Welcome to Political Humor!
Rules:
Real question: is box packing at an Amazon fulfillment center considered "skilled" labor? If so, so is flipping burgers, I would assume. In which case, what exactly is unskilled labor? I thought it was basically any job you can get/do without any degrees, formal prior training, and/or certifications.
As far as I can tell, this is two eminently replaceable, definitionally unskilled laborers hating each other over who is getting fucked over harder.
Crabs in a bucket
I've said it before .. and I'll say it again.
I rather a dude handling my food get paid better than someone touching cardboard.
No balls on my food is preferred over no balls on my Amazon packages.
But really fudge all that. Eat the rich!
Could be a troll? The only difference is that food service is gross and squishy. Amazon has so automated the box packing that the hardest part is getting zoned out in the monotony and forgetting some critical step before you send the box away.
"Skilled labor" lmao. Look it up and sites like indeed.com call it having a law degree.
Some people dont understand that if the workers own the economy everyone benefits, also it doesn't matter how "skilled" your labor is when you're replaceable.
TIL putting stuff in boxes is skilled labor but flipping burgers isn't.
/Eyeroll
I want Amazon fulfillment center workers to be paid a living wage, but calling some of those jobs “skilled” is stretch.
Don't blame the worker for results of working conditions they didn't create.
Amazon is known for micromanaging every aspect of warehouse work, do you really think Amazon lets workers take the time and initiative to select which type of box a thing gets put into? Hell no, all the company cares about is getting shit shipped as fast as possible.
This is a symptom of Amazon's management, not the fault of any one worker.
Ugh.. Dumbasses must've been terrible at Tetris.
But seriously, that box took up so much erroneous space on the transporting vehicle, displacing other boxes that had to move to yet more vehicles. The extra emissions from these failed attempts at protecting the item (which is pushed up against the wall of the box, vulnerable anyways), is sad.
The phrase has lost all meaning. People just assume its a personal attack now cause I guess American egos are in decline or something.
Waxing moon or some shit.
Fry Cooks have to take classes on food safety. They are skilled labor. I'm not sure about the Amazon box guy but maybe both should have the trade union you need to be "skilled labor" in the actual sense of it.
Instead of reasonable pay, you’re offered a title and persistent lies about career growth. And it feels pretty shitty when you’re confronted with the fact that you’ve invested a bunch of energy in something that won’t pay off.
My guy if you can learn the job first day off the street it is unskilled labor
Which is why the very idea of "unskilled labour" is ableist.
I had to work with an occupational therapist for 2 weeks to learn how to wash my dishes at home without having injuries or breaking my dishes. I could not have walked into a job as a fry cook just because it's entry level and "unskilled". I'd need to learn some skills first.
There's no such thing as unskilled labour for me personally, because any labour requires skill when your body or mind is disabled.
Which is why the very idea of “unskilled labour” is ableist.
they don't exactly call it capable labor or anything.
They call it unskilled labor for a reason. It's generally not complicated and not very hard.
Naturally being disabled makes things harder, but idk what you want me to do about that one. People with physical disabilities and the capability of doing labor don't generally go together.
People with physical disabilities and the capability of doing labor don't generally go together.
And yet we're given no other means to ensure our survival other than to try to labour for a chance to earn a living.
i don't disagree, but that's a different problem. I don't think this is an ableist problem, i think this is probably more of a social service problem more than anything.
For some people with disabilities it's a social services problem because they will never have the capacity to work for their income with their own type of disability. For others like myself it's an occupational support issue. It took me a few years and several intensive OT programs, but I now ace every work task expected of me, I have progressed through my company and hold a senior position. After failing for 7 years after highschool to get a proper job, doing we'll in interviews and then being let go before my probation ended because I wasn't picking physical skills up fast enough, finally I landed a patient and understanding employer who responded to my OT and gave feedback to the my OT and worked with me to develop the skills I was lacking.
This was done through an existing social support program in my country where the government will subsidise a business for part of an employee's wage, if that employee is enrolled in a disability occupational program, that way the business isn't paying full price for half the labour while the employee skills up.
This program has existed for over 30 years, and yet it's very difficult to get businesses to enrol in the program because it's still expected that you come to a job on day one with the fundamental skills like being able to hold a pen properly to write (took me until I was 21 to consistently do it without pain, but I got there eventually). I've been on both ends of the program now, having signed up my organisation for a new hire, just a few years after I had finished my program. From the business perspective it's 15 minutes of paperwork, you can hire a temp with the money the government gives you so you can have 2 employees for the price of one, and sure it's a bit awkward because one of those employees isn't yet fully able to do the job, but you quickly see improvement because you've got the right professionals involved, and it doesn't matter because if its truly entry into level the temp will have it covered while the disabled employee learns.
This program exists, so within my country specifically I'd argue that's where the ableism comes in. When the financial cost of hiring someone with a longer than average training period is removed, the only other reasons that remain are that you'd rather just hire the easiest person to train and that person is likely able bodied, and I'm not saying that's wrong, that's smart business, so I completely understand why businesses do it. My point I guess is that my current employment status and output of work is proof that people in my situation aren't unemployable because we can't do the work, we're unemployable because we pose an added barrier to training, and therefore we have no edge in a capitalist society.
Even if I was eligible for a good, livable disability pension I would still want to work/volunteer in my same role because it's what it love doing with my time and it fulfils me even without a pay cheque, but that still wouldn't be an option for me without access to OT programs today learn through skills I need (I'm not eligible for a pension, in my country if you can work more than 8 hours a week you can't claim a disability pension. I can work 10-12 hours, so I can't claim)
Did it take 4 years of school and another year or two on the job training to get proficient? There is such a thing as unskilled labor even if you personally have to work harder at it due to the cards you've been dealt.
I thankfully haven't had to do physical therapy, but from what I hear, it's painful and no fun if you're doing it right...hope your dishes are getting easier, friend.
Painful, generally (but it shouldn't be agonizing barring other health issues) and no fun really depends on the physical therapist.
The guy I went to was very nice and had 4 patients at a time in the big room, and everyone just talked to him, one another, or just worked on sets. It was actually quite pleasant to just do sets and listen to people talk about the best way to do a crab boil!
Stephen King taught me that cracking eggs is skilled labor for homeless alcoholic vampire-slaying priests
Yes putting shit in a box truly requires specialized skills you dumbass twat waffle.
They tie their confidence and self worth to their pay rate. They don't want to think they are the same as a fast food worker.
By the way, fast food work sucks. Thats why noone wants to do it. Its not easy to work a shit job. Hard work is hard work either way.
I sit at a desk at home, send emails, and make calls and get paid comparatively handsomely - these people have to stand over searing hot griddles, deep friers, and industrial equipment, risking serious injury at any moment for (close to) minimum wage. Doesn't seem right to me.
Either way it's Labor and the profit should be shared with the person doing the work. Sure it took Capital and risk to set the whole thing up, there's costs involved with running the warehouse, etc. So I'd course it's not split. But the dildo at the top shouldn't be taking the Lion's share.
Everyone forgets the workers are taking a risk too. "Just get a new job" doesn't fly in a recession. It doesn't fly when your new boss engages in tax evasion and fucks up your SS/Medicare. Or you just walk into a buzz saw of toxicity and harassment.
We treat a business going under as a tragedy for the owner, but the workers are out of a paycheck too. And hey the owner can always get a job; no matter how far down they are, the bankruptcy courts will let them keep enough for rent/utilities/bills. So they aren't actually taking anymore risk than their workers.
There's no risk to the capital class. They do not risk their livelihoods, they barely risk their next yacht. The only people that share risk are the working class, not the owners.
There’s no risk to the capital class. They do not risk their livelihoods, they barely risk their next yacht. The only people that share risk are the working class, not the owners.
the risk is primarily shifted towards the beginning of the businesses lifetime, later it can only really be hampered by skill issues and aggressive competition forcing you out of business. Think boeing. Or any number of companies that just, no longer exist.
Once you get to a certain size, it's really hard to fail unless the world literally changes, or the government kills you or something silly like that.
I would generally disagree with the statement that the working class is the one sharing the risk. Unless you mean some weird tangential thing, like being let go because the company fails, but that should be an obvious risk, i would think. There are a few exceptions, nortel being the only real prominent one i can think of. And that's mostly because they all got fucked over, not because it was risky, so that shouldn't have even happened.
Failing as an entrepreneur doesnt mean financial ruin, it means you have to get a regular job, just like the rest of the people that work for you.
The working class sharing the risk part is about when the owner class makes decisions that go poorly, the working class is pushed to make up the difference or they are downsized. The owner class doesnt bear the risks of their mistakes in any way other than financially.
Failing as an entrepreneur doesnt mean financial ruin, it means you have to get a regular job, just like the rest of the people that work for you.
failing is more complicated than this though. I've thought a lot about it. For an entirely online business, maybe. But if you have any sort of physical product, clothing as a simple example. Unless you're literally drop shipping/middle-manning this shit you have a significant infrastructure and capital investment/cost.
For one thing you need the capability and knowledge to be able to design and manufacture clothing. You need to be able to market it, you need to be able to test it and refine it, you need to be able to optimze the design so it can be produced easily. You need to spend time making product, packing product, inventorying that product, and eventually, shipping that product.
Sure you can pay other people to do this for you, but that's not how this works. You probably have to rent some sort of commercial space, or lease it. You need to outfit that space to work for your needs, you need to hire people to work for you, and you need those people to operate as an extension of you so they can operate most effectively, which requires both a lot of training and upkeep in terms of informational knowledge. You still need to deal with marketing, inventory, and shipping as well, that never goes away. You might continue doing design, you might do collaborative design now. And i haven't even mentioned tax or regulations and laws around this kind of stuff yet.
and if the business fails, you still have all of these assets, all of which you have to deal with, product being the worst asset, because it's effectively valueless. The assets you own in terms of equipment and materials might have some base value, but it's not much. If you have a lease that's going to be a bit of a nightmare to deal with. Not to mention the time and skill investment made into this business as well.
if you put all of these things together, and some arguably irresponsible financials this could very well spell financial ruin for a company and it's owner. Especially for small businesses, small business owners tend to be some of the most charitable business owners out there.
IDK why you keep saying they just have to go get a job, that's completely irrelevant here, considering that that was literally the risk to begin with. And you're ignoring all of the previously mentioned context as well. Seems like a downplay of the risk present.
The working class sharing the risk part is about when the owner class makes decisions that go poorly, the working class is pushed to make up the difference or they are downsized. The owner class doesnt bear the risks of their mistakes in any way other than financially.
sort of? It's not really shared risk, in some senses it is, because you might single-handedly bring down a small business if you really fuck something up, but just dont do that. You might be pushed to work more hours, or do more things, but i'm not sure what the legal basis is for that, and most of that would be done entirely on the working individuals side. Obviously working at a small company there is always the risk that the company goes under, but that's true for every company, and every job. People who work in trades/commission based fields will tell you this. People that do freelance will lament about this fact. It's nothing new.
Also to be clear, it's not explicitly capital investment, capital is the primary risk, but you also risk losing/wasting time, and knowledge as well.
and regardless, this is a different risk. The workers aren't risking their personal capital or investor capital on something. Their investing time and energy into a thing they believe in, in return for money. If that stops, they can "go get another job" as you said. They have quite a bit more flexibility here than the business owner. Since they don't have responsibility for any of these assets.
The owner class doesnt bear the risks of their mistakes in any way other than financially.
i would also like to point out, that in the term "capitalism" is the term capital, which means money. How else are they going to bear that? Emotionally?
I didnt mean to imply every business or situation is the same. Businesses are run as differently as there are opinions online, to varying degrees of success. When owners and management share the responsibility of the company with the working class, it can work perfectly fine.
When I say they only bear it financially I mean that literally. Defaulting on a business loan very rarely means losing a home or the means to feed your family. Thats why its accurate to say they just have to go get a job.
There is a difference in how people are treated when they lose their job vs losing their business. Its much harder to argue that losing your job is a good thing but plenty of people accept that business owners will fail before getting it "right".
To the point a small business entrepreneur is risking their life savings, they risk no more than a worker since they can always get a job. The bankruptcy courts will not make them homeless, will not take their last car, and will not starve them. They make it seem like failure is death itself, but no, it's just back to being a worker.
"Why aren't the rich people being allowed to hurt other workers more than me? What do you mean those other workers are standing up for themselves? I am very mad about this!"
"Everything is going as planned. The propaganda will continue. Capitalism. 'Murica."
Stratification Economics- that's the term for it. It's such a bizarre and fucked up thing that humans would rather make sure their relative status is better to another group rather than objectively imroved overall.