3 ms·

The main point of the parent is this: "people who don't demand overtime pay are deluded/stupid/victims of false consciousness/act against their own interest"

by toehead2000 12y ago

The main point of the parent is this: "people who don't demand overtime pay are deluded/stupid/victims of false consciousness/act against their own interest" right? This is was I took him gnu8 to mean when he said "... the startup culture stock option lottery deludes them into thinking they are a part of the ownership class rather than the working class. Thus, they allow basically all of the fruits of their labor to be stolen from them." What other point am I missing? I think my post and the follow up make a pretty coherent argument that no, in fact, mass delusion on the part of tech industry workers is not the best explanation. The delusion argument is an argument from the "left wing," especially when given in terms of capital and labor and conflict between classes and so forth. That's just a positive statement, not a normative one, so I don't understand how that can constitute a "rant." What I think might be illuminating to Europeans who are incredulous about how our workers would allow the "fruits of their labor to be stolen," would be to hear why they might not consider working unpaid overtime to be being stolen from.

gnu8 12y ago
You understood my comment correctly. False consciousness is a good explanation because of the fact that tech workers accept such a meager proportion of the profits generated by their work without complaint. Why would anyone knowingly accept less money than they're worth? They wouldn't, knowingly. It must be unknowingly. They must not know they're being exploited because there is no significant organization. Instead they all act as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" and try to increase their wealth incrementally, by competing amongst themselves for promotions and raises, working 100 hour weeks at startups for equity, and so on. You suggest that they look elsewhere for a better deal, as if the free market price for their labor is by definition a fair price, but it is not, because of the power differential between capital and labor. It's not that all business collude consciously against labor(1), it's simply that the exception in the law for tech workers drives the price down, because it's purely good management not to pay any more than necessary for labor. I'm not suggesting mass strikes, labor unions, and Marxist claptrap as a solution. Removing the loophole would be an entirely reasonable starting point. I've never seen anything approaching a rational justification for the tech worker exemption. (1) Except when they do, like with the recent wage fixing scandal amongst a subset of well known companies.

gnu8 12y ago

You understood my comment correctly. False consciousness is a good explanation because of the fact that tech workers accept such a meager proportion of the profits generated by their work without complaint. Why would anyone knowingly accept less money than they're worth? They wouldn't, knowingly. It must be unknowingly. They must not know they're being exploited because there is no significant organization. Instead they all act as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" and try to increase their wealth incrementally, by competing amongst themselves for promotions and raises, working 100 hour weeks at startups for equity, and so on. You suggest that they look elsewhere for a better deal, as if the free market price for their labor is by definition a fair price, but it is not, because of the power differential between capital and labor. It's not that all business collude consciously against labor(1), it's simply that the exception in the law for tech workers drives the price down, because it's purely good management not to pay any more than necessary for labor. I'm not suggesting mass strikes, labor unions, and Marxist claptrap as a solution. Removing the loophole would be an entirely reasonable starting point. I've never seen anything approaching a rational justification for the tech worker exemption. (1) Except when they do, like with the recent wage fixing scandal amongst a subset of well known companies.