I think there’s some, albeit limited truth to this. To my mind the fundamental question is “If you’re willing to work harder to get further, CAN you?”.
I think there’s some variation in what people should be paid, and I think most people agree with that. You deserve to be paid what you’re worth, within certain limitations. The problem is that a) there’s risk involved whenever you try to advance, and people need to be given a cushion in case it doesn’t work out and b) some people start off so screwed that they couldn’t climb up the metaphorical ladder if they tried.
A huge missed aspect of work reform is trying to advocate for the RIGHT to take a risk. This right needs to be protected because you need to be able to make yourself valuable. A fast food worker is not economically valuable. They have few to no skills, there’s usually no shortage of them, and they’re about to be replaced by automation. People need to be able to get out of that position and to have something to offer. Your intellectual property is the only real asset you bring to the table. You need to be hard to replace, because you know things and can do things that not everyone can. If a fast food worker wants to go to school, or start their own business, or learn to code, they should have that right, and at the moment that right isn’t protected to the extent that it should be. If the startup fails or coding becomes obsolete, there needs to be someone to catch them so that they have the ability to go out and do that in the first place.
I also agree that wages should be higher - workers should be paid what they’re worth, so companies need to either pay up or decide that it’s not worth it and figure something else out. Like another commenter said, if you work 40 hour weeks you should be able to live on that. BUT with that said there are always going to be a subset of people that want more but aren’t willing to do anything for it. That problem has always existed and always will, and unfortunately movements like “work reform” will always suffer a bit at the hands of people who see it as code for “free rider portal”.
I think there’s some, albeit limited truth to this. To my mind the fundamental question is “If you’re willing to work harder to get further, CAN you?”.
I think there’s some variation in what people should be paid, and I think most people agree with that. You deserve to be paid what you’re worth, within certain limitations. The problem is that a) there’s risk involved whenever you try to advance, and people need to be given a cushion in case it doesn’t work out and b) some people start off so screwed that they couldn’t climb up the metaphorical ladder if they tried.
A huge missed aspect of work reform is trying to advocate for the RIGHT to take a risk. This right needs to be protected because you need to be able to make yourself valuable. A fast food worker is not economically valuable. They have few to no skills, there’s usually no shortage of them, and they’re about to be replaced by automation. People need to be able to get out of that position and to have something to offer. Your intellectual property is the only real asset you bring to the table. You need to be hard to replace, because you know things and can do things that not everyone can. If a fast food worker wants to go to school, or start their own business, or learn to code, they should have that right, and at the moment that right isn’t protected to the extent that it should be. If the startup fails or coding becomes obsolete, there needs to be someone to catch them so that they have the ability to go out and do that in the first place.
I also agree that wages should be higher - workers should be paid what they’re worth, so companies need to either pay up or decide that it’s not worth it and figure something else out. Like another commenter said, if you work 40 hour weeks you should be able to live on that. BUT with that said there are always going to be a subset of people that want more but aren’t willing to do anything for it. That problem has always existed and always will, and unfortunately movements like “work reform” will always suffer a bit at the hands of people who see it as code for “free rider portal”.