31 ms·

It is easy to "find a new job" but things like healthcare, geographic location, and creditworthiness are tied to employment. If employment were more isolated t

by sqeaky 2y ago

It is easy to "find a new job" but things like healthcare, geographic location, and creditworthiness are tied to employment. If employment were more isolated this argument would still only be superficially reasonable, because we also live in a society with structural sexism and racism and other bigotries. Plenty of people have fewer employment options because of the circumstances of their birth. Then look at me, I am professional contractor and not the obvious target of any of those bigotries. 16 contracts (often 6 or 12 mo), in the past 20 years. of that maybe 3 weren't complete shitholes. How long is one person supposed to keep making major life changes to search for a job that doesn't abuse them? Because a 1 in 5 hit rate implies some things. Setting a floor on how shitty companies can be to their employees would a boon to everyone and likely make the whole economy more productive simply by reducing depression by a double digit percentage.

imgabe 2y ago
> Setting a floor on how shitty companies can be to their employees would a boon to everyone and likely make the whole economy more productive simply by reducing depression by a double digit percentage. Yes, we do that. It's called "labor laws". There are many of them. It's a question of agency. If you assign responsibility for your well-being to others, then you're always going to be at their mercy. Sure, there's structural whatevers and bigots and all sorts of things. Some people won't hire you because you remind them of the kid that bullied them in 3rd grade. Whatever. It's still up to you take control of your life. Nobody else is going to do it for you. Every time you try and demand that someone else do it for you, you are going to end up disappointed.
- sqeaky 2y ago
  No need to be so absolute no one is "assign[ing] responsibility for your well-being to others", there are grey areas and gradients and employment is fundamentally full of those. No one person can be an expert in everything, we live in a society and should act like it. Needing to be an expert in healthcare, hiring processes, finances, and a dozen other topics just to switch jobs is a major barrier to the just switch mentality you are presenting. And I know first hand, I am just switching constantly because it is what I wanted. We should have reasonable baselines and minimums for treatment, and those should shift and get better as we improve society. > Every time you try and demand that someone else do it for you, you are going to end up disappointed. Yet there are countries that have better situations for labor than the US?! Even something as simple as universal healthcare would fix a ton for millions of US people. It would empower worker to switch jobs and employers to lure top talent held by it. Only a hundred or so other countries figured it out, there is no way we could do it here we would only end up disappointed, right? I pick that as an example, but we could go over many possible topics that aren't blanket assignments of "responsibility for your well-being to others". Consider non-compete clauses, IP transfers, minimum wage and tons of other topics that if they had a minimum floor of decency could allow more freedom the the worker and employer.
  - imgabe 2y ago
    > Needing to be an expert in healthcare, hiring processes, finances, and a dozen other topics just to switch jobs is a major barrier to the just switch mentality you are presenting. Nobody is saying you need to be an expert in all of these things to switch jobs. Consider the fact that very few people, if any, are actually experts in all of these things and yet people do in fact switch jobs all the time. Empirically, it is not required. > Yet there are countries that have better situations for labor than the US?! Better in some ways. Many of those countries are significantly less productive and have moribund, declining economies and low pay compared to the US. > Consider non-compete clauses, IP transfers, minimum wage and tons of other topics that if they had a minimum floor of decency could allow more freedom the the worker and employer. non-compete clauses: don't sign them. I've never encountered one. Negotiate terms that you feel are adequate to compensate you for not competing. If you don't have sufficient leverage to negotiate, work on that. IP transfers: again, don't sign it, or negotiate. Most workers will never generate any significant IP so this is rarely an issue. If you are going to generate valuable IP that is 100% due to you, then start your own company. Minimum wage: less than 1% of workers make minimum wage. Anyone with a pulse and half a brain can quickly become more valuable and qualify for higher paying jobs. Just be organized and responsible enough to be an assistant manager at a fast food place and you're already making more than minimum wage. There are store managers at Wal-Mart and Buc-ees making $250k.
    - sqeaky 2y ago
      > Nobody is saying you need to be an expert in all of these things to switch jobs. Consider the fact that very few people, if any, are actually experts in all of these things and yet people do in fact switch jobs all the time. Empirically, it is not required. You vacillate between personal responsibility and skipping requirements, which is it? Should we take you seriously or not? You do understand that when I say people need to be "Experts" I don't mean hold Phds, I mean they need to be far more well read and have a much deeper understanding outside of core competencies than our contemporaries elsewhere in the world. They get to focus on family or work, and I need to understand 50 pages of contract nonsense to sort out how screwed I am on this interstate tax law and why my health insurance won't pay. > declining economies and low pay compared to the US You looking at the median income or the mean income? Because if you cut out a few billionaires the US Mean drops by like 20%. If you look at median we are in line with Countries like Canada and Western Europe who have better worker protections and are doing fine economically. (And they have healthcare so insurance doesn't pin them to one job for fear of literally dying) > non-compete clauses: don't sign them. I've never encountered one. You are arguing specifics (and doing it incorrectly) while I am showing you a forest of problems and you go after each tree with an axe ignoring that there is a whole forest. On this specific tree. Some states banned non-competes. Some people do run into them. Some people do. Some people have no real options without them. Some people signed them in the past not fully understanding them (because they weren't IP law experts). I am not saying these should go away I am saying there should be a floor for how hard employers can screw workers so that someone who isn't a legal expert isn't forced out of their profession in a moment of desperation. Fundamentally, in the forest of problems you are arguing "I have leverage so this works for me" and ignoring all the people who must say "I have no leverage except for my labor and I am willing to work hard, but I sure hope the system doesn't screw out of these hard earned pennies".

by sqeaky 2y ago

imgabe 2y ago

> Setting a floor on how shitty companies can be to their employees would a boon to everyone and likely make the whole economy more productive simply by reducing depression by a double digit percentage. Yes, we do that. It's called "labor laws". There are many of them. It's a question of agency. If you assign responsibility for your well-being to others, then you're always going to be at their mercy. Sure, there's structural whatevers and bigots and all sorts of things. Some people won't hire you because you remind them of the kid that bullied them in 3rd grade. Whatever. It's still up to you take control of your life. Nobody else is going to do it for you. Every time you try and demand that someone else do it for you, you are going to end up disappointed.

sqeaky 2y ago
No need to be so absolute no one is "assign[ing] responsibility for your well-being to others", there are grey areas and gradients and employment is fundamentally full of those. No one person can be an expert in everything, we live in a society and should act like it. Needing to be an expert in healthcare, hiring processes, finances, and a dozen other topics just to switch jobs is a major barrier to the just switch mentality you are presenting. And I know first hand, I am just switching constantly because it is what I wanted. We should have reasonable baselines and minimums for treatment, and those should shift and get better as we improve society. > Every time you try and demand that someone else do it for you, you are going to end up disappointed. Yet there are countries that have better situations for labor than the US?! Even something as simple as universal healthcare would fix a ton for millions of US people. It would empower worker to switch jobs and employers to lure top talent held by it. Only a hundred or so other countries figured it out, there is no way we could do it here we would only end up disappointed, right? I pick that as an example, but we could go over many possible topics that aren't blanket assignments of "responsibility for your well-being to others". Consider non-compete clauses, IP transfers, minimum wage and tons of other topics that if they had a minimum floor of decency could allow more freedom the the worker and employer.
- imgabe 2y ago
  > Needing to be an expert in healthcare, hiring processes, finances, and a dozen other topics just to switch jobs is a major barrier to the just switch mentality you are presenting. Nobody is saying you need to be an expert in all of these things to switch jobs. Consider the fact that very few people, if any, are actually experts in all of these things and yet people do in fact switch jobs all the time. Empirically, it is not required. > Yet there are countries that have better situations for labor than the US?! Better in some ways. Many of those countries are significantly less productive and have moribund, declining economies and low pay compared to the US. > Consider non-compete clauses, IP transfers, minimum wage and tons of other topics that if they had a minimum floor of decency could allow more freedom the the worker and employer. non-compete clauses: don't sign them. I've never encountered one. Negotiate terms that you feel are adequate to compensate you for not competing. If you don't have sufficient leverage to negotiate, work on that. IP transfers: again, don't sign it, or negotiate. Most workers will never generate any significant IP so this is rarely an issue. If you are going to generate valuable IP that is 100% due to you, then start your own company. Minimum wage: less than 1% of workers make minimum wage. Anyone with a pulse and half a brain can quickly become more valuable and qualify for higher paying jobs. Just be organized and responsible enough to be an assistant manager at a fast food place and you're already making more than minimum wage. There are store managers at Wal-Mart and Buc-ees making $250k.
  - sqeaky 2y ago
    > Nobody is saying you need to be an expert in all of these things to switch jobs. Consider the fact that very few people, if any, are actually experts in all of these things and yet people do in fact switch jobs all the time. Empirically, it is not required. You vacillate between personal responsibility and skipping requirements, which is it? Should we take you seriously or not? You do understand that when I say people need to be "Experts" I don't mean hold Phds, I mean they need to be far more well read and have a much deeper understanding outside of core competencies than our contemporaries elsewhere in the world. They get to focus on family or work, and I need to understand 50 pages of contract nonsense to sort out how screwed I am on this interstate tax law and why my health insurance won't pay. > declining economies and low pay compared to the US You looking at the median income or the mean income? Because if you cut out a few billionaires the US Mean drops by like 20%. If you look at median we are in line with Countries like Canada and Western Europe who have better worker protections and are doing fine economically. (And they have healthcare so insurance doesn't pin them to one job for fear of literally dying) > non-compete clauses: don't sign them. I've never encountered one. You are arguing specifics (and doing it incorrectly) while I am showing you a forest of problems and you go after each tree with an axe ignoring that there is a whole forest. On this specific tree. Some states banned non-competes. Some people do run into them. Some people do. Some people have no real options without them. Some people signed them in the past not fully understanding them (because they weren't IP law experts). I am not saying these should go away I am saying there should be a floor for how hard employers can screw workers so that someone who isn't a legal expert isn't forced out of their profession in a moment of desperation. Fundamentally, in the forest of problems you are arguing "I have leverage so this works for me" and ignoring all the people who must say "I have no leverage except for my labor and I am willing to work hard, but I sure hope the system doesn't screw out of these hard earned pennies".