• @errer
    link
    English
    541 year ago

    Yeah I don’t care if the jobs are literally no skill, that shouldn’t matter when it comes to paying a living wage.

    • deweydecibel
      link
      English
      221 year ago

      Also, unskilled jobs still end up generating experienced laborers who are worth being compensated for that experience.

      • @stevehobbes
        link
        English
        15
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The whole point of the term unskilled labor is that it isn’t.

        If you’re on an assembly line and you’re putting part A into box B, it takes an afternoon to learn and you’ll be about as fast as someone who’s been doing it for 30 years.

        Either part A is in box B or it isn’t. The difference between the best person and the worst person that’s still worth employing is very small, and probably can’t be trained.

        You don’t pay extra for someone with experience putting part A into box B.

        But they should be paid a living wage.

          • @stevehobbes
            link
            English
            21 year ago

            It’s far more complicated, what is the ROI on the multimillion dollar robot to do pick and place, how long before a packaging or dimension change requires reprogramming, or you stop making part B and instead make part C that the robot needs to be adapted for. How much does labor cost.

            There’s a quite a few parameters to analyze, but it is frequently cheaper and makes sense not to automate it, and instead pay someone to stand at an assembly line instead.

            But then the whole automation thing…. Good for skilled labor (the people building and programming robots and automated assembly lines), not good for unskilled labor. If you’re not qualified or unable to learn another skill, it’s one more job that disappears.