Live data from Hacker News

American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

mobile.nytimes.com

51–60 of 99 posts

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#51
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food always seemed a pretty free market to me, even though it's necessary. I was taught that free market is more about competition and access to information while necessity of the product mainly affected price inelasticity but that was econ 101 so idk if it's entirely accurate.

Shopping for groceries might be close to a free market, but the production of food certainly isn't. Also, a big problem with the "free market" is inability and/or disincentive to price externalities, such as environmental damage. Although, it still seems to be a better system than others, we need to work on that front.

[deleted]

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#52

Corporate America has trained the plebs well. Every time a discussion on unions or any sort of organization to "push back" against the big companies in just our own industry is met with a good 50% of HN readers dismissing the idea outright. And even talking about cutting off the supply of H1Bs - or at least the body shops that probably aren't as prolific at the top companies which are overrepresented here - is flagge…

Tech folks are incredibly smart on technical subjects. When it comes to politics, power dynamics, seeing through propaganda, empathy, we are not trained in or likely to be interested in any of these "softer" but very important issues at all and it shows. Why do you suspect there are so many Libertarians in tech? It is the quintessential political philosophy of a smart successful person who does not understand these issues.

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For non competes, I wish the law was that companies could bench you, but they'd have to pay you 200% of your best comp of the past 5 years. I think it'd solve a ton of problems.

> I wish the law was that companies could bench you, but they'd have to pay you 200% of your best comp of the past 5 years Legally-mandated golden parachutes?

As currently constituted non-competes allow your former employer to take the spoon out of your mouth, so to speak. The proposed change would simply say that they have to provide you with an alternate means of supporting yourself if they will prevent you from working.

It's one thing for knowledge work (even there I'd like to see it go away), but there's zero justification for preventing a guy who gets fired from Jimmy John's from trying to work at Subway or Quizno's.

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#54

The linked article mentions outsourcing, but it was this other _fantastic_ article [1] on the structural issues of the current wage economy that really helped me understand just how different things are: "Thirty years ago, she says, you could walk into any hotel in America and everyone in the building, from the cleaners to the security guards to the bartenders, was a direct hire, each worker on the same pay scale and…

What is it, in particular, about contracting that allows businesses to pay the same people less? What can they do with the contracting that they couldn't do without it? I think this: >“By shifting tasks to contractors, companies pay a price for a service rather than wages for work. That means they don’t have to think about training, career advancement or benefit provision.” was an attempt at explanation. But I don't…

One aspect of this is that it's much more difficult to "work your way up". To start at a relatively low paying position and then put in your time (accruing annual raises) and taking on roles of increasing responsibility and pay.

Previously you could start in the hotel kitchen and then become a line chef or a waiter or bartender and then a manager. And you'd be able to do so by showing you were competent and hardworking and moving up within the organization.

Now, in the extreme case, each of those roles is handled by a different outsourcing firm. The manager is quite possibly not directly taking resumes from people who walk in off the street, they're getting workers from a temp service who only supply low level kitchen help.

Put another way: who is typically going to make more? The person who has worked for Hilton Hotels for 20 years or the person who bounced around between a half dozen temp agencies doing work inside the same Hilton Hotel for 20 years?

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#55
Non-compete clauses are a pretty weird thing and I've seen them in contracts before. Definitely read up on them. I've refused to sign contracts with them before. They're totally unenforceable in California and a few other states.

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_clause

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#56
Like global warming, this may be a problem that we are unable to do anything about except adapt. We need to lean into the gig economy, instead of pulling away.

What we need are mechanisms to ensure that there's always a constant and steady stream of gigs available for any person to work. Many of these gigs might not be full-time or part-time jobs but rather micro-jobs or micro-tasks, that some entity needs to have completed to fulfill some larger mission, which is irrelevant to the gig worker.

The requirements for completing a task could range from simply "Being a human" to "Specialized skills in a specific domain". Profiles for workers could contain all sorts of information that could help them find relevant work quickly and easily, consisting of things like education and trade skills to even body metrics and IQ if necessary. And of course workers can be rated based on previous work history to help them better find future jobs without needing to keep a resume.

A worker should not need to get anything more out of their job than payment for services rendered. Healthcare should be handled by the government, and vacation time is handled by whenever the worker doesn't feel like working.

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#57
post #8

In addition it seems to me that labor is not a free market, simply because there is no choice to not offer your labor, since you'd starve. In large parts of the world anyway, and globalization has brought them into the 'free' market.

Sarah Bagley in 1845:

> Whenever I raise the point that it is immoral to shut us up in a close room twelve hours a day in the most monotonous and tedious of employment, I am told that we have come to the mills voluntarily and we can leave when we will. Voluntary! Let us look a little at this remarkable form of human freedom. Do we from mere choice leave our fathers’ dwellings, the firesides where all of our friends, where too our earliest and fondest recollections cluster, for the factory and the Corporations boarding house? By what charm do these great companies immure human creatures in the bloom of youth and first glow of life within their mills, away from their homes and kindred? A slave too goes voluntarily to his task, but his will is in some manner quickened by the whip of the overseer.

> The whip which brings us to Lowell is NECESSITY. We must have money; a father’s debts are to be paid, an aged mother to be supported, a brother’s ambition to be aided, and so the factories are supplied. Is this to act from free will? When a man is starving he is compelled to pay his neighbor, who happens to have bread, the most exorbitant price for it, and his neighbor may appease his conscience, if conscience he chance to have, by the reflection that it is altogether a voluntary bargain. Is any one such a fool as to suppose that out of six thousand factory girls of Lowell, sixty would be there if they could help it? Everybody knows that it is necessity alone, in some form or other, that takes us to Lowell and keeps us there. Is this freedom? To my mind it is slavery quite as really as any in Turkey or Carolina. It matters little as to the fact of slavery, whether the slave be compelled to his task by the whip of the overseer or the wages of the Lowell Corporation. In either case it is not free will, leading the laborer to work, but an outward necessity that puts free will out of the question.

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#58
post #9

a flagrant monopsonistic tactic that brought down the wrath of the Justice Department. Wrath? It was barely a slap on the wrist or a mild scolding.

Describing it as wrath is in proportion to the overwhelming lack of action against corporate issues these days... so yes, slap on the wrist on an objective scale, but 'hey, look, they DID something!'

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#59

The linked article mentions outsourcing, but it was this other _fantastic_ article [1] on the structural issues of the current wage economy that really helped me understand just how different things are: "Thirty years ago, she says, you could walk into any hotel in America and everyone in the building, from the cleaners to the security guards to the bartenders, was a direct hire, each worker on the same pay scale and…

What is it, in particular, about contracting that allows businesses to pay the same people less? What can they do with the contracting that they couldn't do without it? I think this: >“By shifting tasks to contractors, companies pay a price for a service rather than wages for work. That means they don’t have to think about training, career advancement or benefit provision.” was an attempt at explanation. But I don't…

I think that contractors explain HOW it happens, not WHY.

Let's say in some city the factory was closed due to outsourcing and 3K people are now jobless. They are not applying to be a security guards in city hotels -- there are no vacancies announced, and hotel managers are not aware of opportunity to lower their costs.

But then some dude opens SecurityGuards LLC, hires former factory workers and starts sending out proposals for security contractors, paid by hour. Once proposal reaches hotel manager desk and evaluated, their current bouncer is fired and contract with SecurityGuards is signed. Hotel manager collects yearly bonus for efficient cost control.

So, the root cause is global wage arbitrage, but it appears that owners of contractor businesses are the bad guys here.

Re: American companies are suppressing wages for many workers

#60
post #2

All of the major unions have been broken, with the public sector unions coming up next re: the Janus case. Even though there was always a limited number of union workers, their collective bargaining set the standard. That’s not really a factor these days.

Interestingly, unionization in Canada is still as strong as the strongest years in the US. Despite that, wages are every bit as stagnant as the US and, looking at income data, there is a lot of mirroring between the two countries. The substantial decline of unionization in the US is one thing, but what is Canada doing wrong?

I am curious as to where you are getting the idea that "unionization in Canada is still as strong as the strongest years in the US". That's pretty much the opposite of my personal experience and observations, and it's not the consensus I've been hearing (which is that organized labour has been at an absolute nadir in the past few decades, as much in decline as in the US). Unions have shrunk, membership are down, political clout is down, and a newly unionized company is a rare bird indeed. Perhaps the high rate of unionization in the public sector skews the stats here, because in the private sector, things are pretty much a mirror of the US situation.

From what I can tell, all of the same factors that are driving down wages in the US - increased consolidation, far more 'temp' positions brokered by temp agencies - apply to Canada as well, and have had the same effect.

Post reply on HN