This is, very directly, a supply-and-demand problem. (That is not to say that it's a simple one, or that naive economics trivially applies here or will necessar

This is, very directly, a supply-and-demand problem. (That is not to say that it's a simple one, or that naive economics trivially applies here or will necessarily give correct answers, or especially that either the supply or demand are straightforward to change, just that it's a reasonable reasoning framework to start with.) The more people willing to do a job, the lower the standards of the lowest bidder. Solving this problem requires one or more of: 1) Raising the minimum standards of the lowest bidders on the worker side. This could be done through collective bargaining or regulation, making it so nobody is willing to "defect" (in the prisoner's dilemma sense) and work for conditions below a certain standard, which means there's little to no supply of such workers. 2) Raising the standards on the demand side. This could theoretically happen if consumers are willing to preferentially purchase from places that provide higher standards for workers; effectively, coordinate and collectively bargain on the purchasing side. This seems unlikely to happen as consumers are even more likely to "defect" and purchase from the least expensive company. This is one case where a simplistic model breaks down: consumers' ability to collectively demand higher standards for how companies treat their workers is limited by the fact that consumers are getting their income and ability to afford higher standards from the work they're doing. 3) Lowering the supply of labor across the board. This would happen if fewer people are willing to do the job, such as if people didn't have to work in order to survive (e.g. UBI). If there isn't an endless supply of workers who have to tolerate whatever conditions get them paid enough to survive, satisfying demand for labor requires substantially higher standards for pay and working conditions. (Conversely, if everyone in a workplace wants to be there, it's easier to get quality output.) 4) Raising the demand for labor across the board. This isn't going to happen, as it'd run counter to some of the primary defining qualities of an improving society; even if it did, it would be likely to ultimately result in similar stratification between groups of workers. 5) Raise the mobility from one category of labor to another. Constantly being worked on in many different ways, but will inherently never be able to fully solve the problem because not enough people can take advantage of this option to avoid stratification. The feasible alternatives here feed back both positively and negatively into each other. Personally, I think implementing (3) via UBI is the one most likely in terms of feasibility. (Not politically in terms of passing it, but practically in terms of how monumentally effective it would be compared to the rest.) (3) is the option here most immune to the prisoners' dilemma defection problem.