3 ms·
What you are saying sounds a little like victim blaming. We need regulations so companies can’t compete on cutting costs through not providing things like sick
by rqtwteye 4y ago
What you are saying sounds a little like victim blaming. We need regulations so companies can’t compete on cutting costs through not providing things like sick days or safe working conditions. There are always people desperate enough to take exploitative/unsafe jobs. These jobs should not exist and all companies should compete under the same rules.
- kepler1 4y agoI think we're talking on orthogonal lines. It's not companies who are competing, but workers who are competing with each other for jobs and being willing to take those jobs. If the employment conditions are transparent and not unsafe physically (which is related to having full information about what you're signing up for), why is sick days something that shouldn't be open to negotiation or a person willing to agree to have more or fewer of them? Suppose that a person is young and healthy and believes he/she doesn't need a lot of sick days. Why is it unreasonable for him/her to agree to a job that doesn't offer extra sick days? What's the logic / principle there? Is it because sickness is unpredictable and an employee shouldn't have to suffer from something unexpected? Is it an information asymmetry argument?