You’re missing the point. I don’t think most people have a problem saying there are different levels of skill based employment. Does designing a skyscraper take more skill than managing the lunch rush at a McDonald’s? Probably, but by saying working in fast food is an unskilled trade is propaganda to keep wages for those jobs low.
There is a definite skill for handling noon at a McDonald’s. Maybe it’s different than doing high level math for engineering but it’s not unskilled.
That’s where the issue is for most people that don’t like the punching down at “unskilled workers”
This is the same argument I have with my parents when they say that “unskilled workers” have jobs and not careers. And they use that as a justification for not paying them a living wage, “it’s not supposed to be a job forever” is usually the answer I get.
If you contribute 40 hours of labor to the country’s GDP, you should expect to be able to have shelter, food and medical care. That’s not asking a lot.
Creating a class of full time employees below that basic level is disgusting.
Does designing a skyscraper take more skill than managing the lunch rush at a McDonald’s?
I feel like it’d honestly be hard to compare, because it’s such a vastly different skillset/task.
It’s like the differences between writing a technical manual and wrangling a clowder of cats on crack.
With enough education, care and time, anyone could probably achieve the first (even if you suck at it, you can just do it again until it’s acceptable, there’s no rush), but even attempting the second takes a certain…je ne sais quoi.
If you contribute 40 hours of labor to the country’s GDP, you should expect to be able to have shelter, food and medical care. That’s not asking a lot.
That’s 1000% true, but that doesn’t change the fact that there are jobs you can do from walking in off the street with an hour or two of training, and there are jobs that you need more training/background/skills to do.
All full time work should provide enough for a basic standard of living. But arguing that there isn’t a difference in required skill between stocking shelves in an Amazon warehouse and say, diagnosing and treating cancer is absurd.
That’s going to significantly undermine your argument with a lot of people.
As far as your parents go, historically a lot of those jobs were populated primarily by high school students or people trying to make some side cash, and it wasn’t as hard to find employment in a more stable “career” job. The economy worked in a way where having dead end “starter” jobs still “worked”.
They just probably aren’t as aware of the fact that more and more people are getting stuck in those jobs due to no fault of their own. The idea is truly and utterly alien to them if they haven’t had to navigate job hunting since they started their “career” job.
The idea that people who didn’t make poor life choices are trying to survive off working at McDonalds doesn’t mesh with their understanding of how the world works. The idea that someone working at Walmart full time can’t afford to live without government assistance doesn’t seem real.
The last time they had to directly deal with that sort of stuff, no one was trying to survive that way because you could much more easily move to a job you could survive on if you just put in a small amount of effort. It might have been another shitty job, but options were there if you just looked. Not too long ago you could survive off Walmart.
All you can really do is to keep insisting that times have changed. Jobs aren’t just waiting for someone to ask to speak to the manager, and pay has not kept pace with costs of stuff increasing.
Trying to argue that a fry cook deserves to be paid as much as a skilled position will always be a non-starter.
That’s just not true. Resources are split based on value of work regardless of the actual skill involved. The whole unskilled labor argument is nonsense to begin with as you point out, everything is a skill. If any rich person is complaining about unskilled labor, I’d assume they’re complaining that the skill of the employee doesn’t produce the results required so the person is unskilled, not that the job itself is unskilled. For example, a rich person complaining that the unskilled labor at McDonald’s isn’t a complaint that the job requires no skill, just that either the company didn’t train the person right or the person is unable to attain the skills necessary. After all, if they did everything properly, they wouldn’t be complaining about unskilled labor to begin with.
Obviously, that isn’t going to stand true for every instance of unskilled labor. But what it seems to me is that you’re confusing the rich with the poor. People like your parents complain about unskilled labor because they don’t understand what the rich are saying. I see that a lot. But that’s like using people who don’t understand rocket science complaining about solar flares affecting rocket ships. It’s a massive misunderstanding between the scientists who are talking about solar flares and the common man who doesn’t understand.
Did you read what I wrote? I said when applying the term unskilled labor, it is applied to those who literally don’t have the skill and screwed up the product. Not that there’s work that doesn’t require skill. Or are you just trolling?
You’re missing the point. I don’t think most people have a problem saying there are different levels of skill based employment. Does designing a skyscraper take more skill than managing the lunch rush at a McDonald’s? Probably, but by saying working in fast food is an unskilled trade is propaganda to keep wages for those jobs low.
There is a definite skill for handling noon at a McDonald’s. Maybe it’s different than doing high level math for engineering but it’s not unskilled.
That’s where the issue is for most people that don’t like the punching down at “unskilled workers”
This is the same argument I have with my parents when they say that “unskilled workers” have jobs and not careers. And they use that as a justification for not paying them a living wage, “it’s not supposed to be a job forever” is usually the answer I get.
If you contribute 40 hours of labor to the country’s GDP, you should expect to be able to have shelter, food and medical care. That’s not asking a lot.
Creating a class of full time employees below that basic level is disgusting.
I feel like it’d honestly be hard to compare, because it’s such a vastly different skillset/task.
It’s like the differences between writing a technical manual and wrangling a clowder of cats on crack.
With enough education, care and time, anyone could probably achieve the first (even if you suck at it, you can just do it again until it’s acceptable, there’s no rush), but even attempting the second takes a certain…je ne sais quoi.
That’s 1000% true, but that doesn’t change the fact that there are jobs you can do from walking in off the street with an hour or two of training, and there are jobs that you need more training/background/skills to do.
All full time work should provide enough for a basic standard of living. But arguing that there isn’t a difference in required skill between stocking shelves in an Amazon warehouse and say, diagnosing and treating cancer is absurd.
That’s going to significantly undermine your argument with a lot of people.
As far as your parents go, historically a lot of those jobs were populated primarily by high school students or people trying to make some side cash, and it wasn’t as hard to find employment in a more stable “career” job. The economy worked in a way where having dead end “starter” jobs still “worked”.
They just probably aren’t as aware of the fact that more and more people are getting stuck in those jobs due to no fault of their own. The idea is truly and utterly alien to them if they haven’t had to navigate job hunting since they started their “career” job.
The idea that people who didn’t make poor life choices are trying to survive off working at McDonalds doesn’t mesh with their understanding of how the world works. The idea that someone working at Walmart full time can’t afford to live without government assistance doesn’t seem real.
The last time they had to directly deal with that sort of stuff, no one was trying to survive that way because you could much more easily move to a job you could survive on if you just put in a small amount of effort. It might have been another shitty job, but options were there if you just looked. Not too long ago you could survive off Walmart.
All you can really do is to keep insisting that times have changed. Jobs aren’t just waiting for someone to ask to speak to the manager, and pay has not kept pace with costs of stuff increasing.
Trying to argue that a fry cook deserves to be paid as much as a skilled position will always be a non-starter.
That’s just not true. Resources are split based on value of work regardless of the actual skill involved. The whole unskilled labor argument is nonsense to begin with as you point out, everything is a skill. If any rich person is complaining about unskilled labor, I’d assume they’re complaining that the skill of the employee doesn’t produce the results required so the person is unskilled, not that the job itself is unskilled. For example, a rich person complaining that the unskilled labor at McDonald’s isn’t a complaint that the job requires no skill, just that either the company didn’t train the person right or the person is unable to attain the skills necessary. After all, if they did everything properly, they wouldn’t be complaining about unskilled labor to begin with.
Obviously, that isn’t going to stand true for every instance of unskilled labor. But what it seems to me is that you’re confusing the rich with the poor. People like your parents complain about unskilled labor because they don’t understand what the rich are saying. I see that a lot. But that’s like using people who don’t understand rocket science complaining about solar flares affecting rocket ships. It’s a massive misunderstanding between the scientists who are talking about solar flares and the common man who doesn’t understand.
The mere continued use of the phrase “unskilled work” is undermining your stance. No work is unskilled.
Did you read what I wrote? I said when applying the term unskilled labor, it is applied to those who literally don’t have the skill and screwed up the product. Not that there’s work that doesn’t require skill. Or are you just trolling?