Pages

Saturday, May 10, 2014

Changing Jobs

Growing numbers of Americans no longer hold a regular “job” with a long-term connection to a particular business. Instead, they work “gigs”.  Borrowed from the music industry, the word “gig” has been applied to all sorts of flexible employment (otherwise referred to as “contingent labor,” “temp labor,” or the “precariat”).

Some capitalist apologists say the rise of the gig economy for freeing workers from the grip of employers’ “internal labor markets,” where career advancement is tied to a particular business instead of competitive bidding between employers. However, rather than being driven by worker preferences, however, the rise of the gig economy comes from employers’ drive to lower costs, especially during business downturns. Gig workers experience greater insecurity than workers in traditional jobs and suffer from lack of access to established systems of social insurance.

The General Accounting Office estimated that as many as 30% of workers were on some type of contingent labor contract, including some categories of workers (self-employed and part-time workers) who are not counted as contingent workers by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Using the narrower BLS definition, 12% of workers were on contingent contracts in 1999 (similar to the number estimated from more recent surveys). Contingent workers are employed throughout the economy, in all industries and in virtually all occupations.

Employers prefer contingent labor because it is more “flexible.” Workers can be laid off at any time in response to a decline in sales. Employers can also pay contingent workers less by not offering benefits. By treating many contingent workers as independent contractors, employers avoid paying for government-mandated benefits (the employer’s half of Social Security, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, etc.). They also usually exclude contingent workers from employer-provided benefits such as health insurance and pensions. Counting wages and benefits, contingent workers are paid substantially less than workers in traditional jobs and are left much more vulnerable to illness or economic downturns. While a solid majority of workers is still employed under traditional arrangements, most new jobs since 2001 have been under contingent arrangements. This is in sharp contrast to the late 1990s, when unemployment rates were low and employers had to offer workers more desirable long-term contracts. With the economic recession of the early 2000s, followed by the Great Recession and the anemic recovery (2007 to the present), however, employers have shunned long-term employment contracts and workers have had to settle.

This process was also sold in Australia with the promise that 'flexibility' would be to the wage slaves' advantage.  The flexibility has been nearly 100% one-way, against the wage-slaves, with draconian anti-union legislation and the importing of foreign workers on temporary visas, oiling the passage, as they say. The object, of course, is to keep the rabble quiescent with the fear of instant impoverishment through job loss, and through massive debt. That's capitalism. Marx got at least one thing right: the unique relationship between workers and the employer leads large numbers of ordinary people to more quickly understand who holds power over whom and how and why. When workers who are carrying the burden of the crisis see executive compensation skyrocket, they don't need much political education to figure out why they have no health-care or retirement funds (in effect, the pension raids are reaching into the past earnings of workers and stealing them), or why they haven't had a raise in how long?

Capitalist liberals are never comfortable talking about class, unions or power. "Ending poverty" sounds good, and so does "raising wages" - these are safe sound bites. This simply ignores the actual history of how any meaningful progress has been won - victories that required organization and power. The reason union collective bargaining is under attack is because it works.  Every strategy available to the workers’ side relies upon sustaining high participation. And high participation is created and sustained only when workers feel deeply engaged in developing the plan to win and by deepening working-class solidarity.

Many workers want more than just wage increases but also a safe place to live and to raise their families and control over their out-of-control lives. Many workers want a quality-of-life standard more than a simple wage standard. We also want meaningful work.

From the Truth-out website here and here 

No comments:

Post a Comment