4 ms·

Isn't that the business model with low skill workers though? Figure out how to employ them in a way that they don't need training and all is well.

pdntspa 4y ago
It's an incredibly shitty model for everyone but shareholders. Why do we have to institutionalize abuse?
- DesiLurker 4y ago
  My high level analysis is that this is because of institutionalized 'dispersion of responsibility' stemming from the pure capitalistic doctrine we all have supposedly signed up for. Essentially you have individual entities whose responsibility (& only one) to maximize the profit. so anything that is measurable ends up getting projected on one dimension of 'capital'. There is a lot of talk about social responsibility but most 'don't be evil' lasts until a few bad quarters and then its back to same story. No supposedly the govt/unions are supposed to provide a counterbalance to this but for some incredible reason folks here in America are convinced that any collective action is basically soviet style socialism hence out of question. So what we are left with is this dispersion of responsibility to do social good but no one actually in charge of it. And don't even get me started on the Senate composition/electoral college & institutionalized gerrymandering (so you can actually fix it with simple majority you need a special kind of majority).
  - yourapostasy 4y ago
    > ...any collective action is basically soviet style socialism hence out of question. Ironically, the set of interlocking directorships, foundation seats, advisorships, consulting arrangements, share holdings, etc. among politicians, C-suite and EVP layers is every bit as collectivist as an old Soviet farm or modern workers' union. I personally model it as the strongest union out there because it doesn't need to operate by open rules relying upon legislation but is instead an acculturated reinforcement mechanism amongst its members that flexibly adapts to its host socioeconomic framework, making it harder than any conventional union to bust up or influence.
willturman 4y ago
I would argue that a "low skill worker" doesn't exist as anything but a pejorative stereotype for large swaths of people who form and perform functions that create the foundation on which an economy runs.
- commandlinefan 4y ago
  Well I mean c'mon... are you seriously trying to suggest that every job takes the same level of skill as every other job? There are people who don't want to spend years of their lives working math problems to get to the point where they can become highly specialized and are happy being "low skilled" because they get more time to themselves.
  - tonnydourado 4y ago
    How many software developers do you think can work in a kitchen? Or clean houses? Or work on construction?
    - snapcaster 4y ago
      Probably almost all of them right?
      - danaris 4y ago
        Work in a kitchen: Maybe. Actually do a good job, walking in off the street? Nope. There are dozens of things you need to know and be able to do to work well in a kitchen—and those things change depending on what kind of kitchen it is, but one of them that doesn't change is clear, fast, in-person communication, including doing what you're told instantly. A software developer going into a kitchen job and thinking they're hot shit because they're coming from a "skilled job" and this is an "unskilled job" is going to get themselves or someone else badly injured very quickly. Clean a house: Yeah, probably. Clean houses well enough to be paid for it: Probably not. Clean houses, well enough to be paid for it, 40 hours a week, for years: Very unlikely. That takes not just the skills to actually get each house professionally clean, but the mindset to be able to handle that sort of work for long periods. Work construction: Almost certainly not. While not all construction requires heavy lifting, most does, and most software developers are not in good enough physical shape to do that on a regular basis without doing serious damage to their bodies. Not to mention the care and precision required to build things that will both look good and last. Because "be able to do this job" doesn't just mean "has the basic understanding of how the mechanics of it work." It means understanding the details and nuances, being willing as well as able to do it for long periods of time, and being able to do it to a professional standard, not just "good enough for me".
AlexandrB 4y ago
The newer goal seems to be employing them in a way that doesn't need training, but then claiming that "flipping a burger" is a business secret and making them sign a broad non-compete anyway.
UncleMeat 4y ago
There is (almost) no such thing as unskilled labor. If you've ever tried to move your furniture to a new place and also paid people to move your stuff you'll see that movers are like 5x more efficient, yet it would be considered an "unskilled" job.
- bluGill 4y ago
  McDonald's is considered a low skill job, but in reality it is high skill, but they have done very well into breaking those skills down so that with just half an hour of "class room training" (on a video), and a couple hours with a trainer you can be productive. Repeat this for a new area a few shifts latter, soon you have a lot of skills with minimal investment.
- SkyBelow 4y ago
  >There is (almost) no such thing as unskilled labor. That is arguing against a strawman created by an argument that isn't fully specified. Even walking takes skill. What is meant when people talk about the skill involved in work is how hard is it to train someone to do the job, generally someone with the knowledge and physical skills an adult is expected to have but without any special training beyond that. Some jobs can be picked up in under a week of training. Other jobs require years of training. Some require physical skills that are quite common among the population even if the average adult doesn't have them (say something like a fitness level 1/3 of adults have). Discussions of skilled vs. unskilled labor rarely if ever get into where exactly the line is drawn at, but there is a common understanding that jobs can generally be classified as either something an average adult could be taught how to do on the job or not. Why this matters is that it determines competition for jobs. The more people able to do the job, the less one has to offer to find someone willing to accept. If you can train the average adult to do the job on the job, then you are competing with working adults at large. If you can't, at least reasonably, train someone on the job, then you are competing with far fewer individuals.
version_five 4y ago
I think your point could be rephrased around the business model being to turn jobs into low skill jobs (basically by removing any human agency) so that labor becomes a pure commodity. Uber is the closest I've seen to that I'm practice. I suspect some warehouse jobs are like that too. Most of the time it doesn't work, which is why Uber for X never really caught on, because you can't commodify e.g. a handyman the way you can a car ride
- ghaff 4y ago
  Driving at least in the same universe as competent is something that most adults need to be able to do for other reasons so Uber (sort of) works. And the product is pretty standardized--get me from A to B which is so far/so long. Most handyman--much less general contractor--tasks are a lot more variable and I even have some issues with my lawn guy once I get beyond the contracted every two week mow.

pdntspa 4y ago

It's an incredibly shitty model for everyone but shareholders. Why do we have to institutionalize abuse?

DesiLurker 4y ago
My high level analysis is that this is because of institutionalized 'dispersion of responsibility' stemming from the pure capitalistic doctrine we all have supposedly signed up for. Essentially you have individual entities whose responsibility (& only one) to maximize the profit. so anything that is measurable ends up getting projected on one dimension of 'capital'. There is a lot of talk about social responsibility but most 'don't be evil' lasts until a few bad quarters and then its back to same story. No supposedly the govt/unions are supposed to provide a counterbalance to this but for some incredible reason folks here in America are convinced that any collective action is basically soviet style socialism hence out of question. So what we are left with is this dispersion of responsibility to do social good but no one actually in charge of it. And don't even get me started on the Senate composition/electoral college & institutionalized gerrymandering (so you can actually fix it with simple majority you need a special kind of majority).
- yourapostasy 4y ago
  > ...any collective action is basically soviet style socialism hence out of question. Ironically, the set of interlocking directorships, foundation seats, advisorships, consulting arrangements, share holdings, etc. among politicians, C-suite and EVP layers is every bit as collectivist as an old Soviet farm or modern workers' union. I personally model it as the strongest union out there because it doesn't need to operate by open rules relying upon legislation but is instead an acculturated reinforcement mechanism amongst its members that flexibly adapts to its host socioeconomic framework, making it harder than any conventional union to bust up or influence.

willturman 4y ago

I would argue that a "low skill worker" doesn't exist as anything but a pejorative stereotype for large swaths of people who form and perform functions that create the foundation on which an economy runs.

commandlinefan 4y ago
Well I mean c'mon... are you seriously trying to suggest that every job takes the same level of skill as every other job? There are people who don't want to spend years of their lives working math problems to get to the point where they can become highly specialized and are happy being "low skilled" because they get more time to themselves.
- tonnydourado 4y ago
  How many software developers do you think can work in a kitchen? Or clean houses? Or work on construction?
  - snapcaster 4y ago
    Probably almost all of them right?
    - danaris 4y ago
      Work in a kitchen: Maybe. Actually do a good job, walking in off the street? Nope. There are dozens of things you need to know and be able to do to work well in a kitchen—and those things change depending on what kind of kitchen it is, but one of them that doesn't change is clear, fast, in-person communication, including doing what you're told instantly. A software developer going into a kitchen job and thinking they're hot shit because they're coming from a "skilled job" and this is an "unskilled job" is going to get themselves or someone else badly injured very quickly. Clean a house: Yeah, probably. Clean houses well enough to be paid for it: Probably not. Clean houses, well enough to be paid for it, 40 hours a week, for years: Very unlikely. That takes not just the skills to actually get each house professionally clean, but the mindset to be able to handle that sort of work for long periods. Work construction: Almost certainly not. While not all construction requires heavy lifting, most does, and most software developers are not in good enough physical shape to do that on a regular basis without doing serious damage to their bodies. Not to mention the care and precision required to build things that will both look good and last. Because "be able to do this job" doesn't just mean "has the basic understanding of how the mechanics of it work." It means understanding the details and nuances, being willing as well as able to do it for long periods of time, and being able to do it to a professional standard, not just "good enough for me".

AlexandrB 4y ago

The newer goal seems to be employing them in a way that doesn't need training, but then claiming that "flipping a burger" is a business secret and making them sign a broad non-compete anyway.

UncleMeat 4y ago

There is (almost) no such thing as unskilled labor. If you've ever tried to move your furniture to a new place and also paid people to move your stuff you'll see that movers are like 5x more efficient, yet it would be considered an "unskilled" job.

bluGill 4y ago
McDonald's is considered a low skill job, but in reality it is high skill, but they have done very well into breaking those skills down so that with just half an hour of "class room training" (on a video), and a couple hours with a trainer you can be productive. Repeat this for a new area a few shifts latter, soon you have a lot of skills with minimal investment.
SkyBelow 4y ago
>There is (almost) no such thing as unskilled labor. That is arguing against a strawman created by an argument that isn't fully specified. Even walking takes skill. What is meant when people talk about the skill involved in work is how hard is it to train someone to do the job, generally someone with the knowledge and physical skills an adult is expected to have but without any special training beyond that. Some jobs can be picked up in under a week of training. Other jobs require years of training. Some require physical skills that are quite common among the population even if the average adult doesn't have them (say something like a fitness level 1/3 of adults have). Discussions of skilled vs. unskilled labor rarely if ever get into where exactly the line is drawn at, but there is a common understanding that jobs can generally be classified as either something an average adult could be taught how to do on the job or not. Why this matters is that it determines competition for jobs. The more people able to do the job, the less one has to offer to find someone willing to accept. If you can train the average adult to do the job on the job, then you are competing with working adults at large. If you can't, at least reasonably, train someone on the job, then you are competing with far fewer individuals.

version_five 4y ago

I think your point could be rephrased around the business model being to turn jobs into low skill jobs (basically by removing any human agency) so that labor becomes a pure commodity. Uber is the closest I've seen to that I'm practice. I suspect some warehouse jobs are like that too. Most of the time it doesn't work, which is why Uber for X never really caught on, because you can't commodify e.g. a handyman the way you can a car ride

ghaff 4y ago
Driving at least in the same universe as competent is something that most adults need to be able to do for other reasons so Uber (sort of) works. And the product is pretty standardized--get me from A to B which is so far/so long. Most handyman--much less general contractor--tasks are a lot more variable and I even have some issues with my lawn guy once I get beyond the contracted every two week mow.