The US economy is on thin ice, … well, thinner than currently forecasted. The reason is this: the rate of wage growth since the 1950s has not kept up with the rate of price growth. In fact, the gap is growing wider and wider. Also, consider that most Americans quit or get fired or change career fields every so often and when they do most suffer significant income loss and typically start at the lower levels of their new job or new field at a much lower starting pay rate. So then, on a graph, while prices are moving up at a steady 25% angle, wages are moving up at only 10% annually and with a jagged shark-teeth line to reflect job losses & career changes. (These numbers are just there for example), but you can see that it wouldn’t, and hasn’t taken, long for prices to outpace adjusted family wage growth at such a rate that families can’t keep up. And, that is what is happening. Coupled with planned obsolecense, the results are more families on the edge, working more, longer, less well paying jobs and a dramatic increase in bankruptcies. It’s hard not to need a computer these days. It’s aggravating to have one that works fine, except that none of the new programs or platforms or anything you have been able to do on it can actually be done on the new upgraded version with that new “feature” that truly is indispensable. So there you are, keep up with the Joneses, your neighbors, other business, or be left behind. A dinosaur on the fast path to economic extinction, without value. Hey, dude, find a fuckin’ job!
Welcome to the job market! Here are your instructions: buy a paper, look on the local job listing sites, & apply for unemployment if you qualify (and that’s becoming more difficult). Sounds simple enough. So go ahead, … what are you waiting for, … jump in, the water’s fine, … you know you hate that new boss, … go ahead, quit, … something about “take this job and shove it,” come to mind, or maybe a faint refrain of “money for nothing and chicks for free!”
All right. 2 months pass, 3 months, 6 months, … better start branching out, diversifying, … there has to be something you can do with all those skills, … I can do that with some training. OK, so I’ve had a few blips, and of course my credit sucks, because I DON’T HAVE A JOB. So you’re telling me I have to have good credit or you won’t hire me, and if you hired me, I’d have good credit, but since I don’t, you won’t, … likely ever, but you’ll keep my application on file? Did I get that right? OK, so E-bay here I come, … post it, sell it, sell this, sell that, can’t sell that, … hell, I really didn’t want to lose that, … you mean I have to sell that before I can even apply for assistance, … I have to be how poor, … nothing more to sell, … your rope is at end.
But you have skills, … I mean you actually graduated high school, went to college, had that administrative job, or maybe industrial, you took that special course, even won that award. Post your resume, Monster.com, the local TV station and Daily News job websites, send out resumes to recruiters, and if the right job to fit your skills is actually listed at any of these sources and you’re the first in line, or prettiest, or related to the owner, … well, you could get lucky. Now remember, employers don’t have to list their job openings with any one, and while they can list with every job listing source, they don’t, so you’re job might be on Monster, but you don’t have a computer, had to sell it, remember. Or maybe you’re posted on Monster, but you’re job is actually posted on the XYZ company’s website, but you don’t have $100 to sign up for their agency, or the $150 to sign up for the next agency, that may or may not get hired to post a job for this corporate client or the next. Or maybe you just can no longer afford you’re subscription.
So where are the recruiters that work for the person looking for a job? Remember? In the old days (cue music here), their were actually agencies, teams of people, that would contact employers on your behalf looking for the best job for you. They’d take a retainer/down-payment and a percentage of your income for a year or two as payment for their services. But, critically, they worked for YOU, not for the employer. They would sell your best features and skills, and downplay and bolster any weak attributes or problems with your employment history, … they would sell you. Sometimes the employers would pay part or all of the fees, … and it is easier to collect from employers, … so more and more of these agencies opted to have the employer pay, … and over time, more and more, … then all, … and now, none work for the employee. None.
We are allowing American multi-corporate employers and conglomerates to ship more and more jobs overseas. To avoid benefits, you can only get hired part-time. You’re 401k or pension may not be there, or the company is free to reduce it, change it, amend the plan. Health insurance, … after 6 months a year, partial coverage, maybe some family coverage if you’re lucky or earn enough, but if you’re low-wage, unskilled labor, part-time, temporary, … forget it. No need to worry about employer loyalty anymore & hell, we killed all the unions & stacked the courts with pro-business, tort reformers, so it’s not like you have any enforceable rights anyway. No consideration non-competition clauses with injunctions, and no-court arbitration, so you can’t start your own competing business, used to be a restraint of trade, but now just widely accepted. Down-sizing, off-shoring, and my personal favorite the RIF … the Reduction In (your) Finances. Not our finances, not our bonuses or golden parachutes, just yours and your family’s, never ours.
If you’re unskilled, you’re job prospects suck, are hard to even identify, and are getting fewer and far between. And when you find a job, they’re mostly so temporary, so part-time or so low-paying that even if you take that job to make ends meet while looking for something better, you often don’t make ends meet, end up with worse credit, less resources to have access to this job posting site or that job posting site, and eventually, fewer and fewer decent job opportunities. Not that you’re prospects are markedly better if you’re a professional or specially skilled in your particular field. Open up the classifieds. How many listings for doctors do you see? If you see any, they are likely for a non-profit clinic or the like? But you see jobs for techs, clerical, care providers, and even some nurses. My field is no better. The Bar Association does not require law firms to list all openings for attorney positions, or even paralegal, law clerk or administrative positions in a central database. The reality is that most openings aren’t advertise anywhere. Maybe word of mouth, maybe with a recruiting agency, but almost never in the paper or the local newspaper or TV station website, or anywhere that might be open and accessible to the public. God forbid. We can’t have all those qualified lawyer resumes pouring in, … how could we ever manage?
We have no systemic societal programs to actually try to match up the skills of our un- or under-employed workers to the jobs for which they are best suited or to allow them to easily, cost-effectively find all openings in fields in which they have training/experience. My question is WHY NOT? We should. We should require all employers when they create a job to notify somebody who can create a database which allows folks to search, identify and apply for all openings that suit their skill set and interests. Somebody like each state’s unemployment commission or the U.S. Department of Labor. After all, employers have to fill out forms for all sorts of information, tax information, unemployment claims and reports, reports to discrimination agencies. They fill out lots of forms anyway, performance reviews, benefit and insurance documents, termination papers, pink slips, … you get the idea, and when they create a job they fill out internal forms & reports anyway, … usually. And allow folks to compete for the openings, … openly and fairly. Require the jobs to be held open two weeks from their posting. Along the way, we can make some exceptions if required for that special case where a job is just being created for a relative or a particular person, … but we are trying to eliminate the overuse of such employer tactics and open up the job to the widest audience of most qualified applicants. I have found in my career that these are also the little nuances in which discrimination still resides.
Other industrialized countries actually do this or some form of it. They treat their citizen labor as a valuable national resource. England is one example. There, there is an agency which gathers information on terminations and openings, and actually encourages and assists folks to remain in their primary career fields or to re-train to fields in which there are viable career paths. They also have better safety-net programs which actively identify and help folks who need help. Canada & European allies routinely do a better job of assisting and efficiently utilizing workers.
We suck in this country at actively identifying and assisting folks on the lower economic rungs. When someone loses a job or quits, it should be reported and trigger some kind of contact to apprise them of all forms of assistance available to them, whether it be income, job-placement, food, rent and utility assistance, etc. As it is, if they don’t call the right number, if they have a phone, or have transportation to the right government office, and fill out the right form, again, … in triplicate, which must be mailed to three particular officials, who add it to the stack they’ll review in 4-6 months, maybe … if they have money to pay the information processing fee. We should be more pro-active. We should recognize that someone who has just lost employment will require assistance, certainly job placement assistance to start, and that if we don’t make it available then they may and likely will require more assistance, food, housing, even welfare. In other words by being pro-active, we actually prevent more public assistance costs down the road. Further, low unemployment statistics mask seriously bad and growing worse under-employment. An organized worker-focused approach is better for each individual citizen and our nation.
We compete in a global market. The internet and faster modes of shipping transportation have effectively leveled the playing field. We have allowed American employers to offshore jobs and entire operations to take advantage of cheap labor, … too cheap and too often abused. As Frontline just reported, we’ve created massive sectors of nothing but cheap, low-wage jobs. The gap between rich and poor in this country is widening & the rich folks see it as opportunity. I was going to say they don’t see it, but honestly, how can they not? And not take full advantage? Why any self-respecting rich person would have to be crazy not to want higher dividends, bigger net earnings, more and more worth, … another yacht. To hell with what’s best for the nation, or something as benign as our children’s future, what’s in it for me? Me. Now. More. Me. Me. Me. And to compete against countries paying abused workers 50¢/hour, we must downsize, cut jobs, cut pay and benefits, amend retirement promises, outsource, and make ‘em work harder for less.
And that’s where we are headed. More low wage jobs, more international competition, more worker unrest. Classic Haves v. Have Nots … and the decline of another great civilization. The rebirth of unions. Organized labor. Protection. Not protectionism, tariffs and the like. We have treaty obligations after all. Free trade. Strife caused by greed. Failure to protect workers. Failure to protect the ability of all Americans to actually live out the American dream. Failure to protect our most valuable and indispensable of national resources—the American labor force. And a complete failure to learn history's lessons on the decline of all great civilizations.
Or we could actively assist our workers to make their dreams and our nation’s come true.
It's not complex Arcadia, it's simple: as a country we should help unemployed and underemployed workers find jobs that best utilize their skills, experience and talent. Gosh, finding them a better, higher paying job, quicker, might actually result in them paying more taxes and needing less assistance. It is also good for the country to attempt to "best-utilize" the skills of its workforce. Results in better technology, more growth, a better economy, a more competitive position in the world market, less national debt, and a more educated workforce producing much better products and services. 