U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#61

Post by sandworm101 » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:34 PM UTC

gota wrote: post #18

Well, virtually nobody browsing HN can say they share the pains of the workers of the US that 'suffer when compared with the rest of the world'. Sure, there are many low-income residents, high inequality, high turnover, low unemployment with low upward job mobility, etc. All those things are true for the 'disadvantaged', and engineers, technologists, computer scientists etc. are _not_ part of the population that make…

Well, some of us arent in the private sector anymore. I enlisted few years ago because i was tired of the ratrace. Im still doing much of the same tech stuff, near my old home. Pay isnt great but no ratrace and the benifits are amazing. Anyone else get paid exercise days? Im booked for a paid day firing machine guns next month.

So, no. Not everyone here is a standard brogrammer.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#62

Post by abritinthebay » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:35 PM UTC

swimfar wrote: post #31

djcrayon wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love a citation on this. Anecdotally, I have lived in both the United States and United Kingdom. My tax rate was similar and in the UK I largely paid less for rent, healthcare and public transportation while paying more for staples like food. All in all costs were largely equaled out, although in the UK I enjoyed more vacation and worker protections I did not have as a US employee.

I don't know about the UK, but my net annual savings in the US is about equal to what my gross income would be in France or Germany. If I worked in the tech industry I'm sure the difference would be even greater. Also, healthcare is a problem in the US for people who don't get it from their employer. For those who do, it's often relatively inexpensive. I pay ~$100/month for really good coverage. It's the lower to low…

Statistically speaking you are an incredible outlier. Good for you, of course, but you shouldn’t generalize your experience to the entire population.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#63

Post by jellicle » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:35 PM UTC

sol_remmy wrote: post #45

ceejayoz wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The graph is inaccurate because the 2017 and 2015 numbers are different? Find any source - any reputable source - that indicate US healthcare costs are anywhere near the rest of the OECD.

Your graph (2015): United States: $10300 Canada: $4400 Ratio: 2.34 My actual findings (2017): United States: $9250 Canada: $6600 Ratio: 1.40 I think your graph is fake news. Sources: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/04/20/5247741... https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/canada-to-spend-more-than-6-60...

For one, you seem unaware that Canada has its own currency. You are comparing CAD with USD.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#64

Post by snarfy » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:35 PM UTC

> The United States and Mexico are the only countries in the entire study that don’t require any advance notice for individual firings.

This is why I never feel bad for quitting a job without giving the expected two week notice. They don't give you any notice when they fire you.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#65

Post by abritinthebay » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:36 PM UTC

Reactionary_ wrote: post #39

jacobush wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet, social mobility is higher in Europe. Also, americans can keep more of their income, if they skimp on health insurance and pensions savings. I don't think americans in general grasp how much higher quality the healthcare system is in Europe. Example: get scorned at by your GP doctor for seeing them for a bad cold. Get billed $20. Receive open heart surgery and triple by-pass. Get billed $20.

Social mobility doesn't really matter when everyone more or less has the same quality of life, as in Europe. That's what many don't understand. The Europeans have essentially nullified the value of social mobility in the first place. That is why their economies are more stagnant than that of the US.

As a European: lol no.

This is completely incorrect.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#66

Post by Eridrus » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:37 PM UTC

virmundi wrote: post #33

What I don't understand, and you may say that it's the intrenched powers keeping the status quo, is why the US picks such poor implementations of certain ideas. The article mentions low collective bargaining. Our model, as an American, is pretty much one union per vertical. There is the Teamsters. There are no unions that compete with the Teamsters. I believe that Germany has unions that fight each other for contract…

I think partisanship can explain a bit of these failures. People defend or attack the implementations of ideas based on their ideology, rather than implementation. If you like unions you basically don't want to admit they have problems, because that is ammunition.

I'm a bit surprised by the support unions have personally, even when people are aware of their failings. I recently talked to a friend about coat to build public transport in NYC and mentioned how we were, among other things, getting super fucked by unions, and while he was aware of these issues still basically supported unions as a way to improve things for workers.

But besides that tangent, can you point to some reading material on good implementations of unions? How can we have unions that advocate for workers, but don't lead to incredibly inefficient workplaces? Because all I basically hear is unions resisting anything that looks like accountability for their members, or efficiency in doing the work.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#67

Post by realusername » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:37 PM UTC

sol_remmy wrote: post #60

realusername wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same in France, I guess the US is structured differently but overall it's probably the same amount of years. I doubt they study more than 6 or 9 years after high school or otherwise it's a bit too long.

Post-high school schooling for a standard family doctor (one of the lowest paid doctors): 4 years bachelors + 4 years medical school + 3 years residency = 11 years post-high school education.

Ah yeah, there's maybe something wrong there then, it's a bit too long I think. For a standard doctor, it's 9 years in France and it's already quite long.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#68

Post by tonysdg » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:40 PM UTC

protonimitate wrote: post #52

INTPenis wrote: post #12

I'm glad this is being addressed but I don't feel qualified to add anything of substance to it. As many other techies I frequent message boards on reddit and other sites. A majority of users are from the US and many posts are written from a US-centric point of view. What I've observed on those message boards regarding workers rights and health has made me deeply concerned about US workers. And that's only in the tech…

I think it all comes down to how Americans see and value money versus how the rest of the developed world values it. American culture puts 100% emphasis on how much money you make, and how you make it. More than health, or stability, or a well rounded life, American's are taught that money is the cure-all. And sure, when you are in the top 1/4 of income earners, the U.S. has quite a bit to offer. But what good is all…

> we as American's have been brainwashed to believe that we are all just 'down-on-our-luck millionaires'

I'm not sure I'd say "brainwashed" -- this is a founding mythos of the United States. It's embedded in our most sacred documents -- the Declaration of Independence, the Preamble to the Constitution, etc. -- that the individual (in theory) reigns supreme and (in theory) has ultimate control over his/her life.

It's a noble ideal, truly, but also a damn convienent excuse for those in power ("I/my ancestors didn't get lucky, they made smart decisions and worked hard, and so did I, so I succeeded") and those in poverty ("I can win if I just work harder/emulate those more successful than I -- ultimately I'm in control and nothing else matters").

It's both our ace-in-the-hole and our fatal flaw IMO.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#69

Post by dghughes » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

With any job in any country there are measurements for many things but worker mental stress doesn't seem to be taken into account. I know companies send out engagement surveys but they are pointless since employees feel like they can't answer truthfully.

I may be employed, the pay may be OK, some vacation time if permitted (probably not when I want), work about eight hours per day. But it doesn't take into account your manager screaming at you, that aggressive coworker who always gets their way, pushy employees exceeding the scope of their position, timid managers and supervisors who don't talk to bad employees.

I wouldn't agree about the US being the only OECD country that doesn't give notice before lay off or firings. I'm in Canada and I was laid off two hours into my day mid-meeting by an aggressive manager who I complained about to HR nearly a decade ago.

Re: U.S. employment conditions compare poorly to the rest of the developed world

#70

Post by ergothus » Thu, Jul 05, 2018, 2:44 PM UTC

sunshinelackof wrote: post #59

While it may be true for a subset of posters here, the idea of just finding a new job if it doesn't suit you is not possible for most people. The majority of people need to be able to do something mildly productive and be able to live a happy life as a result. If your economic model is leaving this many people behind--or they even feel they're being left behind it's not a good model. Everyday I find it harder to argu…

I read an interesting perspective on universal basic income recently that suggested that it was MORE capitalistic than not: by freeing people from limits imposed by needing to supply food/shelter for themselves/their families, it allows more participation in the market.

That seems a radical but obvious-in-hindsight idea to me: a majority of the population cant participate in the competition the system itself needs because they cant accept the risk of failure that the system requires of us. Meanwhile anyone who is already successful chides them about thow they should just work harder.