You're viewing a single thread.
Lololol this fucking sub 🤦♂️
You imagine the most insane shit.
Imagine? This is real life.
Whatever you say 🤷♂️🤦♂️🤣
I guess we're simultaneously in 3% unemployment and employers are at the same time firing effective employees all day.
You’re watching in real-time as middle managers fire as much as half their staff using ridiculous “return to the office” policies (when wfh had productivity up, saved employees money, and reduced pollution) just to save their own jobs and those of their commercial real estate landlords. Employees are already being replaced with AI.
If you don’t think that bosses would just fire people and replace them with automation then you really must be the most dense motherfucker in America. Stop defining your self-worth by how hard you work, it’s just what your bosses want to turn you into a slave they can exploit while you never criticize the ever increasing problems with a system that doesn’t give a single solitary shit about you.
Lolol that's one company. Median tenure in the US is about 4 years depending on who you ask.
Here are some possible reasons for why the unemployment rate can be misleading and why low-wage workers (usually in the service sector, which includes over 2/3 of jobs in Canada and over 3/4 of jobs in the USA) are often not considered for promotion or career development. Wage stagnation and inflation are rampant and are driving down real wages. I made less this year than last year despite a 5% wage increase because inflation was over 8%.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/underemployment.asp
A third type of underemployment refers to situations in which individuals who are unable to find work in their chosen field quit the workforce altogether, meaning they haven't looked for a job in the last four weeks, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics' (BLS) definition of "not in the labor force."
The number of these workers skyrocketed during the onset of the economic crisis and lockdown in early 2020, which ultimately resulted in a substantial change in working conditions and coincided with a crash in the markets. It is statistically difficult to measure the third type of underemployment.
People are removing themselves from the job market; they've given up and are not being counted by labour statistics. This is also not something caused by COVID-19, just made more overt due to the large number of people affected.
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/8/17308744/bullshit-jobs-book-david-graeber-occupy-wall-street-karl-marx
A lot of bullshit jobs are just manufactured middle-management positions with no real utility in the world, but they exist anyway in order to justify the careers of the people performing them. But if they went away tomorrow, it would make no difference at all.
And that’s how you know a job is bullshit: If we suddenly eliminated teachers or garbage collectors or construction workers or law enforcement or whatever, it would really matter. We’d notice the absence. But if bullshit jobs go away, we’re no worse off.
My sister-in-law's ex-husband works for the federal government; when he first started his job, he did his work at what he thought was a normal pace, only for his supervisor to tell him to slow down because others weren't able to keep up. He would be given a report to write and would finish it in 3-4 days, but his supervisor wanted him to take 7-10 days.
He's employed, sure, but he has to essentially waste his own time so that his superiors don't get butthurt. He plays video games on his computer during his downtime; you'd think a person like that would be fired, but he's been working there for 4 or 5 years now, so he would never be on the chopping block during layoffs.
https://hbr.org/2022/03/does-your-company-offer-fruitful-careers-or-dead-end-jobs
For example, we worked with a food services company that is one of the largest employers in the world to examine how training and job opportunities are created within the company. With more than 15,000 current job openings at the company, recruitment and retention is a constant focus. Training employees to create career paths for them in this low-wage industry is an important part of the retention strategy.
An initial examination of the data showed that training expenditures were highest among low-wage workers at the company, yet when those low-wage workers changed jobs within the company, more than one third soon left, and almost half saw almost no pay increase. Digging deeper, we found that only 17% of low-wage workers saw a significant pay increase.
These outcomes did not jibe with the firm’s commitment to training. Further analysis showed that when we removed compliance-related training expenditures from the data, we learned that most other training expenditures were directed at higher-wage workers and that these workers were more likely to take advantage of training benefits offered by the company.
If you're working 40 hours per week while living paycheck to paycheck, yes, you're employed, but is that really the sign of a healthy national economy or robust quality of life? Job hopping is the only way to reliably keep up with inflation, but it impacts your ability to build towards retirement (pension, 401k/RRSP contributions, etc.) or qualify for benefits such as paid time off or continuing education.
In the tech industry it's even worse, as there are so many software developers and networking/IT professionals waiting for a chance that companies genuinely can get rid of interns/junior staff (and sometimes even senior staff) at will and have a replacement at the "revolving desk" by next week.
Do you think getting fired means you don't need a new job? Those people getting fired still have bills to pay. They're just finding new jobs.
And you think companies are firing the efficient employees from employer to employer while keeping a sub 3% rate? The median tenure in the states is about 4 years. What you are claiming just isn't mathematically possible
Then show me the failed calculation
"Efficient employee" is corpo speak for "abused and compliant worker". Of course they wouldn't fire the people that give them the most results for the least in return.
Edit: I do work 40 hours/week and it's bullshit. I don't reply to corporate shills
Blah blah. Blah blah, go walk dogs if you can't be brothered to put in a decent 40 hours.
I think all the stuff that gets to the "front page" of lemmy from this community is actually all correct but idk why anyones first reaction to this would be antiwork. You still want people to work because ai cant program well enough today. I dont really understand the antiwork movement right now, maybe in 20 years.
The anti work movement is really 2 things. You’ve got the “I want to work as little as I can” group who no matter the circumstances would do just that. Shove 10 people in a house that work part time with a big garden types. And you’ve got the “my hours and pay need to reflect increases in efficiency and decreases in amount of work I need to do”. Both unify in hating work. And both are useful to the cultural milieu, the former more like the hippies who dropped out of society and the latter like the people who demanded the 40 hour work week
Ok but that means most sane people arent antiwork but just want work reforms if im right. And it confuses like minded people(like me).
You aren’t entirely wrong but also the difference winds up in perspective. Work reform seeks to change work, usually through cooperation. You can compare it to a liberal union like the teamsters. Antiwork seeks to remove work’s status as the main focus of a significant chunk of our lives. It can be more easily compared to a radical union like the IWW. Both can probably settle on a compromise that they’re both comfortable with, but how they relate to folks like bosses and those who drop out is going to be different.
And I wouldn’t call those who minimize their labor insane but rather differently prioritized. Many are doing productive things with their time but not of the monetized or monetizable variety, just personal projects. Or they want to live like they’re retired. Or whatever. I can’t judge that urge because while it’s not how I want to live personally I do see something admirable and increasingly necessary in a lifestyle that trades ability to consume for time