News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by oneoff786 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @10:44AM (#29567494)
The funny thing about the American dream is that the quintessential examples used to be blue collar or back office labor jobs like mailroom processors could work hard and rise to the top. Kind of a pipe dream but it did happen. Even if you believe that to still be true, gig workers start even lower, below the bottom rung of the ladder. They’re contractors doing spot jobs in mailrooms. Most janitor jobs are gone. They’re now contractors too. Healthcare is to blame for a lot of this. The cost of a low level employee is simply too high when companies need to cover the healthcare coverage costs.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by awakeasleep on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @02:48PM (#29570714)
Your point about employee costs rising with healthcare is terrific and needs wider cultural recognition.

This increases the cost of labor, and therefore cost of goods across the economy. Its a big part of the reason why US based manufacturing is increasingly impractical.

Your point expands to all social services our government has outsourced, from retirement benefits to transportation, too.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by gadflyinyoureye on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @03:00PM (#29570854)
We'd still have the costs if the government took those in-house. Germans pay around $1500 a month (personal + employer costs) for healthcare. Other government programs add more cost. Bring those in cost would not really bring the cost of the employee down. Rather it would expand the weight and power of the government via increased taxes.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by oneoff786 on Thursday December 16, 2021 @08:42AM (#29577973)
It wouldn’t change the actual costs of living, but it would remove the inflection points where a full time employee is suddenly much more expensive than a 38 hour a work employee.

And the taxes could be spread more progressively, e.g. to match the rate of wealth accumulation people get from having passively having wealth

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by gmadsen on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @04:01PM (#29571575)
it distributes the cost across all sectors, which as the above poster commented would be beneficial to hiring low skill workers
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by jollybean on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @10:27PM (#29574450)
The 'American Dream' is not 'Mail room to CEO' though FYI this is still possible.

The 'American Dream' is a stable job, a modest home with 'plumbing' and 'electricity' and maybe one car, plastic tupperware, maybe a dishwasher, and a safe community with basic constitutional protections and a justice and democratic system with integrity and legitimacy, decent public schools and some access to higher education.

All of that is revolutionary in the grand context of history.

The 1950's 'America Middle Class' is the dream, as it is for many migrants to the US for whom those things are like heaven.

The '$100K job, BMW and Corner Office' - that's something else, more like icing on the cake.

People forget how hard it was for the world to create the basic '1950s middle class standard of living' and frankly how delicate the system we live in is.

Within a generation we've come to accept that as more of a 'basic' condition of life, rather than something aspriational, which is a bit tragic. Most immigrants 'get it' though.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by justtologin on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:37PM (#29569887)
> blue collar or back office labor jobs like mailroom processors could work hard and rise to the top

I'd guess a factor in ending this has been the rise or at least growth of an administrative or managerial class in most businesses.

An apprenticeship model lets people grow, and to some extent a similar model used to apply in business, where the executives and managers were all career industry people who started on the shop floor.

The current system is closer to (closer, not the same as) a feudal system where there is a group of nobility that manages a group of serfs, and there is not much movement between the groups, at least at the same company. Admission into the nobility is based on education and other pedigree, and can never really be had by work experience.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by ryandrake on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @03:32PM (#29571252)
Exactly. There is no way to "hard work" your way from junior employee to Founder or CEO. When the CEO leaves, their replacement always comes from the executive class. The junior can work their way up to senior or even low-level manager. But at some point high up on the ladder, employees come from a totally different aristocracy, and you can't work or even buy your way into that clique. Every company I've ever worked for, when they went looking for a VP-Of-Something, they'd never promote from the proletariat--they'd always go externally and look for someone from the nobility.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by 908B64B197 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @07:35PM (#29573410)
> Every company I've ever worked for, when they went looking for a VP-Of-Something, they'd never promote from the proletariat--they'd always go externally and look for someone from the nobility.

Interestingly, that might be the case for Fortune 500. But among the fortune 10, most CEOs/C-Suite are engineers with long tenures at the company.

Actually, if you look back at some of the most influential companies in the Valley at their peak, that's been a rule of thumb since the Fairchild days. Andrew Grove is an example of that [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Grove

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by mandevil on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @04:07PM (#29571650)
So one factor here is the actually computers: 50 years ago, store clerk was a medium prestige job, that had medium pay and growth prospects- there are plenty of stories of people who started a clerk and ended up in a senior position. But that was because clerks had to know the prices and goods: a major risk to the store owner was customers swapping price stickers, so you needed a clerk who could spot the difference between the expensive onion and the cheap one and knew what the price should be and these clerks had to stay in one place long enough to know the prices.

Then along came the laser/UPC/computer system and deskilled the job. No longer did you need to know the difference, the computer printed up a natural language description of the item. This allowed stores to get much larger, because no one could know all the prices in a large store (early department stores handled the size by making you pay for items in each department, using store balance accounts to not create too much friction). This fundamentally reshaped the relationship between capital (who owned the stores and the computer system) and labor. It's actually the exact same alienation of the individual from their labor that Marx was writing about in the 1850's, just for jobs that didn't get the same attention.

Similarly, an in-law worked as a teller at a bank. 50 years ago that job would have more upward mobility because banks managed their risk locally: after many years as a teller and then as a loan officer you could move up to be the local person making the decision on loans. Nowadays large banks have centralized that with fancy computer systems to guide the decision, so there are entire paths of advancement that essentially don't exist anymore because computers spit out the answer. There is only shift and then branch manager, with once again the owners of the computer system using it to de-skill jobs and cut off promotion opportunities. (See, e.g. Better.com, using poorly paid contractors to do all the tedious stuff that can't be automated, and then letting the computer do all the high skill work.)

This is, by the by, one of the reasons that computer programmers continue to get paid well, because we are enabling capital to de-skill and bifurcate jobs better and better.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by justtologin on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @04:35PM (#29571916)
Interesting take. So if i can restate it, automating people's agency - basically their decision making or judgement - creates a "disposable" class that there is (from management perspective) almost no point in investing in their growth, meaning they have little mobility because there is no demand for a better person who has built on their experience.

Alternatively put, we've commodified human hand eye coordination and basic speech recognition and intent resolution. This view is definitely supported by the current state of the gig economy.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by mandevil on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @05:43PM (#29572529)
15 years ago, Circuit City laid off their highest paid retail employees, to be replaced by new hires: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna17837882

That is, management was declaring that there was no value in experience whatsoever (until you got to management levels, naturally), and that they could replace anyone with a new hire without loss of performance. (After all, the way you got to be a highly paid retail person was to stick around for a long time and be pretty good at your job.) And while most managers in a retail setting aren't quite as obvious about it, that sure seems to be how they feel: employees are completely fungible, and it isn't worth paying them enough to get them to stay.

(Costco is a notable exception in the US: notice how the standard Costco name badge includes their start year on it, that is one of the ways Costco signals that they do value experience. They are also significantly more profitable per sq/ft than Sams Club, their competitor in the warehouse segment operated by Walmart. I strongly suspect that those two facts are related.)

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by tengbretson on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @12:22PM (#29568893)
>blue collar or back office labor jobs like mailroom processors could work hard and rise to the top

The American dream is not about starting low and making it to the top, it's about upward, intergenerational class mobility.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by diskzero on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @12:51PM (#29569247)
The definition has changed over time, but you have reduced the definition to a single component. It is true that an element of the ethos is to improve the outcomes of your descendants. The American Dream can be reduced simply to mean America exists as a place where you can live a better life. This concept is predicated on the statement in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal." We may agree that this statement was not enacted with sincerity, but we may hope that is will be.

Much of the world views the American Dream as America as a place where one can come, work hard, be treated fairly and be rewarded regardless of social class or circumstances of birth.

The extrapolation of this concept into a larger ethos that includes upward, inter-generational class mobility makes sense, but is just one element of an ethos based on the basic principles of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by xwolfi on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:38PM (#29569908)
The American dream was also a concept for non-Americans. I mean, it's not like a formal, natural phenomenon we can just observe, so everyone has its own interpretation.

So here is mine, from a French who chose to emigrate in China instead of the US: the idea was that you'd come from your bum-shit country into that vast new land of opportunities where everything was to build, you build it and are rewarded in a fair meritocratic system in ways your rotting homeland could never have provided.

But now, you have to get your Twitter account scanned to be allowed entry under a temporary visa (or hey, try a green card lottery), risk upsetting an untreated schizophrenic while crossing the streets, to go to a gun-heavy anti-police protest anarchists use as an excuse to empty their Molotov stock while the police, too happy to finally have a purpose for their military weapon stocks, shoot at random. And if you are at the wrong place at the wrong time, you can be sent to a private jail. All the while, any accident you would have would not have been covered by any sort of socialized insurance but you'd be under one of the most punitive international tax system. And if you're unlucky, you can always take a payday loan, and join the merry mass of indebted grassroot people who have negative equity for no reason a rational mind could understand.

The American nightmare, it seems to me :s

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by ChuckNorris89 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:45PM (#29570019)
>here is mine, from a French who chose to emigrate in China instead of the US [...long paragraph of US bashing ...] The American nightmare, it seems to me :s

Mighty ironic of you to go on such a lengthy rant to bash the US off your Western European high-horse (white male too I presume?) living in China like a priviledged westerner, but where the stuff you bashed the US for is amateur level stuff.

Be careful with all those Winnie the Pooh memes or you might loose your social credit points, comrade. Could you please point out the free nation of Taiwan on the map, in public, for everyone to see please? My geography is a bit rusty. Also, how are them force labor death camps this time of year over there?

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by onemoresoop on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @11:05AM (#29567877)
> could work hard and rise to the top

What are the odds of that?

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by cbozeman on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @11:19AM (#29567993)
Not good, because getting to the top of any enterprise is inherently competitive.

Everyone wants the job, and there's only one of them to go around.

This is the reason you see such similar personalities occupying extremely high positions in companies. You need a certain mentality and dedication to set everything to the wayside for the pursuit of climbing the corporate hierarchy.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by mistrial9 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @12:18PM (#29568845)
> Everyone wants the job, and there's only one of them to go around.

no, everyone does not want that job. People who do want that job reduce the equation that way, though

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by wyager on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @11:38AM (#29568258)
If the odds were high that people underwent meteoric career trajectories, that would imply that our sorting mechanisms for placing people into well-matched jobs worked very poorly. In general, I think these mechanisms work pretty well, so people typically end up in gradual career trajectories they're well-suited for.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by jhgb on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @12:32PM (#29569024)
Well at the very highest it's 1/N, where N is the number of employees at the organization.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by lordnacho on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:17PM (#29569594)
There's lateral hires with their eyes on the same job too.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by jhgb on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:29PM (#29569762)
That's why I wrote "at the very highest". It can't be more that that, but it can be less than that.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by simplestats on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @02:22PM (#29570429)
But they leave a company somewhere else so don't affect the average number unless they move from a smaller company.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by oneoff786 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:37PM (#29569895)
Technically non zero
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by medio on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:17PM (#29569600)
Wow this escalated hilariously fast. Coming from a country with universal healthcare, I find it amazing how you believe your absolutely shitty coverage is to blame instead of, I don’t know, corporate greed?

But yeah, I guess low-level employees should do without healthcare, they just shouldn’t be poor AND sick after all :)

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by m4x on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @02:29PM (#29570499)
Your response is rude and completely misses the point of the person you responded to.

If companies have to provide healthcare coverage for their fulltime employees, but not their gig workers and contractors, which type of employment do you think they are going to prioritise?

If healthcare costs were applied uniformly through tax (as is done in most countries with universal healthcare) then there would be less reason for employers to prefer one type of employment contract over another for low level jobs.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by oneoff786 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:37PM (#29569885)
You’ve got it backwards. By not directly employing low level workers for roles like janitors, companies do not need to pay for their healthcare. It is a very expensive cost per head even if the plan is shit. In America, employees get health insurance from their employer.

Your eagerness to shit on America made you entirely miss the point. Believe it or not, it is extremely obvious to many that universal healthcare would be a cheaper and preferential option.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by asdff on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @02:02PM (#29570214)
Most companies just get around this by only scheduling you for 38 hours a week or something like that.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by oneoff786 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @04:02PM (#29571591)
That is a common way, yes. Contractors from a firm is the other big one. There are folks who can spend decades working at the same org, full time, without technically being a real employee
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by m0lecules on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:26PM (#29569715)
the point is that healthcare costs have to be socialized – if you put the burden on the employer, you necessarily end up with the US system.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by zmix on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:36PM (#29569866)
In Germany, the employer must pay half of the monthly healtcare plan and the employee pays the other half. Goes like this since decades in one of the strongest economies of the world. Of course, Apple is more worth than the whole DAX...
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by xwolfi on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:45PM (#29570007)
Be careful of market cap numbers, they hide information and are almost meaningless: they don't describe volume behavior. If suddenly people realized Apple had to be sold as fast as possible, most of that value would evaporate to reach a more reasonable tangible asset value.

It's possible German stocks are well priced, in a regulated, slow and rational market that cares about fitting the price with the value of the company, and would hold most of their current market cap much more than Apple, were it liquidated.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by burntoutfire on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:56PM (#29570146)
DAX P/E at the end of 2020 was 27, while Apple's was 35.5. Higher, but not shockingly so.
Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by ChuckNorris89 on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @01:54PM (#29570126)
>It's possible German stocks are well priced, in a regulated, slow and rational market that cares about fitting the price with the value of the company

LOL, well regulated and rational my ass. The Deutsche Bank and Wirecard scandals (puls numerous more) proved the German government is just as corrupt when it comes to manipulating the market and threatening honest journalists, so that some rich and well connected scumbags can get even more obscenely rich. I've worked in several western countries but never saw more high-level corporate corruption than in Germany.

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by zmix on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @05:19PM (#29572325)
> Wirecard scandal

Oh yes, the regulation (BaFin?) totally was out of order on that one!

Re:The ‘invisible’, often unhappy workforce that’s deciding ... by zmix on Wednesday December 15, 2021 @05:16PM (#29572286)
Thanks for that insight. When it comes to Stocks & Co. I don't know much, if anything. I find it always interesting to read information, that puts things into a relative perspective. The information I had was from an infographic I saw a few weeks ago.