i was born. property use to be 2-3x of salary, now for me its closer to 20x. gambling on crypto shit-coins is literally my only hope.
- liketochill 4y ago
  Your partner will work too though so property is 10x of household income instead of 20x one person salary.
  - prirun 4y ago
    And because both spouses have to work now to make it, you will have to pay daycare to raise your kids for you. Let's hope they do a good job. So no, your calculations are wrong.
    - suggestion 4y ago
      It's a chicken and egg situation though. Both spouses "have" to work because both spouses started working. It should be no surprise that if you nearly double the labor pool that labor devalues and household income is split between the laborers.
      - jprd 4y ago
        the what now? Are theorizing that women wanting to be more than just a domestic servant and baby factory _devalued_ household earning potential by splitting it between two people?

sharemywin 4y ago

It's funny because I've never had my own office at the "office" the best I had was a decent sized cubical. The worst was sharing a room with 50 other people. Yet, at home I have an office where I can concentrate when I need to. So, I don't see what the big push is to get people back in the office. If you want a better company culture, when I worked for a consulting company we had people all over the city so they way they did it was to have a company meeting once a month at a hotel or restaurant and some kind of after party.

asdajksah2123 4y ago
> So, I don't see what the big push is to get people back in the office. It's interesting to me that so many people post their amazement at why employers (more specifically, middle and upper management) would want employees back to office, without actually thinking about why. So let's try that. Here are some possibilities: 1) They are sadists who just like to make life worse for their employees. But this makes little sense because it means that the middle managers, upper management, etc.'s lives are also miserable because they will also need to come into office. 2) They are control freaks who just want to control their employees. Even assuming this is broadly true across the majority of companies, it's fairly evident that online tools provide far more control than anything in person. But let's keep this as a possibility. 3) They want to save costs. Doesn't pan out. Getting rid of expensive office space, and offloading the rental, electricity, internet, etc. costs onto the employees seems much cheaper. 4) They are resistant to change. Also doesn't make sense. All these companies made massive changes within the span of a few weeks to ensure everyone can work remotely. If anything, bringing people into the office is the change. 5) They wrongly believe that employees would be more efficient in the office. This is a possibility. 6) They correctly believe that employees would be more efficient in the office. Also a possibility. Also, the fact that tech firms like Google and Facebook, which have some of the most sophisticated employee tracking/measuring systems were among the first to push for RTO there may be some data behind this, although the accuracy of the data depends on how it's being measured. 7) They just want to hang out with the only friends they have. People at work. Does not track either. Why not use the cost savings of RTO to have weekly or biweekly meetups if this is what they want. 8) They think that employees will be easier to retain if they bring them to the office. Doesn't make sense since so many have resisted coming to office. 9) They are worried that with remote work the more expensive US employees will be easier to replace and they don't want to fire their friends/colleagues. This can be a possibility but seems too "emotional". Of these options that I could think of right now the following seem possible. 1) They are control freaks who need people to be around to be physically. 2) They wrongly believe employees are more effective in the office. 3) They rightly believe employees are more effective in the office. 4) They are sentimental and don't want to make it easier to fire their friends/colleagues. Any other ideas? Why are companies insisting on RTO if it's such a slam dunk?

jjk166 4y ago

While the number of job openings have dropped 11% from their all time high in April, they're still almost exactly the same as this time last year, which is 41% higher than the prepandemic all time high. Unemployment is the lowest its been in 50 years with every gender and race having their lowest unemployment rate in the past 240 months. The total number of unemployed persons is also the lowest in at least 10 years with a 5% drop from last month alone. Initial jobless rates and quits have been holding pretty much constant for the past 12 months. While the quits rate has gone down from its all time high of 3 to 2.8, that's still .4 higher than it ever was prepandemic. YOY Wage growth remains over 10%, a level not seen since the early 80s. Labor still very much seems to have the upper hand in the current market.

rekabis 4y ago
TL;DR: this article is likely “spin” trying desperately to blunt the tsunami of workers moving to better their own conditions at the expense of arrogant and entitled employers who traditionally have had all the power in the employment relationship. sad trombone noises
MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> Labor still very much seems to have the upper hand in the current market. Serious question but like... the people I interact with at like... Chipotle, Dunkin Donuts, Starbucks... They're still making $14-$16/hr no matter what, right? Tight labor market or not? Is that "upper hand"?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jjk166 4y ago
  The wendys by me is offering $23/hr for walk in hires. And given federal minimum wage is $7.25 even $14-16/hr is still pretty damn good. The median individual income in 2019 was $35,977 or $17.29/hr. Median individual income now is $44,225 or $21.26/hr an increase of 22.8%. The fact is most of these jobs would normally be staffed by young and uneducated people who have few other prospects at that stage in life. However shifting demographic trends mean that there simply aren't as many such people to fill these positions as there were in the past. There are fewer people entering the workforce than exiting it due to retirement, and a greater percentage of young people pursue higher education. Before the pandemic even hit, the US achieved full employment and it was becoming difficult to hire unskilled labor. A lot of low wage positions were only filled by virtue of people not wanting to leave to look for other opportunities. With the pandemic, the decision to move was made for a lot of them. Further, a lot of people who were on the cusp of retirement did so slightly early, and many who would have gotten jobs just for the sake of having something to do did not. Combined with an unanticipated boom in various industries like online shopping, there was an has been a severe worker shortage for some time now. Low wage earners are seeing the largest improvement in the current job market.

phone8675309 4y ago

Workers in the US (tech or otherwise) have never had the upper hand. They've just been able to get screwed with lube in the last few months as companies burn through the last of the cheap credit they can get.

pharmakom 4y ago
True but downvoted for such a crude analogy.

nr2x 4y ago

Bluff.

jdgoesmarching 4y ago

> But in a new survey conducted by the Harris Poll for Bloomberg News, 58% of respondents said they believe companies have more leverage in the job market these days, an increase of five percentage points from January. A Bloomberg poll has a 5% change from January. I won’t say that’s insubstantial, but there’s been a suspicious uptick in “workers are losing power” stories from the corporate mouthpiece pubs. Feels like a narrative is being pushed prematurely.