Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 152 posts

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#101

Post by Retric »

mannkind wrote: post #72
Retric wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention the US, Japan, and most if Europe is already below the replacement rate. Without immigration we are a dying society suggesting we need even fewer kids is a great way to end up extinct. Reolistically, in the long term we need to support young parents with policies that promote having more kids or accept that 'the American way of life' is a dead end doomed to failure.

You state that as fact, but it seems highly unlikely. Please cite your source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate

Global fertility rate is dropping so depending on other countries sending new immigrants is risky.

US below replament rate: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/02/12/us-birt...

Note the chart, US has been below the replacement rate ~2.1 births per woman since 1975.

PS: It's a fairly well established trend across a wide range of cultures which might change over the long term as populations shrink. However, my point is not that it's currently an issue for us, just that discouraging births is probably a bad idea.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#102

Post by SilasX »

zo1 wrote: post #68
dragonwriter wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My solution: Company towns. Give the workers daycare, food, accommodation, training/education and pay them peanuts... in the middle of nowhere. But that'll never fly ...because its been done before, became widely and accurately recognized as de facto slavery, and the key components of such schemes outlawed.

Enlighten me how that is slavery? Bear in mind, in my example people have the choice to go there, or not.

Seems like a fair question, one I'd like a thorough answer to. Not sure why the downvote. I can see why there are downsides, sure, but the slavery comparison would need more support.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#103

Post by gojomo »

normloman wrote: post #83
mikeash wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see him proposing that minimum wages should be removed, or that anything will "magically" work out if they are. I merely see him stating that minimum wages contribute to this particular problem, which is true. It does not then follow that minimum wages should be eliminated. This sort of knee-jerk reaction makes it really hard to discuss any sort of public policy in a rational way. The moment you point out any…

Why would you blame minimum wage for this problem if you weren't implying we should reform or abolish it? Also, the process of proposal and rebuttal you describe has another name: Debate. And the constant rebutting is why it works so well. You attack the other side's idea while defending your own and the best ideas survive the process.

Mentioning minimum-wage laws as a contributing factor isn't quite 'blaming' them. Also, even minimum-wage proponents can (and often do) admit there are tradeoffs involved with such mandates, they just think those tradeoffs are worth it.

You've guessed right that I don't personally think the tradeoffs of price-controls on wages are worth it. (Among other problems, the very young & low-skilled, who get priced out of essential starter jobs, are hurt more than those who remain employed at the higher wages are helped.) But we don't have to agree on that to reach common understandings on other particulars of how employers and employees adjust to constraints.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#104

Post by GHFigs »

Guvante wrote: post #90

> If she dared ask for more stable hours, she feared, she would get fewer work hours over all. While being in this position sucks, I kind of think that this is a compromise she chose for herself. "I want to work as many hours possible" is obviously going to conflict with "I want to work a stable shift".

In my experience with a certain retailer, the former is a decision made for you: they'll schedule you for 32-34 hours if they schedule you at all. As soon as you introduce any friction outside of what they're legally obligated to accept, you get squeezed out.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#105

Post by GHFigs »

PeterisP wrote: post #93
willismichael wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Finishing your degree" in no way guarantees employment.

Nothing guarantees employment, but some factors almost guarantee a low income. You can't be sure if you'll be okay, but if you already know that you definitely won't be okay - well, then you probably can't afford to have kids.

if you already know that you definitely won't be okay

This "okayness" is something people determine by looking at their community and peer group, not by looking at statistics. It's the same effect that causes the middle class to buy houses and cars that it can't really afford.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#106

Post by crpatino »

zo1 wrote: post #68
dragonwriter wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My solution: Company towns. Give the workers daycare, food, accommodation, training/education and pay them peanuts... in the middle of nowhere. But that'll never fly ...because its been done before, became widely and accurately recognized as de facto slavery, and the key components of such schemes outlawed.

Enlighten me how that is slavery? Bear in mind, in my example people have the choice to go there, or not.

An example from late 19th century Mexico: Tiendas de Raya.

The drill worked like this. You live in a poverty riden rural area, and an "enganchador" (lit. hooker, but its kind or a recruiter) comes town and offers you a job elsewhere. You sign up and leave with this guy.

Upon arrival, you learn that you have to pay for the recruiter fee, which is always more than whatever money managed you brought with you for the trip. So your options are either debtors prison or ask your new boss for a single early payment. It's day one and you start in the red.

You are new in town, nobody knows you and will not do business with you unless you bring money upfront. That is, nobody except for "la tienda de raya" your bosse's personal side business, that is happy to extend you a credit line with your paycheck ("la raya") as warranty. Everything is more expensive there, but they will give you everything you need because you are "one of the bosse's men".

So, you are down the hole and digging. An extremely unusual degree of self control over a lengthy period of time is required to cut down your consumption enough so that you will sometime pay your debt. If you manage to do that, you will be able to shop at the same stores as normal people does, and benefit from it. But you will always have the temptation of going to the tienda de raya again for special one of purchases (like that special dress for your daughters wedding), or if the inevitable event of life set you back (like if you need to have a tooth extracted and end up short of cash before the next pay check).

And if you ever try to quit, or loose your job, it is debtor's prison again.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#107

Post by Mz »

Scheduling software is a tool. Management still makes the decisions. At the end of the article, management helped this woman out and gave her a more bearable situation.

Software may magnify the problem but this is fundamentally about how management views employees.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#108

Post by seanflyon »

willismichael wrote: post #27
Kenji wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sorting it out requires predicting ~20 years of social and technology changes, which is a pretty high bar." No. Finishing your degree before you have a child is not a high bar. It's common sense.

"Finishing your degree" in no way guarantees employment.

You are right it's not a guarantee, but unemployment is low among degree holders.

http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#109

Post by datasmash »

dragonwriter wrote: post #65
datasmash wrote: post #46

The macro trend of more and more companies shifting jobs from full time to part time is disconcerting. Working one of these service jobs where you're slave to your hours like this is hell. The "Share Economy" (Uber, TaskRabbit, etc.) has the potential to make this both better and worse. At least if you're an independent uber driver, you can choose when you're going to be available and pick up jobs when it makes sense…

> The "Share Economy" (Uber, TaskRabbit, etc.) has the potential to make this both better and worse. Incidentally, while its a pleasant (for the industry) propaganda/marketing label, these things have nothing to do with sharing. They are routine sales-through-an-agent, and are no more about "sharing" than selling a house through a real estate agent is.

I'm with you - it's a pretty BS term to describe what those category of jobs actually are, but it's also one that people use to describe the category.

Re: Scheduling Technology Leaves Low-Income Parents With Hours of Chaos

#110

Post by justizin »

Mithaldu wrote: post #6

> she was scheduled to work until 11 p.m. on Friday; report again just hours later, at 4 a.m. on Saturday; I have family working for the german train company, which has highly fluctuating shifts too, but something like that would be straight-up illegal here.

in the US, at least, there's nothing really holding you back from treating your low-income employees illegally.

it's not like they can afford a lawyer, or even have time to find and/or meet with one.

that's an example of where unions are important.

Post reply on HN