Slashdot Mirror
Temp Troops of High-Tech
A submitter sends in this story about
temp work in Silicon Valley, from the point of view of the temp. Compare almost the same story written from the point of view of Amazon.com's management.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Thats becuase most CEO's of internet startups are now fired. And hoping to be temps to earn the average temp wage of $75,000.
Cruise TT
what about temp work from the point of view of this guy?
The most scary thing about reading such articles is that I always have a feeling that it will end up being fiction, having a happy ending, yet finding out that these things really happen, even in civilised countries.
I intend to live forever, so far so good.
I used to mount tapes as a vendor to IBM... man... that work was a pain.... same wage walking eight hours a day to feed damn tape machines that would never slowdown... that god for VTS tape libraries.. It was amazing that in the year 2002 people are still manually mounting tapes for mainframe systems.. we even had a bunch of old reels... that would occationaly light up waiting for a mount.
Amazon Ships to Sorting Machine Beat
.com has boasted of the wonders of the machinery inside them -- 10 miles of conveyer belts and myriad other gadgets.
By SAUL HANSELL
FERNLEY, Nev., Jan. 18 -- Ever since it built five vast warehouses in 1999, Amazon (news/quote)
What Amazon was not so vocal about was how many people it took to operate those machines, especially during the holiday rush. In 2000, for example, Amazon had to hire 7,200 temporary workers to supplement the 4,400 people working in its warehouses in the United States.
Now, Amazon.com, once the champion the strategy of "get big fast," has learned how to become small. On Dec. 11, its busiest day last year, Amazon's warehouses employed only 4,000 temps and 3,700 full-time employees. With one-third fewer people than the year before, the warehouses processed what analysts estimate were 10 to 15 percent more items.
Amazon, which plans to release its fourth- quarter results on Tuesday morning, needs every dollar it can save. A year ago, the company -- which has lost $2.8 billion since its founding in 1995 -- promised investors it would turn an operating profit in the fourth quarter of 2001 (at least by its own "pro forma" calculation).
That goal was made harder because Amazon's sales grew at only half the rate it predicted at the beginning of the year, dragged down by the recession, the aftermath of Sept. 11 and some of the company's own missteps.
If, as analysts expect, Amazon nonetheless hits its fourth-quarter profit target, a key reason will be the savings from its yearlong campaign to reorganize the people and the machines in its warehouses.
"They are focused on productivity in a very structured way, and it appears they have made good progress," said Anthony Noto, an analyst for Goldman, Sachs. Mr. Noto estimates that order-fulfillment costs absorbed 11 percent of Amazon's sales in the fourth quarter, down from 13.5 percent a year earlier. Still, he said, those costs need to fall below 9 percent for the company to thrive.
Walking amid a forest of bookshelves and climbing metal bridges over the rivers of conveyer belts in the warehouse here 40 miles east of Reno, Jeff Wilke, Amazon's senior vice president for operations, pointed to dozens of improvements big and small.
One big goal had been to reduce errors in keeping track of the several million items continually being placed onto and pulled off of hundreds of thousands of bins on metal shelves. In theory, Amazon's computers know exactly where each item is at any moment. But in 2000, the computers were wrong more than 10 percent of the time, causing delays as workers searched for missing items and restocked spares.
"We had a whole secret plant, not our main focus, putting stuff back," Mr. Wilke said.
To reduce errors, Amazon wrote new software to take better advantage of the gizmo that each warehouse worker was already carrying -- a shoehorn-size device that combines a bar code scanner, a display screen and a two-way data transmitter.
The new software beams far more explicit instructions to workers about where they should go and what they should do. And it checks their work by forcing them to scan each item every time they put it on or take it off a shelf. Errors have fallen to below 5 percent, from 10 percent, Mr. Wilke said.
This new system also helps with another of Mr. Wilke's main goals -- improving the productivity of seasonal temporary workers -- by giving them more direction. It also monitors their performance, so those who cannot get up to speed in a week or so are given help -- then fired, if necessary. Amazon also instituted a formal training program for temps. As a result, the average productivity of each temporary worker has doubled.
Many of Mr. Wilke's efforts reflect the highly quantitative bent expected of an M.I.T.-trained engineer who ran chemical plants for Allied Signal before joining Amazon in 1999. But when he talks about the biggest change here in Fernley, he uses the language of music, not manufacturing.
"We needed to build cadence," Mr. Wilke said, "to operate to the drumbeat of the constraint."
The drumbeating constraint is the $25 million Crisplant sorting machine at the center of Amazon's automated approach. Working with batches of 500 to 2,000 orders, the employees with the hand-held terminals feed items onto a network of conveyor belts into the sorting machine. The machine reads the bar code on each item and routes it into one of 2,100 chutes, each chute representing an order for a single customer. When all the items in an order are in the chute, a light flashes, and a worker rushes to put them in a box. They are then sent on other conveyers to machines that print packing slips, seal the boxes and send them off to shippers' trucks.
Adopting such an expensive and complex machine was controversial for Amazon.
Mr. Wilke acknowledges that he was skeptical of the Crisplant machines when he joined Amazon, inheriting the warehouse designs of his predecessor, Jimmy Wright, a former Wal-Mart (news/quote) executive. In fact, Mr. Wilke arrived in time to delete the machines from the designs for Amazon's warehouses in Europe.
But in the last two years, Mr. Wilke says, he has come to believe that the sorting machines were a good choice. He has also concluded, though, that because they are so expensive and so central to the business, all other parts of the warehouse need to operate with the goal of avoiding backlogs and delays that would prevent the Crisplant machine from running at peak efficiency.
So Mr. Wilke created a new job -- flowmeister -- making one person the orchestra conductor of the warehouse, to keep each section of the operation in rhythm with the sorting machine. In Fernley this day, the flowmeister was Andy Warren, a former logistics consultant who took a career detour as a lawyer. His podium was a metal table topped with seven computer screens that monitor all the key processes of the warehouse.
As Mr. Warren conducted, a graph showed that the people taking items from the chutes and putting them in boxes were not keeping tempo with the ones putting items into the sorting machine. So he had a worker move from the "induction" area to work the chutes, heading off a backlog.
Mr. Wilke's "cadence" talk was hardly music to the ears of the people who worked in the warehouses, because he was essentially insisting they could handle far more volume with no new equipment.
"I felt like Scotty in `Star Trek' saying, `I can't push her any further, captain,' " said Greg Bennett, the manager of the Fernley warehouse. Yet by keeping the Crisplant operating at full speed for two 10-hour shifts a day, the warehouse was able to pack more than 200,000 items on peak days in December, 30 percent more than the year before.
But Mr. Wilke says the pressure is not off. His calculations show that many more incremental improvements could eventually double the productivity of the warehouses.
"The sum of all the little mistakes," he said, "is big."
Judge Smails: The world needs ditch diggers too!
/* Half alive and half dead too, work is for suckers and the sucker is you. - "Half-life" by Local H*/
There is mention in the beginning of the article about it being strange to have so much non-hightech work in such a hightech-area. That's not so strange if you think about it. The whole ecommerce thing is about selling stuff. The stuff that gets sold normally can't be send over the internet, so you need FedEx, the postal service, etc. What they're missing out on letters that get send, they're gaining in packages...
And the high-tech (?) printers and so also in the end need packaging, sending, assembling. You can automate some parts, but...
When you read a story like this, it just keeps reminding me of early 20th century conditions that made socialists movements all too understandable... Some people just don't seem to care. Or not to be allowed to care by some system...
Reinout
Reinout van Rees
The world economy has always been built upon the backs of a 'disposable' workforce.
Let's face it, paying minimum wage to people is cheaper than automating a production line (and of course, they can argue that they are providing valuable jobs).
It's heavy handed and unethical (IHMO) but companies (with a _few_ limited exceptions) are only interested in the bottom line.
I've done the temping thing for a while, and there was certainly variety (like I'd be in a different job every week), but you are also treated as little more than 'an extra body'. They can get another one easily enough, so they can get you to work, trample on you, and if you go replace you in a day.
(Much happier now I'm working full time doing 'skilled' rather than manual labour. Least this way I get a month's notice before being told to walk)
that these big companies with their huge revenues can't give their lowest-payed staff a decent wage.
There should be some kind of income cap, like the top-paied executive can't earn more than 10x what the lowest paid worker in the company can.
Somebody email this article to Carly. Not as if she'd care.
I've been swashdotted -- Elmer Fudd
Not everybody can both live where they want to live and have the ideal job. If there aren't any decent jobs available in your area... news flash... you may have to move. Silicon Valley may be on hard times, but that should be anyone's cue to move on, rather than stay and work a menial job. There are jobs out there, they're just not in Silicon Valley. As far as the job the author described and the atmosphere of HP's production line: big deal, sounds like a typical warehouse. Nobody is going to say it's a good place to work, and people come and go and get let go all the time. That's just the way it is. Reality bites...
-- Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat.
I've heard horror stories from friends. One in particular has to do with foriegn programmers who are brought in with work visas. The hiring company holds both the visa and their passport. The programmers are threaten that if they don't work 12hrs a day, they'll be sent back. Typically, the programmers are paid 1/4-1/2 the wages of a citizen. High tech is not immuned to slave labor practices and mentality. The whole idea of staying with a company for 50-60 years doesn't exist anymore. Although some companies use it as a selling point in their recruiting, most companies have a policy that dedicate the opposite. Now more than ever, intelligence is necessary for steady employment.
i've always wondered how such a system can work!!
these guys work for $8/hour!
and you can bet the managers are on about 5 times that.
having worked in the hotel industry (and studied it for 5 years) i can tell you this method is only profitable in the short term.the employee is not happy and delivers poor work, and eventually it turns against the employer.
thing is if you envolve the employee in the company, you can a much better return, the employee will do concessions when you need it.
IMHO the japanese model is a lot based on that idea (although it will probably change with tough times ahead).
in France one thing that is considered by many an inconvenient, but is for most an asset is that there's a legal right to go on strike.
it slows down the economy, and the employement rate, but quality of life is a priority.
that's how we get 35hours work per week, and 30+ days paid holiday a year
if the sites slashdot links to get slashdoted, how come slashdot itself never gets slashdoted??
But at the same time, this story happens in thousands of businesses around the country, every day of the year. The pay is low, the work is tedious, and the management oppressive and degrading. Where I work now, the fulfillment center is the major part of our company... supply-chain services, as it is being touted nowadays. It's the 'new economy' that was made so much around the start of 2000... but it's still the same old labor-intensive machine. So, IMHO, there's really little news to see here, for those of us who have worked outside the cubicle.
And temp agencies? Don't even get me started...
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
Speaking as a former "contract employee" for the good people of Verizon, it's a lot like being the world's most low-class whore. You get passed around from job to job like a dirty sock, and eventually booted out onto the street with a keyboard print on your forehead from spending so long bent over your desk.
On the up side, at least I'm not bitter.
--saint
One of the most common sentiments on slashdot is how backwards governments are and how technology makes them obsolete.
But you see something like this-- maybe things like workplace safety standards are still important...
With all the libertarian sentiment here on
With the way things are during this recession, programmers with bachelor's degrees are working at plants like these just to pay for the high cost of living out in Silicon Valley. The advice one of the workers gave about going to school and doing something with computers doesn't cut it anymore. Job market is just horrible for computer programmers, even with a college degree.
What is the point?
Yes factory works sucks. So like the workers said "Get a CS degree."
"Workers in india would never stand for this."
Thats nice to know, so why are you here?
Nobody MADE anyone work there. Nobody forced people to come to the US to work deadend jobs 24/7 for $8/h.
Thats life. Thats how it works. You don't like it leave.
It's not the company's job to make the lowend workers get rich. They're not supposed to care for you.
You think it's any different for high level programers sysadmins or whatever? You don't think they can get a phone call "Very nice work on that project you finished yesterday. Very impressive. Oh and this was your last day."
Thats life. It's not anyone's job to make your life peachy. It's your job. Don't whine to me about how the corparate machine is ruining your life.
In Soviet Russia, the television watches YOU!
... this article says that Amazon finally has turned a profit. So I'm sure the 'well-cadenced' line workers have something to be proud of, while Mr. Bezos' stock takes a big boost in pre-market trading...
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
Reading an article like this does nothing but make me feel quite weak and ill. Thinking that people in a country like the USA are treated like nothing more then a pair of hands really really bothers me.
I read sooo many articles written by these company CEO's or whatever, telling the reader how they are now customer focused and how great they are doing, but the honest truth is they treat their employees as if they aren't human.
Companies need to learn that it's their work force that makes them what they are. I'm sure they believe they are being effictive by getting rid of "bad" workers who complain and want better standards, but have they ever really just taken a step back and wondered how much BETTER production would be if they were to treat their workers with respect and give them the security they need and desire?!?
so in the first, we have a full on temp agency with no company employees working on site, workers are being manipulated, silenced and fired...essentially sounds like a terrible work environment.
/.ers and amazon? i am not holding amazon out as mother teresa of corporations, but having 3700 full time employees out of 4000 - that says to me that amazon at least gets it a little. sure, during xmas amazon is trying to squeeze every ounce of work out of its employees, but no where in that article does it mention abuse.
in the second (amazon), you have 7.5% of the work force as temp workers, with no mention of abuse, forced silence, etc.
and you want us to draw a comparision from the 1st to the 2nd?
flame all you want, but what is it with
what an unfair comparion...you ire should be directed at HP if you ask me.
/* Half alive and half dead too, work is for suckers and the sucker is you. - "Half-life" by Local H*/
Overworked? Impossible - he's paid hourly.
Underpaid? Well, get another job with your obviously menial skill set making more than $8/hour. What's that? You can't? Well, see, if we paid everyone 9 bucks an hour, we'd have to let one person go for every 8 we give the raise to. Also, why pay 9/hour when there's people lining up to work for 8?
Essential? No, your job function is essential. You are not.
The most amazing of this is the fact that so many people are getting this jobs as the best think they can get. The third world labour conditions are being moving to the country, you get the same people who would be working on this factorys on their homelands and put the people and the work conditions near you. And maybe they get paid a little better than on their countrys but the CEOs spend a lot fewer, they con't have to delocate the factory, and get a better image.
------I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either.------
Remember, the War was won so you too could work part time.
H.G. Wells once wrote a story about a heartless, commercial society where all art was crass commercialism and the foulest entertainment of the lowest common denominator variety. Set in a future 1963, his publisher refused to print it saying:"No one will believe it".
unless it is for the super management types to roll around and lord over folks or something.
typical of manual temp agencies, there is no reason to give when you are dropped from a job. because then they might have to justify their practices. this puts them just a few steps away from the attitudes of slave masters, not quite tyheir, but close.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Having been a temp worker in Florida, back in the early '80s, I can really sympathize with the article. It totally sucks not knowing if you can even pay the rent, much less eat. I was working at a pc board plant. Something like 80% of the workers were temp. Everybody was scared of getting shitcanned. The pay was terrible and the managers/supervisors constantly screamed and threatened people. Lovely environment, in other words. Thank managed to pull myself out of that morass and moved forward.
All I can say to people that are trying to live on temp work is, get to school! Somehow, anyhow. I don't care if it's tech school for one semester. Even that little bit of knowledge can help. Also, learn English. Learn how to speak it so that even slow midwestern people like me can understand you. I know it's challenging to the extreme, but my ancestors came here and had to do the same thing. BTW, I'm *not* trying to flame or be prejudiced here, I'm simply trying to state facts. Please read and judge accordingly.
--- Think of it as evolution in action ---
Editor asked to compare. I read and saw:
;-)
Raj talks about people. He cites a lot of names, feelings, relationships. It's constructed around what people are feeling about a situation, the actions that they are seeing and their reactions;
And Amazon's Management talks about numbers. It quotes lots of statistics, managers, and 'market condition'. It's constructed around what people are analysing about a situation, the actions that they are taking and the reactions.
It's classical from a literature perspective. And IMHO, I prefer much more Raj's point of view.
But maybe I am a misplaced human on a capitalist society
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
Ummm. No, that's not what it says:
Amazon's warehouses employed only 4,000 temps and 3,700 full-time employees
So by my book that's 52%
In 2000 that number looks more like 62%...
The article was quite clear, for xmas 2000, Amazon had 7200 temp works PLUS 4400 regular warehouse workers, for xmas 2001, they had 4000 temps plus 3700 full time warehouse workers. So your 7.5% is way off, I don't see how anybody could think that a retailer could get through xmas with only a 7.5% bump in employees.
The tactics described in this article here are very similar to the ones the large brands use on contract workers in the export zones in SE Asia. Naomi Klein describes it at length in her book NO LOGO.
Strange that these same management techniques which work so well on the poor and uneducated overseas are now being used domestically.
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
I can see it now:
My level 60 Knight finally has enough of his temp job.
>Your bash sends the bossman sprawling!
>You TERMINATE the bossman.
>You TERMINATE the bossman.
>You TERMINATE the bossman.
>You TERMINATE the bossman.
the bossman is incapacitated and will die if not soon aided. The bossman is dead. You get one lousy experience point.
tee-hee
Sent from your iPad.
We may win some battles for justice and our rights against the rich and powerful capitalists. But as long as they can dominate society in the workplace, control the politicians and the state security structure, and the airwaves, they will continue to exploit us and reap huge profits from the labor of workers. Every victory under capitalism is partial and temporary. The logic of greed of capitalism will always try to extract more from workers.
Overworked? Impossible - he's paid hourly.
So by that logic, it would be okay to fire a person if they couldn't keep up with a 20-hour working day?
You're confusing overworked with underpaid. "Overworked" means "having more work than you can be reasonably expected to complete in the time available". It has nothing to do with how much you're paid, or whether you're paid hourly or not.
Cheers,
Tim
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Capitalism can only offer to the worker a continuous struggle, against the ruling class, for the necessities of life. They can never be as rich as the ruling class, because they can never own what the ruling class owns.
The only way to achieve long term riches for all is by a complete elimination of the class system. It will have to be replaced with ownership of the means of production by the working class. And that means everybody having a fair say in how things are run, not just a ruling political party clique who would be no more than the replacement of one set of rulers by another.
g'joob!
Ok, so it looks like the consensus here is that these poor folks are being used and abused, and Big Business just doesn't care.
What's the alternative? Pay them $20 and hour and let them come and go as they please, or stop the line whenever they want to chat about their weekend? How willing are you to pay $500 for a printer that currently costs $125?
If this story was about HP automating the box line and putting some number of temp workers out on the street, or moving the work to Mexico where the labor costs are even lower, would that be better?
Temp work exists for a reason. I have done temp work myself. My view of it was work I could get at the drop of a hat, and quit the same way. If you need to work for 3 weeks, are you going to take a job somewhere knowing full well you're only going to be there 3 weeks? Yes, there are perma-temps, and there are inarguably strong financial incentives on the part of the company to staff in that manner, but the cold, hard reality is that this is the kind of migrant labor these workers chose. Granted, they probably didn't have a whole lot of options to choose from, but it's not like some recruiter painted a rosy picture of temp-Nirvana to these people. They made a fully-informed decision to accept the work, and given the angst shown over being laid-off, seemed to appreciate that they had work at all.
Karma: Professionally Doomed (mostly affected by inability to keep opinions to self)
So, how do you feel sitting there at your cushy desk job... knowing that even your company supports or is directly causing pain and suffering of the less fortunate. Have a nice work day.
Low wage jobs can be unpleasant. The managers there frequently have no training in how to work with people. Production oriented jobs like the one described in the article are often focused on keeping the line moving.
And yet, these people choose to work there for $8 an hour. This is their choice. They also opt to live in one of the most expensive places in the world. This too is a choice.
Before you pound on me for being heartless, it may be important to note that I have passed through that place, as well. I come from a poor family in an economically depressed area.
I have worked as a laborer doing back-breaking work by the sweat of my brow. I have also worked in mall jobs that were production oriented. "No talking! You're here to work, not have fun!" I have worked in food service as a busboy and waiter for long hours and late nights.
It was my experience in those places that motivated me to get my education. Without those jobs, I would not have chosen to finish school.
People can go to school, even while working a low-wage job. I did it, my parents did it in their 40's, and YOU can do it, too.
If it's too expensive where you live, MOVE to somewhere cheaper. Don't want to move? Be creative, find a way to make it work. Don't want to do that? Then accept the fact that you will work that kind of job for the rest of your days.
The future is in your hands. Repeat after me: "If it's to be, it's up to me. If it's to be, it's up to me. If it's to be....."
But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
My family came to this family to find signs "Irish need not apply." What this guy doesn't say is what he is doing at night to make his life and career better. They may treat him like dirt, but that doesn't mean he has to choose to stay that way.
Would somebody please mod this down?
What do you do while you're earning a degree? You work. It's like the Alice Cooper song, I can't get a job unless I have a car, I can't get a car unless I have a job. It's a Catch 22.
Obviously you had parents who pushed you out the door after after high school with your little silver spoon and you're nice little trust fund and your beer swilling caveman friends. You sound just like upper management. Just b/c you can't comprehend a situation from your narrow-minded point of view doesn't mean it isn't legitimate. Those people are here b/c they've heard they can have that "American Dream" and it isn't unreasonable to say that they shouldn't be overworked and underpayed in achieving that dream. It isn't unreasonable to demand that Carly Fiorna give up the Lear jet and fly coach so that the people that keep the company running can enjoy their lives more healthily and happily. And just like how you advocate these people having choice, you do too, don't read the article if it bothers you that much. Nobody is whining to you, god how self-important you think you are, get a grip or step in front of a speeding bus.
On one hand, having a sucky job is not so good... on the other hand, as one of the temps points out, you can't have better conditions without unions. One of the sad facts of life is there is a positive correlation between union membership and higher unemployment.
Unfortunately, there's a trade-off between good working conditions and having work at all. In Europe, the population chose to have better working conditions, by voting for left-of-center governments. In the US, the population chose to decrease the power of unions and have more jobs, by continually voting for right-of-center governments.
Say the average salary for an experienced developer is $80k. (I'm in St. Louis, YMMV)
65% of that is $52,000.
Where do you see YOUR career headed?
Where does it say he has any more than an 8 hour shift? It doesn't. Now, if he was paid 64 dollars (his day's wages) and he had to have 1200 boxes done (the author claimed 800 in a day), that would obviously be unreasonable, as the line before, and after (remember "What's the holdup"?) couldn't produce that fast. But, I fail to see how he has "more work than you can be reasonably expected to complete in the time available". After all, no one else in the line is having trouble keeping up.
I DON"T BELIEVE IT! I can't believe that a 23 y.o. hasn't found the perfect job. (You know the one, where you don't actually do anything)[/sarcasm]
What a bunch of Communist Bullshit. This kid obviously hasn't figured out that work is a 4-letter word - it almost always sucks.
Maybe the job he's in sucks enough that it might motivate him to actually do something with his life.
I don't believe that *anyone* should go through life without having worked a job that is physically painful and emotionally demeaning. It builds character and makes better humans.
I don't understand how corporations get away with the permanent use of temporary workers. These assembly line jobs are full time, long term jobs. Sure, people can be laid off in a downturn. But as long as the factory runs assembly line workers are needed.
I was under the, perhaps foolish, impression that it was illegal to keep temporary workers for long periods as a way to circumvent labor laws.
And that's what's happening here. By using permanent or semi-permanent workers management can release people on a whim, head off any attempt to organize, avoid paying benefits and other wise abuse their power.
I thought this was illegal. Was I wrong?
There should be some kind of income cap, like the top-paied executive can't earn more than 10x what the lowest paid worker in the company can
Are you kidding? Think about all the time they spend developing those mission statements. That's gotta be worth more than 10X minimum wage.
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
If there are people lining up to work 20 hours a day at 8$and hour then so be it.
Spencer Ogden
Or they could whine about it.
Spoken like someone who has always been comfortably middle class.
"It's their fault for being at the bottom of the economic ladder. They sit and complain instead of working harder and smarter."
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
In its' purest form: exploitation of poor by the rich. Yet it works, because there's always someone willing to work those jobs. Sure, reading it made me somewhat sad that things like this happen, but at the same time...what did they expect? Donuts, coffee and massage in the morning, afternoon and evening?
Hey, 80% of people on the Earth can only dream to work for 8 $/hour. For them, this is unreacheble salary.
There is one benefit to working temp jobs that I would suggest anyone take full advantage of - read the internal postings.
I temped in Chicago for one year during the tech boom period, and had no trouble interviewing for system support and programming work, and eventually landed one. The cool thing about this method was that I would just jot the info down while in the break room and call the next day.
While employers are looking for education / experience, they are also very well aware that some guru with ten years of background might not contribute that much more than "the temp fellow that has a decent resume, everyone seems to like, and seems to know how to brew coffee instead of leaving it for the next person to do." Or at least that is the angle I would take if I was not the guru. I just always thought of the temp work as rent payers and a good way to scope out companies I might like to work for.
I wonder if temping at an HP corporate office would have yielded a different tale?
Some people have family ties, kids that they don't want to yank out of school and away from their friends, and other circumstances that make becoming a nomad to chase jobs around the country impossible.
From my reading of the article the author decided to do exactly that (he's not a U.S. citizen if I'm reading between the lines correctly).
The job situation in Silicon Valley sucks such huge tons of festering donkey dick that people by the thousands are swarming in from around the world to get a taste.
It's relative. A job I might concider dismal could be something a million other people would give their eye teeth for.
I'm from South Dakota, in South Dakota right now a majority of jobs pay around 8 dollars an hour, in South Dakota the cost of living is about 1/6th that of Silicon Valley California. In South Dakota the unemployment rate is around 2%.
The fellow in the article said "The events of this day alone are grounds to start a revolution."
On what grounds? He's making 8 dollars an hour, doing grunt work. Sure his hands are getting cut up, where I grew up, the summer work was prying rocks out of dirt roads with 6 foot iron pry-bars, 8-15 miles from, town for 8 hours a day with no breaks. That really motivated me to stay in College.
All these people that drive for 2 hours each way to work, they have locked themselves into what they get because they are either too foolish or too lazy to move. A work visa into the US doesn't mean you have to move to Texas, California or New York, there are thousands of places out there that need stable workers, that want people, of any nationality to move there.
Turning the place Union won't help, temp workers are temp because they want to be.
Thats nice to know, so why are you here?
It's nice to see that the pig-ignorant are alive and well. You might have had a fraction of a point to make, but with that statement, you blew all your credibility.
Reading your post did remind me of Jeff Foxworthy though...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
More simply put, it was assumed for a long time that if the minimum wage were raised beyond basic subsistence levels, then the population would increase, leading to sharper competition for jobs which would depress the wage rate, until starvation occurred then the drop in population would make labour scarce and thus cause a rise in salary according to the law of supply and demand. So for the better part of two centuries, it was believed that it was not possible to raise the minimun wage more than bare subsistence - the "Iron Law of Economics".
Funny how most western countries have managed to mandate minimum wage scales over the past half century without plunging us all into economic chaos.
So what's my point. My point is that just because an economic theory is logical and consistent doesn't necessarily mean that it is correct. Your assumption, sir, appears to be that people are replaceable machines to be purchased at the minimum cost. But you are leaving out a number of factors. Morale in any team of workers is not a factor to be despised. A happy worker is normally a better and more efficient worker.
It also leaves out the moral question. An enterprise does not exist in order to make a profit. No, really, it doesn't. A company *needs* to make a profit in order to exist, but that's not its function. "A company exists in order to fulfill some market segments needs or wants." And dare I suggest that taking care of the clients - who provide you with the income - is no less important that taking care of the workers who produce whatever it is that you are producing. (All my management texts suggest that that is the more efficient paradigm.)
I suppose what girned me the most was the assumption implicit in the post that labour issues were only an economic matter. IMHO, piffle!
What are you going to hire? An Indian who
can't quit his job or an American who can?
when I first dropped out of college because I ran out of money to finish my degree.
I was a temp worker, and was only given part time work so that they didn't have to pay me any benifits. I had to work 3 part time jobs and was also an officer in the Army National Guard in order to make just enough to support my family.
A union worker decided that he would cuss me out for no reason and I told him to fuck off. He ran off and lied about the incident and got me fired, the little coward.
After working for a year in shit jobs I finally got a break laying network cabling and doing help desk and support and I never looked back. I am currently a self taught programmer and make a great salary.
But even then I got laid off my Disney after working for them for just a few months, when they began downsizing go.com.
I lost my job while the executives got paid about $50,000,000 in bonuses and stock options. _My_ stock options. So even at a professional level you can be screwed over.
Of course I got 2 job offers in less than a week, during the height of the recession, so no big deal. But it was depressing to get laid off. And in my book being laid off without ever intending to hire you back is just fired.
The most important thing to remember is that the fuedal system was _not_ slavery. Sure, the serf had responsibilites to the lord and had to work hard, but the lord also had responsibilities back to the serf. The lord had to provide for the workers like you would your prize animals. And the church kept a strict eye on the behavior of the lords to ensure that they maintained law and order in the area.
The lord just couldn't arbitrarily throw someone off the land, because there was no replacement workers, even a lazy drunken lout was better than no lout at all. A lord that kept abusing his people would have to answer to the church and might even be excomunicated and exiled himself.
When capitalism replaced fuedalism the CEO became the fuedal lord, but the CEO no longer has any responsiblity to the workers and has to answer to nobody for their treatment of the workers. The unions formed in response to long hours of labor with little pay and the constant threat of being fired. The same reason that these people in the story have to face everyday.
I used to be against unions, because I had been brainwashed by the propaganda that unions were causing the US to be less competitive. But then I looked into the matter and found out that union shops are every bit as competitive as non union shops and that dollar for dollar they produce as many goods as non union shops. Mainly because in union shops you had long periods of employment that allow people to get good at their jobs.
The reason that companies go with lower paid inexperienced workers is because even though it is more expensive in the long run for the company, it allows the executives to make a lot more money for themselves individually, in the short run.
Ford paid his workers enough money to buy a model-T. I doubt that most of the workers in these third world countries could buy a pair of sneakers or jeans at full price. I doubt that the workers at the company in the story could have afforded to buy one of the printers that they were packing up. Sad really.
If we don't support the right for everyone to have a living wage that lets people get ahead, who will buy the things that we are making in the future. and if noone buys the things that we are making, how long do you expect to keep your job?
I think that it is time for high tech workers to form a union and protect our rights. We should also make sure that the workers in foreign subsidiaries of the companies that we work for get paid the same as we do. The the US will have someone to sell our stuff to overseas and we can reduce our huge foreign debt that we have every year.
-- Never make a general statement.
In addition to what you said,
The problem with salaries just above starvation level is that the workers would not have enough money to buy other non essential goods...
If each and every worker would only receive minimum wage who would buy these products?
Minimum wages on a large scale would eliminate all companies except food production/subsistence related companies...
And please don't say that companies can thrive by only selling to management.
There would be no managers, since the cattle (read workers) would have no money to give higher education to their sons..
Jesus Christ, I hate those christians!!
I used to have a friend who worked, uh, temped for AOL. I still have part of this email he sent to me
"On the 25 minute walk that I make to work I usually think about work on the way there, thereby doing what I always promised I would never do as long as I was a "temp" - think about work outside of being at work. Only a God can spend 8 hours 5 days a week someplace and not wonder what their place in it was. As a "temp" at the end of the century your place was/is even more displaced than your fellow postmodern brethren. The turd of the Virtual Elite, on a global level a "temp" exists on a plane with structurally readjusted peoples and prisoners. On the local level a "temp" is nearly a non presence, disposable, cloneable, or on its best day not qualified enough to be solidified."
I think he touches on several good points. Economist Richard Rosecrance wrote a book a few years ago called "The Rise of the Virtual State"(yes walmart sells it). In it he basically said that nations will divide into two parts, ala Descartes, the head, or mind, and the body. The mind will perform the information and idea tasks, the US, Europe, Japan, and the body will handle the labor, China, Mexico, Africa.
It is especially interesting when that mind/body split is enforced here in the US of A. Plenty of people say, well if they would just get more of an education then they would be alright. In a sense that is correct, but overall it is a push to drive us in the US toward strictly virtual or mind based production and send all the body work elsewhere. As an economic solution, it may work for us in the US for the short time that we are alive, but also you have to wonder about the political aspects that help set these divisions into play, ie dictatorships in Africa, the decline of organized labor in the US and the massive push in the tech sector to outsource as much of the workload as possible.
More or less, for every person making 80k and saying, just get more productive schooling, there are 10 college graduates wondering if they will ever get their teeth cleaned again. It's our economic policy.
The world needs ditch diggers too.
...the worker(s) who didn't get an education. They wouldn't be there if they'd taken school seriously instead of screwing around.
The legal immigrants are here to take a chance at a better life. No matter how much they whine, it's still better than from where they came. Otherwise, they'd go home. God forbid they have a backbone and fix their own country.
As for the illegal border-crossers, there should be a bounty on their heads anyway. Funny to hear someone say they want to be part of this country; and the first thing they do is ignore our immigration laws....
My question is how come that was not in the editorial/opinion page?
Editorials passed off as news is a bad thing in modern newspaper/news reporting.
I can lead to each and every article being written for some political/social agenda which is a bad thing.
I heard a new one yesterday, a tv newcast referring to the husband of this woman as her 'life partner'. Is that just a way of saying that the words 'spouse' and 'husband' are not acceptable to groups of people whom cannot legally get married in this country?
Why can't they just use the common words and not worry so much about the 1 or two people who may be offended. And of course, the one or two people who make it their career objective to be offended by everything.
Hi, /. reader for some years. If there is one consistent POV I've noticed with /. posters is that they are very uninformed as to their rights as a worker.
I'm 34 years old. I've worked in the IT industry for some time. I've also been a
/. posters believe people have a choice, you don't like working there, go elsewhere. Where I ask? All corporations work under the same rules of employment, the lowest end I can assure you. Those very very few companies that do give their employees human consideration will be bought by Micro$oft soon.
/. posters think the standard IT contract is perfectly natural. Well, a contract that gives you bad benefits, no pension, no security, seniority, etc. is not a good contract. Just because you're making 6 thousand more than your friends are doesn't mean you'll have a job tomorrow.
/. posters believe that roaming from company to company is a normal and good career move. This drives me crazy... can you people not do the math?
/. posters should consider the big picture. Workers need to come together to assure a healthy industry and future for the technology. You think Bill Gates will do that? Larry? Steve? No, they won't. Industry is created by the workers, the engineers, the scientists, not the bean counters and marketing sharks.
/. posters seem to have not noticed that all thier IT jobs generally originate with departments or companies that are, in effect, a chunk of some greater hydra like corporation. To make thier quarter earning fit, they would fire you and burn down the building you work in. It's called downsizing.
"Fuck the doomed". R. Nixen
First of all, although it will do you no good, blame the Government for all of the wonderful deregulation in the workplace.
It will do you no good, because "the will of the masses" couldn't get John McCain in the White House, well after his candidacy yielded three times the support of Bush or Gore in the primaries. Think how different our country would be for the working man with a reforming, respectful, ex-POW in the big chair. All of that campaign money is now going to screw you in this "financial crisis." By the way, financial crisis means "we will not cut into our profits one dime, so we will CUT YOU." Expect fun legislation that will take decades to undue in the next year.
Second, blame Manpower. After all, they're only the largest employer in the US. They treat peole like cattle, hold your checks for weeks so that you feel forced to stay at your crappy temp job... and sometimes never pay off. I should know, my sister got screwed by them. So this poor person that lost a weeks pay, well, they aren't alone... pray it wasn't two.
They keep the money coming late so you can never be ahead of anything, and be able to leave your job to pursue a better one. This is no different than the coal towns of West Virginia in the late 1800s, where they were far away from everyone, so the company charged more than they got paid, and they got more and more in debt until their children worked the mines.
Manpower is no different. After all, they are America's largest employer (of late, no benefit, no security funds to people who can't afford an education)! JOIN THE MANPOWER TEAM TODAY!
It speaks well of those who argue for higher wages, better working conditions, and the like for the lowest-paid workers. But, at the same time, it's important to remember that we're the ones who create and support these structures. After all, we kicked off a race to the profitability bottom by insisting on the cheapest possible prices for hardware and software: $60.00 inkjets, pirated software, e-commerce loss leaders, and the like. The players have had no choice but to cut expenses to the bone in order to keep prices sensitive to our demands.
... and so on ....
This isn't to say that companies aren't misallocating money -- Enron, anyone? -- but don't think that increasing assembly line workers' real wages won't impact the prices we pay.
Now, the flip side: when companies reduce prices by reducing costs, they paradoxically make life easier on low-wage employees in some ways, because the cost of living is reduced as well. Unions are a way workers can game the system to their own advantage, increasing their own wages by making goods more expensive for other, usually non-union, laborers; to use a deliberately simple example, if auto workers can get higher wages while farm workers can't, then auto workers will get larger paychecks and pay less for food, thus getting improved real wages. At the same time, farm workers' real income (even if their money wages remain stable) drop because cars become more expensive to compensate the auto workers. It's essentially the prisoner's dilemma.
I hate to say it, but I can't think of any easy way out of this problem, short of increasing government requirements when it comes to wages, benefits and working conditions for all American employers. But then, of course, many of those jobs would be moved overseas where such protections don't (and, given how onerous they are to developing nations, probably shouldn't) exist. But *that* would drive down product prices, releasing more free money into the American economy, creating new jobs
The company I work for is profitable, but not
as profitable as it could be if management were
focused solely on the bottom line.
Heartlessness is neither necessary nor sufficient
to prevent bankruptcy.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
The lesson that this brings out is to get an education. This author who's now "devoted to improving working conditions in Silicon Valley" according to his bio, moved on to a more successful position as a editor of a (sponsored) web magazine. He succeeded in getting out of a dead-end job. I think he would be even more helpful to the workers if he wrote on what he did to accomplish this rather than concentrating solely on working conditions at that plant. I'm pretty sure many others there moved on to other, better jobs too. This is why they call them entry level positions. But his tone was that they were all stuck there (except him) in temp-hell.
No education will leave you in a dead-in rut. My spouse knows this well. When he got out of the military and became an plumber's apprentice in the 70's he had no idea that he wouldn't be able to do the job 30 years down the road because of the back breaking work of commercial plumbing. Physical labor takes it's toll. He made good money (as long as the weather was good and there was work to be had). He had 3 kids and a spouse to provide for so he never took advantage of his military college benefits which he now realizes at 50+ was a big mistake. But he went hungry before his family did and he did whatever it took job wise to put food on the table, even if he had to move out of state and send the money back.
Unfortunately, although he's extremely good at what is essentially mechanical engineering, he has no degree and his job scope (and earnings) are limited by that.
Fortunately two of his sons are taking a different track. After four years in the Navy, his youngest is now studying electrical engineering at a good school. He works a job component testing for $7, but in a state that's a LOT cheaper to live in than California, so he's doing okay. The oldest has been inspired to go school after suffering though numerous security jobs. Both are paying their own way. The middle son unfortunately still works in security for about $10/hour and I don't know if he'll ever get truly motivated to do better.
Basically when I see people stuck in these type of jobs, I rarely see one who has truly reached their potential. It's more of a "this is my lot in life" attitude than their brains that's holding them back. Don't give me the, "Well not everyone doesn't have the same advantage as you." We all have our advantages and disadvantages. Motivation and desire are two powerful forces that can overcome almost obstacle.
But the cruelest thing is essentially tell people, "You're right, you have no hope, you're not smart enough to do better on your own. The only way things will be better is if someone else makes it better for you."
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
I think American minimum wage tends to run a little bit _below_ the bare subsistence level envisioned by Ricardo. If you are single and can find one hell of a good deal on housing, you might just make it on minimum wage. With a family, you're eligible for welfare...
Note however that Ricardo didn't imagine zoning laws and building codes forbidding the workers from living in really inexpensive housing -- in his day the lowest class of workers would live in one room, no plumbing, minimal heat, and built from sticks, scraps, and mud. You could do a whole lot better than that and still spend less than half of the minimum cost of our regulated union-built "low-income" housing. Nor did Ricardo imagine cities sprawled for 50 miles, so that most workers had to drive to work. We have "progressed" from a condition where the average worker could barely afford to bring home food for his family, to one where a couple hours of work will buy a day's food, but about 25% of the population can't pay for a home out of their own earnings and have enough left to get them to their job.
right right....never get up at 4AM and try to quit drinking coffee in the same day...ugh!
still, i am not sure the correlation between the evils of Manpower Inc (who i have worked for as a temp)/HP and Amazon. of course, the NYT article is not written from an insider's perspective.
appreciate the correction!
/* Half alive and half dead too, work is for suckers and the sucker is you. - "Half-life" by Local H*/
This remark seems to beautifully illustrate what Marx meant in Capital about how the industrial revolution turns the worker into a mere appendage of the machine. The "New Economy" looks a lot like the old one.
There's a variable not much discussed here- good vs. bad management.
For my work, I've spent time observing warehouses for a number of different companies. The nature of the work varied little across the facilities that I've seen, but the cultures varied dramatically- workers in some facilities hated life, and in others were fulfilled and happy (of course, I am dramatically simplifying here).
The difference? Whether management viewed and treated their employees like robots, or like experts who knew the job better than they (the management) did. In the latter case, management could and would call on floor workers to help improve business processes, making the company more efficient- and guess what, one benefit of increased efficiency is that you can pay a higher wage (and will, because you want to retain your trained workers).
I realize that this sounds like a fairy tale, but I have seen it and it's real. It's the exception rather than the rule b/c it's hard to manage with this philosophy, and requires something that few managers have- humility.
For an example of what I'm talking about, read about Paul O'Neill's days at Alcoa (Jan 13th article in the NY Times Magazine- apparently not free online). For the theory, read about W. Edwards Deming, or the book Lean Thinking.
Simple Unexpected Concrete Credible Emotional Stories
You go live in the most expensive place in the world... how silly can that be?
There places in North America where there are jobs at 8$/hour and where you can actually have a decent enough living for that kind of money.
I can't help but wonder how he pays the rent with 8$/hour over there?
What's the point?
However, clearly, there is a problem with unemployment. Too many people *need* a job. In many ways, we've moved backward in that respect. In the last 20 years, things got worse.
And yes, no matter how many degrees you have, no matter where you live, live is continually getting tougher... unless you are among the few who "surf" the changes.
I should know, I used to be an H-1B programmer myself. And I never made less than any of my peers of equal experience or education level; or get my passport confiscated, or threatened, or anything like that..Most of this is BS generated by the Norman Matloff bunch.
Zigbee Central: A Zigbee weblog
i can't believe someone in Silicon Valley makes an hourly wage. we should split up all wages equally. except for open source programmers, and maybe any other tech workers who are "cool". they should make more. much more.
At least as far as this article is concerned, the workers here were being paid well over minimum wage at $8 an hour. Yes with CA's cost of living that pay sucks, but it's the cost of living in CA. When I last checked, jobs in California didn't pay much more than they do where I live, but the cost of living was 2.5 to 3X of here.
Depending on your skills, one of the advantages of temping (of which I've done quite a bit of) is that you can LEAVE or be reassigned to another job if you hate it. Or you know you'll be out of there soon. Sometimes, I thanked my lucky stars that I didn't work somewhere permanently! At least you got to see it from the inside first! Yeah, it's work without the benefits, but also without the commitment on your part too.
I liked the variety of temping. How you're treated can depend on the atmosphere of the company, but it depends on your attitude too. I was amazed at the number of employers that would put up with sloppy work or chronically late (really late) temps.
One thing I did gain from temp work was walking into different situations and a broader background.
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
Its unskilled labor. You get what the state mandates you should get because there are one thousand people who would take that job for a nickel an hour less if the state permitted it.
If you don't like it, get a skill. This is not news.
I'm posting AC so I can help him by modding him +1 Interesting! Don't let the rumors be true! MOD THIS GUY UP!
--SC
I think American minimum wage tends to run a little bit _below_ the bare subsistence level envisioned by Ricardo. If you are single and can find one hell of a good deal on housing, you might just make it on minimum wage. With a family, you're eligible for welfare...
i suspect that there's also a lot more minors that have part time jobs in america than Ricardo. they don't really need the money to support themselves. point taken, though.
greg
sig - .
you and all your 1910 scum!
Funny how most western countries have managed to mandate minimum wage scales over the past half century without plunging us all into economic chaos.
...your assumption, sir, appears to be that people are replaceable machines to be purchased at the minimum cost. But you are leaving out a number of factors. Morale in any team of workers is not a factor to be despised. A happy worker is normally a better and more efficient worker.
Behold the magic of outsourcing.
Do you believe the worker who assembled your cellphone or the one that put shoelaces on your nikes makes 8 dollars an hour? Impossible.
Here in Mexico the minimum wage is roughly 4 US dollars a day, and even then factories such as Volkswagen and Flextronics are threatening that if Congress raises this to more than 4.2 dollars a day they will close shop and open up in Russia, China or maybe Malasia.
However it seems that its just as effective to have 5 unhappy workers in China, Thailand or Mexico making as much as one happy, unionized, insured, US worker.
No sig for the moment.
Uneducated, cheap labor is everywhere, they are like ants. Funny how they have such large families. SEE - WELFARE WORKS!!!
Crossing the border is even easier in the other direction. So make a trip of it and take family members with you.
SINCE YOU DON'T LIKE IT HERE - GO BACK HOME
Think of all the problems that would have been solved if only your parents had used contraceptives.
It is funny that you should mentiont he word whore, and contract employment in the same breathe. The main reason to hire contract employees, is for just that reason, the ease of letting them go at a moments notice. Companies pay a premium for this ability.
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I apologize -- the fault is entirely mine.
One type of "contract" employee is one who is hired to work on a particular project due to arcane coding talents, impressive credentials, or a really impressive pair of those black framed glasses all the Dreamweaver jockeys are wearing these days. Were I that kind, I wouldn't be complaining.
The other type is, like I was myself, a tech support drone with no job security, paid at well under Parent Company wages and bitchslapped occasionally to keep the chances of "uppity-ness" down. That's what I'm complaining about; a job that made me feel at the end of the day like I was walking away from my corner, counting the money in my garter belt.
Sorry for any confusion.
--saint
This article has two main points.
(1) Working conditions and pay really sucks on the bottom. Duh!!! I've worked as a dishwasher, farm labor, and in a non-union factory. The Essex Wire factory job "inspired" me to get the heck out of there by joining the Air Force and getting an education. Pay was $0.50 above minimum wage, no benefits, worse working conditions, layoffs whenever the economy hiccupped, and people who'd been there 11 years (since the plant opened) were making just $0.50 more than new hires. I think the economy is always going to have an oversupply of idiots, so if you want to do better, find some way to distinguish yourself from the idiots...
(2) The rise of "perma-temps." At Essex Wire, we were permanent employees, for all the good it did us. But most permanent employees have some benefits. Permanent employees often learn considerably more about the business than just their jobs, and this experience is valuable -- whether or not the employers recognizes this.
But the HP plant described deliberately separated itself from the hourly personnel and classified them all as "temporary" even if they had been there for years. I guess they were paying Manpower about $12/hr for $8/hr employees, so the economic benefit isn't real obvious. Probably it's that the "temporary" classification kept the hourly workers ineligible for company benefits, and out of the union.
brought to you by the labor movement"
a bumber sticker i saw in evanston, illinois.
You have just described the conditions which, as a whole, are called "a race to the bottom." If you think this a good thing, you have some very unusual ideas of the good.
Like many posters, I've had low wge and menial jobs. I've worked hard and now have a great living, making 100K in the computer field.
However, not everyone can succeed. The advice to learn, get better, and you will succeed is good advice, but it doesn't work for everyone. Not only that, but there are many more important things than $$ or pesos or yen.
I wish the entertainment and sports world would learn this.
There are more important things than money. Now everyone needs to pay the rent, feed their family, etc. And doing that may be a problem, but and life may stink while you do it, but there is something to be said for a day's work and a day's pay. Be happy with your life. If you don't like your job, work to get another one, but also enjoy your life and your family. I wouldn't work twice the hours for twice the pay, but I'm in a good position. Hell, I wouldn't work 50% more for twice the pay.
I had the same attitude when I worked in a restaurant and worked 50 hours a week and barely made rent. While I tend to work more than the average joe, I need some free time and that time has a value. Often a value above that of my wage or salary.
I hate to have to say it again, but there are more important things than money. Even if you make $8 an hour.
The fact that it is illegal doesnt mean it does not happen.
No sig for the moment.
WHY ARE THEY STILL HAVING BABIES????
No matter how you slice it, this is fucked up. You only have so many productive years in your life - being in constant retraining mode is a nice idea and all, but just being human has its limits. And it's definitely a class-based issue: you know that a management-class worker would have been given golden-parachutes, retraining packages, relocations packages and all sorts of goodies.
Overworked? Underpaid? Essential?
Hmm... that kinda describes my job, and I sure ain't temping. Get with the times. In this economic environment, where layoffs happen on a regular basis, EVERYONE is overworked and underpaid and essential.
Overworked: remember when 1 in 3 people were 'let go' that last summer? well, guess who's doing their jobs now.
Underpaid: guess who had to take a pay cut in exchange for twice the workload.
Essential: guess who's gonna be left to do your job should you leave. no one.
I hate to say it, but I can't think of any easy way out of this problem
Create employment law that protects the worker, the industry, and the community? Just a thought...
Business practices will always aim for the bottom line in a capitalist economy. In the past, we had created law to protect workers after we learned that companies will exploit people even onto death. What has happened to those laws in the past 20 years? Things changed...
"Greed is all right, by the way . . . I think greed is healthy. You can be greedy and still feel good about yourself." Ivan F. Boesky, U.S. financier. Commencement Address, 18 May 1986, School of Business Administration, University of California, Berkeley. Boesky's words were later picked up in Oliver Stone's film, Wall Street (1987), spoken by Gordon Gecko. Boesky himself was later convicted of conspiring to file false documents with the federal government, involving insider trading violations, and agreed to pay $100 million in fines and illicit profits.
Go home and stop taking an American job, ya' furner. It's you furners here willing to work for low wages that caused wages for legitimate, 'mercan programmers to fall.
My respect for you is great, since you did almost exactly what my father once did. His hard work and his obstination with studying are the main causes my life and my brother's are and have been for a long time a life full of choices and surrounded by high technology.
But I must disagree when you say that working for low wages in expensive cities is a choice some (many) people make out of the blue. Unfornately, the very fact that makes Silicon Valley an expensive place to live (the concentration of high-tech industries) also makes it the place where the jobs are. No choice here, unless you are willing to move away to cheaper places (where you will obviously earn even less).
It should also be noted that work and study at the same time is not for the faint of heart. And may be objectively impossible for some people (single parents, parents with a many children etc).
A good point, but you already raised my objection:
> We have "progressed" from a condition where the average worker could barely afford to bring home food for his family, to one where a couple hours of work will buy a day's food, but about 25% of the population can't pay for a home out of their own earnings and have enough left to get them to their job.
Ask your grandparents, if they're still alive, about what "bare subsistence level" was like? (Particularly if they're from North American and lived during the Depression)
To many people, "bare subsistence level" now appears to mean a home with a television, a cable TV subscription, air conditioning, prepackaged foods, and for about half the population in question, enough money to maintain a nicotine habit.
Cut out the luxuries and live better. Buy "cheap food" - fresh vegetables and cuts of meat.
Filet mignon: $10/pound. Potatoes: $0.30/pound. Carrots: $0.30/pound. Clove of garlic: ~$0.10.
For about $6.00, including the cost of electricity (apply spices, lightly sear in frying pan, wrap in foil and cook slowly at 300F until medium rare), I can have an 8-oz filet mignon with two vegetable side dishes in the comfort and privacy of my own home.
Or I can have a Big Mac, Large Fries, Big Shake, and a Diet Coke while sitting on plastic chairs and surrounded by screaming kids.
You tell me who's livin' at the subsistence level :-)
The biggest social problem is educational, not economic. If you know what you're doing, living at a subsistence level can be pretty damn good.
(Frugality applies to us middle-class-income folks too. If you drink coffee for the caffeine, swap the $5.00/day Starbucks habit for the free stuff in the company lunchroom. Multiply that 220 work days per year, is a $1100 vacation to wherever you wanna go. Or a GeForce 4, 160GB drive, and dual Athlon XP 2000+ box to go with it!)
I've been a Recruiter/Staffer in the industry for 5 years now, and I am shocked at both the article and the responses to it. I'm shocked at the article because someone actually had the huevos to write it (and did a great job of it!) and shocked at the responses because of their (mostly) lack of blind Temp agency bashing.
IMHO, there is always a time to say "enough". It's just different for everyone, and they must have the balls to do it.
For Temp agencies, they must be able to turn away that business, and that money, when their temps are being treated badly. This is a very hard thing to do when your Parent company is demanding sales numbers be met.
For the workers, they must be able to sacrifice the easy job (as in easy to get and quit) and put long days and nights into education to qualify for higher paying and permanent work. This is also hard, when you can't feed your kids.
Finally, the Company must be able to lower profits and raise expenses by hiring high quality, permanent employees at or above market rate. Again...not easy to do, especially when profit are low.
Every agency, company and worker has done this at some time in my career. My agency has walked from business and paid for it, sometimes for years. But we did it knowing that we would come out ahead in the end (there is a reason my agency is NOT the one in this article) but in the meantime, things are harder, not easier.
Until one of the three parties in this plant says enough...it will be an embarrasment for all.
AOL IM? ICQ? Yahoo Chat??? Bah! I use Bitwise baby! http://www.bitwisechat.com/ My BW ID: virginia
why didn't they quit? Nobody was forcing them to work there.
I saw this writer in a television documentary on public television a few months ago. He struck me as bitter about the success of others and overly prideful of his own mechanical labor.
Simply put, those closer to the implementation of the thoughts of others are paid less.
Raj Jayadev's paid contribution to the company is to mechanically assembles designs. The engineers are paid more than he is for the designs and assembly instructions. The designers of the business process are paid even more. None of these groups should be prideful of their own contribution, and none should covet the pay nor power that others have.
He is lower on the decision chain and he should not be so bitter about that. While his strategy of organized complaining and "unionizing" may help a group of workers with pay and conditions, I would argue that self improvement (and group improvement) help a lot more.
This article is highlighting the possible future or your "higher CS" job.
Already programming jobs are heading offshore.
With all the H1-B visa's around (and I have heard nothing of reducing the head count) - the pool of talent is increasing, which means the value of that talent is decreasing (not scarce.)
Already "support" jobs are going to China and Taiwan, where English is spoken well.
The economic divied won't be between "manual workers and knowledge workers" - it will be between "those who own companies and those who do not."
- Benefits
- Insurance
- Welfare
- Or comply with the onerous and completely employer un-friendly Labor Laws that discriminate in favor of the stupid immigrant masses at the expense of those that have an education.
Cheap labor is cheap because there is an un-ending supply of uneducated idiots from (amongst other places) everywhere South of LA.
And we'll probably get one in the next election. US unions are weak because US labor law is weak. In Canada, for example, a union has to be recognized as soon as half the employees sign cards wanting to join. In the US, 90% of workers who try to organize a union are fired.
Well, who the hell forced them to have kids? Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Like, just get pregnant and let someone else (i.e welfare) pay for your inconsideration.
I worked full time and got an education at the same time, so these idiots can too. Or they can GO HOME
College is *not* the only answer. Neither is tech school, or any other training course. I've been on the temp end; at 20, I was filing (moving large pieces of paper that had small pieces of paper in them into alphabetical order) for $7/hr for a food services company. I hated it. I had the skills to move into a reception job, or a data-entry job, even then... Word, Excel, PowerPoint, 80+wpm keyboarding, etc.
I had also gone to ~2 years of college, which I also hated. I saw it as a very expensive waste of my time.
I left the temp company to work for an ISP, at minimum wage. I was the *anything you can think of having to do at an ISP* person. I answered phones, signed users up, helped them get configured (and reconfigured), handled billing, and anything else you can think of. I left there after a year, with a few more skills, but nothing special. I got the job because I taught myself html.
Long, long, long story short, I've been a PC Support Tech, a Unix Admin, and a contract sysadmin in Silicon Valley during the boom. I'm now a sysadmin, and I got there by teaching myself how to do most of what I do. A book here, a book there, man pages, FAQ's, and online documentation have been more useful to me than any of the classes I took in college.
It's a myth that you have to go to college to get the education you need for a good job. Especially in computers. You just have to be motivated to learn.
A college education may get your foot in the door, but if you can't do the work, no matter if it's accounting, system administration, or human resources, it's just another piece of paper.
While I support the concept that you have to learn and better yourself, not everyone who doesn't have a college degree is unemployable.
It's a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable. It's a lot wrong to say it's a suspension bridge.
Despite some of the recent noise out of Washington, a drivers license is tied to residency, not citizenship.
If you're here as a tourist, you can use your home license and an "international license." But most (all?) states want you to obtain a local license if you're here for any length of time. Even if you don't drive, I think you can still get a "state ID" if you prove you're a legal resident.
Still prefer to use your passport? That's fine... until you run into someone who needs proof that you live locally (e.g., before they'll accept your check). In those cases a drivers license from another state is as worthless as a passport (domestic or foreign).
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Have you heard? A new revolution is starting which will see the end of capitalism as we know it today! JOIN THE REVOLUTION!
This is true if both sides have an equal need to reach an agreement and both sides are equally informed about the value of the work. And of course there would need to be equal negotiating skill.
Obviously someone who desparately needs a job is in a worse individual bargaining position than a company that has 500 employees doing the same work and wants to hire 1 more. While negotiating, the individual can walk away if wages or conditions aren't good enough, but the consequences are great -- possible eviction, children without healthcare, etc. But if the company refuses the individual's final offer, then the company is understaffed by less than 1%. That might mildly affect the morale and profitability of the company, but it obviously wouldn't be desparate. And the fact is, the one with the most ability to walk away from a bad offer is in a powerful position.
As for knowledge, it is difficult for an individual to learn the true value of their labor. While it is possible, most people aren't aware of what they are worth. And if you undervalue yourself, you are in a worse bargaining position. Imagine buying a used car, thinking the car is worth $5000 more than the salesman knows it's really worth - you will clearly pay more than you might have with more accurate information, just as if you knew the value and the salesman undervalued it by $1000 you'd end up with a bargain. And if a lot of people looking for a similar position undervalue themselves or are desparate, then suddenly your value goes down, even if you have accurate knowledge and are not desparate.
And, of course, negotiation is a skill -- if you've only negotiated three or four times for a salary, you won't be as skilled as someone that has done it a dozen times, or someone whose job it is to be a good negotiator.
This all adds up to most people being in a situation where it is not an agreement between equals. And this lowers the value of all of our labor, since we are only as valuable as someone that might be used to replace us.
So, that leads to the question -- how can we best increase our value, so that we are on an equal footing when reaching an agreement with an employer, or even tip the scale in our favor? For one, we need to ensure that the employer is more desparate than we are -- if refusing an agreement might put us on the street, then it would be best if the employer would risk going out of business if they refuse. We need to make sure that not only do we as individuals know what we are worth, but we need to make sure that all others that do similar work know their value. And we need to make sure that others have the skills needed to stand up for themselves. And to tip things even more in our favor, we need to lessen the risk of standing up for ourselves -- if one person stands up, the employer risks little by getting rid of them, but if we stand up together for issues we have in common, we have less risk and the employer has more.
Now, when I say we need unions, I mean it is in our best interests to organize together as I described above. We certainly don't need corrupt union officials or unions that spend our money on even more corrupt politicians.
But there are a lot of other options -- you can form an independent union, and make it as democratic and decentralized as you like, or you can find an existing union to your liking (there is a broad range both within and outside the AFL-CIO).
Personally, I recommend the IWW -- a union long known for being the most democratic and least bureaucratic of unions, with a constitution that forbids any entanglement with political parties.
To hell with this capitalism nonsense. I'm going to go all retro-- hunting and gathering's the way to go. And if I absolutely have to get something, it's bartering with grunts and gestures for me!
Anyone else interested? There'll be an informational meeting followed by a three-course meal of grubs, bearies and raw turnips.
Quick note: reducing the disparity between the lowest paid worker and the highest paid worker (line worked and CEO) would certainly allow them to keep 'costs" the same, produce products at the same price, and up the wages of thier employees. This can probably happen in every industry (I say probably because I don't know my way around every industry).
If we are organized and see that we are the ones that control how safe or comfortable our working conditions are, then we will see the value in staying vigilant. If the standards are in a law instead of a collective contract, then rather than keeping organized and putting pressure on employers, we will need to work to keep the incumbent politicians in power -- staying organized on the job will be irrelevant. And after a while, the politicians will have little incentive to keep the standards on the law books -- they just need to make sure they are the "lesser evil". Next thing you know, the laws are whittled down, the standards are gone, and we're disorganized and weak.
We don't need the government to do anything for us, and, in fact, they'll never have our best interests at heart. That's why we need to do it ourselves by organizing for our own interests.
in reply to:
"I hate to say it, but I can't think of any easy way out of this problem."
you said:
"Create employment law that protects the worker, the industry, and the community? Just a thought..."
Ok, I can think of an easy way out, too. Kill everyone. But we want easy AND good. And I'm sure you think you are proposing something good. But I don't think you are thinking about how much damage your laws can do.
I lived in Belgium for six months. Part of the time I was there I was at a hotel, where the owner was working his ass off, long hours, little vacation. Some huge fraction of his money was going to pay young, healthy kids to do nothing. He couldn't find people to work for him. Why work when you can sit around and still get enough from "the government" (read "those the government has extorted money from") to live on?
I'm not saying that there is _no_ place for regulation. I am saying, though, that you have to be very careful. Yes, a civilized society can take the edge off of the human condition, prevent you from having to spend all your time as a hunter-gatherer when you are between jobs, etc. But if you take too much of the edge off, people quit trying--and it's your fault. You have "helped" them into being completely unproductive.
Not to mention that you do this by taking the money from people who are working for it. Maybe you can do that successfully, but there will be backlash. You have to figure our the right balance, and it's not easy. "More laws" should only be the absolute last resort.
Liberty uber alles.
Or a couple of pounds of rice, peas, mushrooms in sauce, tuna or meat, boil it up in a big pot, it will feed a dozen. I haven't priced all the ingredients in a couple of decades, but in 1978 it was under $5; it's probably still under $10 and tastes pretty good. If you know how to buy it and cook it, food in 21st century america is as cheap as it's ever been since manna stopped raining from heaven. But cooking takes planning, work, and a little knowledge, 3 things that seem to be lacking in the people that actually _need_ to keep costs down. Back when I was working at minimum + $0.50, my wife had a friend whose kids would get hungry at the end of every month -- their foodstamps gave them a bigger grocery budget per person than us, but they bought TV dinners and soda pop...
And cigarettes, of course. I've seen people get the heat turned off in mid-winter, who are burning up more than the heat bill every month in cigarettes. If you _really_ want to get the welfare cases back to work, find a way to cut off their tobacco.
As for subsistence living... My first year in the Air Force, 4 people living on E2 pay, was probably way below the poverty line but it wasn't subsistence living the way we handled it. Closer: when I was five in 1958, 4 people in married student housing at Arizona State, Flagstaff, a two room stone cottage and living primarily off Dad's GI bill and 10% disability. (There was some damage to his lungs in the Army -- he gets sick _every_ time he tries mountain climbing.) Real subsistence living: Dad learned to sneak up on rabbits and woodchucks with a rock to put meat on the table, as a kid in the Ozarks in the 30's. But I doubt that corner of the world is much different when the economy is booming, either...
And not everyone was suffering that badly in the 30's. Mom's grandparents had to lay off most of the servants...
I'm not certain, but a friend of mine heard from the temp agency that he was working for that at the end of 6 months, he would be required to take a 2 week break. Appearantly, the state I live in must have a policy that anyone working for longer than 6 months is classified as a permanent/full time employee, and must receive benefits made available to other employees (the temp agency's managment I assume). Perhaps it was only health benefits . . .
The Amazon article ends with the following quote:
"The sum of all the little mistakes," he said, "is big."
It is the dogged and too-often mindless persuit of control over that dynamic that is behind every ridiculously draconian rule you ever suffered in any company you ever worked for, from McDonald's to Ratheon.
They learn too late that it's a double-edged sword, that erodes morale and encourages sabotage when pushed too far. It is the dynamic that make even the new-age slobs at Apple yearn for the dark years of yore when labor laws were lax as slacks on a Lorax!
Hey, it's all part of the fun.
**>>BELCH
I forgot the "on the other hand." There used to be houses priced within reach of a minimum wage worker who was sufficiently frugal with other spending. I actually could have bought a house for $5,000 in 1979, if I'd needed to save money badly enough to do all the work it needed. I think that's $15-20,000 in 2002 dollars; a vacant lot goes for far more than that now in a good many counties.
Now, it seems like any housing at all is priced pretty much out of the reach of minimum wage, unless they are assisted by the welfare department. This is bad not just because it effectively raises the real price of unskilled labor (much of it shifted to others by taxes), but because regardless of the ostensible policies set by legislatures, the welfare department's actions tend to maximize the number of clients so their bureaucracy has to grow too...
And of course, Ricardo expected the less foresightful of the unskilled workers to starve to death, along with their presumably genetically inferior children. We don't let that happen anymore. And we no longer enforce significant societal penalties against those that breed without regard to how the children will be supported and reared. (I know of a man that is in arrears for child support on four or five different children by as many women, mostly not from marriage. How many more children weren't tracked to him? The courts can enter all sorts of judgements for non-support, but there is no money or assets to sieze, they don't sterilize him or keep him in jail forever, and as soon as he's out he's finding a new girlfriend to support him.)
This goes far beyond that. Here we have people getting shortchanged for their wages, and fired if they complain too much about it. I've done factory work, I even came close to punching out a foreman. I know there is no way to make the work less shitty. But to fudge payroll ought to be a capital offense.
I work for AT&T Worldnet's Tech Support Tier 1. They contracted the work out to a company named Teletech. During the meeting for hiring from Temp to Perm I raised some contracts regarding some forms they wanted us to sign. They fired me on the spot.
This is very typical... ask for time to read your contract, "you're fired." is the response you get. The people in this article are in aweful positions and should just quit. Nobody forced them to take the job, it's their own fault for keeping it. Will they be able to find other work if they leave... YES. No matter how bad the economy there are always non-temp positions available SOMEWHERE. Carl's Jr? Taco Bell? Mc Donalds? Sure it's not glossy like HP, but you don't have to take nearly as much shit, and the pay isn't that different. Plus, unlike the dumbass in the article... you don't have to commute 100 miles (100 miles for a job paying $8.50 an hour?! The guy's retarded and deserves to be a temp worker.)
Let me quantify the above by stating that; in the past two decades we have seen a reversal of employment law and folding of government to the business lobby.
For example, Ontario, where I live, currently has changed employment law to such a frightening degree that it has been compared to the state of employment law from 1884! Not kidding at all.
I'm sure similar things are happening in the U.S. Hard to tell from CNN *chuckle*
If your goal is to switch places with "ana" in the article and yell at some other sop, then go get a degree in management, work hard, and maybe one day you will get to hold the whip.
If your goal is to improve the lot of people in general, then address the systematic incentives in our economy for these sweatshops. Atleast minimize them. Maybe change the playing field so that these types of parasitic business models are punished.
Why parastic? Well, these temp workers are not going to be buying a lot of printers. The idea of the worker who can afford his own model-T is sustainable. Having a horde of disposable temps who make stuff that only a shrinking middle class can buy is parasitic.
What are the incentives for these sweatshops?
the above hidden cost is not paid.
The big 5 accounting firms have successfully lobbied the SEC to not require reforms in reporting compensation packages. This allows management to pay themselves more, because this pay is hidden from shareholders. This (along with LBOs and management sitting on each others' boards) is a big source in shifting money from supervised to supervisory employees (total labor costs have remained constant). This can be addressed with accounting reforms.
The laws on the books protecting the rights of workers to communicate and organized are not enforced. Scared, disorganized employees are then confronted with organized management which is confident it can break the laws with impunity.
make the true owners (hp in this case) legally responsible for how their employees are treated. Let defacto employees == legal employees. Again, this is a shell game which we let the big boys play to avoid responsibility and bad p.r.
the article contains an example of clearly an illegal firing. This was done for political purposes and without cause. The employee can no go to unemployment and uncle sam foots the bill. Companies who want this kind of "flexibility" should then pay for it by paying much higher unemployment insurance. Companies who don't engage in these practices will have lower costs.
Not paying someone's paycheck is illegal. How about some enforcement on that.
Immigration reform. If you come here you can work for anyone. Companies who decide to use the INS as their personal manpower recruiter should then pay some of the INS's budget, no? While those who don't shouldn't pay this cost.
openness. No secret meetings, no policies of "we can't tell you if a list exists, and if it does, wether your name is on it." Documents relating to your employment should be accessible to you. More inspectors, more news coverage. HP, Amazon, IBM, know the power of goodwill in the marketplace.
There's nothing wrong or shameful with washing dishes, carrying boxes, loading packages, or seasonal employment. It's possible to treat these employees well, have everything above board, and enforce their rights. Many countries manage to do it, and it's more a matter of political power and organization which prevents it happening here. Remember, there is nothing inherently more indispensible or rare in another kind of seasonal work: the business consultant. But the latter has powerful (non-"market") institutions which protect his interests: academia, networks of friends, cultural prestige, congressional lobbyists. These interests tweak the business climate to support him.
Just think:
You want to shut down a plant, but can cover your ass if some fancy name consultant recommends it. Guaranteed income for Anderson Consulting!
Or
A ceo (say for Cisco) gets stock options. If the business goes up, he gets 700 million, if it goes down he pays..nothing. The utility function doesn't dip below the x-axis. That's called, in economics, a "moral hazard".
These examples are due to institutional policies which benefit these two groups. Nothing at all to do with working hard, free markets, or improving yourself. Everything to do with culture, the legal system, accounting rules, and business practices. In short -- power. And there are ways for dishwashers and assembly workers to be powerful, too. Not artificial ways, but natural ones, since everyone needs/wants dishwashers and loaders. Poeple have to be forced into hiring lawyers and consultants. Simple power of the vote, of organizing, of information can be enough to make the life of the seasonal worker much better.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
HAHAHA. *ROTFL* Pretty much makes my point. Wish I read this before posting earlier today. ;p
:)
This Modern World
@ Salon.com if your wondering.
What you're doing is measuring the Amazon workforce based on the number of names on the payroll*, not the amount of work performed over the course of the year.
Most temp employees are not employed year-round, because there's not a need for them year-round. I would guesstimate that temporary workers account for maybe 20% of the total man-hours worked in Amazon's warehouses.
-Poot
(* not strictly true if temporary help is contracted through an outside staffing agency.)
Speaking as someone who actually DOES work in this capacity.....
I don't see what all the controversy is about. It was abundantly clear to me when I started down the path of being a Contractor, that the following rules and concepts applied:
o You're not an employee of the place where you work.
o This is not a permanent position, and you shouldn't expect it to become one.
o You should not expect to directly advance within the capacity you're assigned to.
Here's the situation: This article is about a guy who thinks he works for HP, and is entitled to HP's benefits. This simply isn't the case. He may work AT HP, but he is not an HP employee, and therefore is not privy to the benefits that HP provides. Here's another example. I work at IBM. I do not work for IBM. I am not an IBM employee. I do exactly the same work as IBM employees, go to the same meetings, work the same hours, make the same money, work on the same projects, work with the same people, enjoy the same perks, hell, I even have an IBM email address, an employee #, and 24/7 access to confidential materials.. But I am NOT an employee of IBM. "work AT IBM" != "work FOR IBM".
The only thing you should really be concerned with when you're a contractor, is entrenchment, flexibility, and experience. Be ready for anything. By the very nature of your employement, its temporary. You WILL get let go. Thats the whole point of why companies like HP and IBM hire contractors..You're there to fill in the spots where the market and the economy fluctuate. You often times sign a contract thats says you can be let go at any time, without warning, without reason. If you're lucky, your contractor firm will offer you a benefits package comparable to what regular employees are given. Knowing this, you should use your time working at Company X to your advantage. Learn as much stuff as rapidly as possible to make yourself more desirable to future employers down the road. For example -- Being a contractor at IBM gave me a first class education in storage subsystems, SAN implementation, performance tuning, a couple certifications, etc.. Not to mention half a dozen work references, reccomendations and accolades I can throw on my resume' when my contract runs out. Make yourself integral to as many processes as you can, it may save your neck. And above all, don't consider your job to be permanent. You're just setting yourself up for a disaster if you do, because when you get laid off (and you WILL get laid off) you'll have no one to blame but yourself in the end, because its your signature on the contract. You were supposed to read the contract BEFORE you signed, remember?
Most of all, be an honest person, and honest to yourself. This guy is lying to himself in that he thinks he's an HP employee. Thats his first mistake. The rest is common sense.
Bowie J. Poag
Read The Jungle, a book by Upton Sinclair, written in early 1900.
------------------
You may like my a cappella music
there are few temp jobs left in san francisco...
I am amazed at the number of "contract jobs" (i.e., temp workers) that have been created in the so-called new economy. Temp worker are easy to hire and fire and generally get treated like egg-sucking pigs - it's just that simple. I have been a temp in the IT field and I can honestly say that there is no worse form of work: it's degrading and ultimately you are booted for some fabricated reason without so much as a good reference. Screw it.
What's worse, is that this cycle will continue as long as there are english-speaking people to lead and workers willing to take it up the ying-yang. If you're a temp worker, I urge you to really consider the how much effort you put into your work; infact, I urge you not to work hard at all. Feel free to screw things up!
Hey, as lomg as "Temping" works, management will keep using them and tens-of-millions will be stuck with deadend jobs.
Help yourself and others - be a suck-ass temp. It's the only way management will consider hiring fuul-time employees. And anyways, what can they do to you? They don't give reference and they don't give benefits - you have nothing to lose and everything to gain and there is always another suck-ass temp job to be had until something permanent comes along.
Reminds me of a Dilbert comic:
Carol the Secretary: My kid is failing all his classes, i'm hoping he'll get a job in computers.
Dilbert: What, carrying them?
Seriously, I know guys who have comp. sci. degrees and they can't find jobs so they applied for admission into masters and doctoral programs at other schools to avoid having to pay back college loans. What's better? A bachelor's degree in comp. sci. and $25,000 debt, or a PhD. and $100,000 debt? I guess either is prefferable to debt with no job at all.
-ted
The better kind of control is self control.
It would be nice if the society in which one lives in did give a damn about what was mentioned in the article. However you'll notice a couple of things.
1-A good portion of society labours in conditions not much above the one's described.
2-Misery does love company. Most will either sympathize, but do little or nothing to help. Or most will tell you to basically accept the situation as is.
Government controls would be even worse because you would have all this implimented by a nameless, faceless buocracy this has nothing invested in the situation. No shared experience.
No losses if it doesn't succeed and no gain if it does.
The solution to all of this however will not come until those who weild the whip of power feel the stings of it's abuse.
Now i'm pissed.
I can see sticking up for the hard laborers of this country they do very valuable things, but don't put down my education, or hard work.
Most of the posts here seem to say that if you went to college you were born in a well funded area of the country that has wonderful schools, and that put you on a so-called "golden elevator".
SCREW YOU! I worked my ass off in high-school taking college prep courses, AP computer science, and Calculus I so that I could do well on my SATs and get college loans!
I paid for college with loans and I am still paying for college. It was hard as hell; I did 3 years in EE before switching to CS. A "golden elevator" didn't give me a high-school diploma, a college degree, or my current job...I HAD TO WORK MY ASS OFF FOR THEM AND SO DID MY CLASSMATES AND CO-WORKERS!
I am offended that because I am successful, some people assume that my parents gave me everything or that I didn't work for it. The path to success isn't a "golden elevator" it's a rickety wooden ladder....you've got to climb it yourself!
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
I'm open to suggestion, please don't include ones that involve crime, or lottery tickets.
P.S. I don't have kids, but some day, if I work hard i'll be able to afford them.
" In general I think an employer should have pretty damn free reign on hiring and firing, but this sort of thing does bother me a bit."
Proably hits the same nerve that controls the right to critisize the government that controls so much of our lives.
[a different AC]
" Mexico has to spend over 50% of its gross domestic product paying the interest of its foreign debt. Not the debt itself, just the interest. "
And Mexico amongst other countries should ask themselves "How did we get to the point were we have to borrow money under such bad terms?".
The road to any bottom has to start somewere.
Mexico has had many roads to that bottom.
Yup, it's a balancing act. You've got to decide what works for you. Some people like contract/temp work, some people don't. (I would rather have a lower paying "permanent" position as well.)
Best of luck,
-ted
"Not that I always agree with the way the corporate folks run their businesses, but a 25% increase is not something you can just casually implement without raising the cost of the end product."
True. Now let's go the other way. Lower the cost of the item, and slash everyone's paycheck 25%.{##} Now who are you going to sell this *inexpensive* product to? Why of course all those other people out there who work for companies that haven't followed the above. But wait there's more. Since companies exist to make a profit by any means necessary (just ask Enron). Why not make this an across the economy thing? Now who do you sell your product to? There's something to be said for *lowest common denominator* both in economics and debate.
##BTW notice that the top managment in a lot of companies give themselves a raise all the while singing the economic blues and cutting people left and right. That 25% looks a lot more justifiable in that light.
"You argue that those who "make the wealth" are getting screwed, but pause for a minute, take a breath and realize that making the product does NOT equate to making the wealth (no matter what your socialism books say). ffoiii"
Really? So who indeed is *making the wealth"?
Is there a wealth vacumn that all this is coming out of?
In business, ALL cows are sacred.
Elaborate please.
1-I've know many examples of were people have done the college route. Haven't risen as high as you'ld think. Wonder what's wrong with them?
2-Not everyone CAN move, or at the most move very easily. Think *handicapped* before you say anything else.
"Turning the place Union won't help, temp workers are temp because they want to be."
Hmmm...yes the "it must be that way because people want it that way". Oh the sins a society could get away with, using that defense.
The problem at hand is that plain and simple greed has caused absurd concentrations of wealth, on a global basis. If taxes were made more progressive, the economic problems would become less important, because large portions of the economy (be they regions or peoples' skills) would not become disenfranchised. More progressive taxation would spur economic growth and preserve essential services.
Compared to the great lever of the tax formulae, interest rates are a little knob when it comes to the unemployment rate. The leaders will soon return to a more progressive stance, when they see where their greed has gotten them.
Would you rather have 50% unemployment and 1% interest, or 1% unemployment and 50% interest?
Log in, please.
Why becuase I work hard and i'm proud of my accomplishments? Yeah, with that attitude you'll go far.....how much do fry cooks at McDonalds make these days?
Hello t0qer, can you send me a private e-mail to fredf@aol.com. Want to ask tech questions about ricochet.
Thankf fredf
Anonymous Coward says:
...And Mexico amongst other countries should ask themselves "How did we get to the point were we have to borrow money under such bad terms?".
Unfortunately you have a point here, Mexico has owed money to the US ever since US Ambassador in Mexico Joel Roberts Poinsett lulled mexican president Antonio Lopez de SantaAna into a false sense of security and then wrote home recommending a full scale invasion of Mexico.
Lopez de SantaAnna regretfully went into history as one of the most stupid people that ever lived. And Poinsett went home as a hero and went into history as the guy who introduced the Nochebuena flower to the world (called Poinsettia in the US ever since)
No sig for the moment.