Bartleby

Twas ever thus

Why people are always so gloomy about the world of work

 

Sep 4th 2021 | words 809

 




 

THE NOTION that the modern economy lacks good jobs is as uncontroversial as saying that Lionel Messi is good at football. Pundits decry the disappearance of the steady positions of yesteryear, where people did a fair days work for a fair days pay. Where have all the good jobs gone?, wonders one recent book, while another talks about the rise of polarised and precarious employment systems. President Joe Biden takes after Donald Trump in promising to bring good jobs back. But what if the whole debate rests on shaky foundations?

 

It certainly lacks historical awareness. Compare the current discussion with the one during Americas postwar boom. Few people back then believed that they were living in a golden age of labour. Commentators were instead full of angst, worrying about the blue-collar blues. They said that unionised factory jobsthe very sort that todays politicians yearn to restoreconsisted of repetitive, dangerous work which involved all brawn and no brain. Others fretted over pay. Workers are getting increasingly frustrated by a system they think is not giving them a satisfactory return for their labours, proclaimed a high-ranking official at Americas Department of Labour in 1970.

 

In fact the notion that the world of work is in decay is as old as capitalism itself. Jean Charles Lonard de Sismondi, a Swiss writer who inspired Karl Marx, said that factories would turn people into drones. John Stuart Mill worried in the mid-19th century that the rise of capitalism would provoke social decay. People would focus on nothing other than earning money, he feared, turning them into dullards (just look at Americans, he warned). The rise of big business and white-collar work in America provoked a new set of anxieties. It was soon predicted that the self-made men of yore would be replaced by effete company drones who did what they were told.

 

This is not the only reason to question todays pessimistic narrative. By any reasonable standard work is better today than it was. Pay is higher, working hours are shorter and industrial accidents rarer.

 

It is harder to tell whether workers enjoy their work more than they did. Gallup, a pollster, has kindly supplied Bartleby with a smattering of job-satisfaction surveys from the 1960s and 1970s. Certainly there is little to suggest that workers back then were any happier than they are today. More comparable data, also from Gallup, from the early 1990s onwards show gradually improving job satisfaction. Last year 56% of American employees said they were completely satisfied with their job, an all-time high. A growing precariat of insecure workers gets a lot of headlines. But 90% of American employees said in 2020 that they were completely or somewhat satisfied with their job security, up from 79% in 1993.

 

If the jobs-are-bad narrative falls down on the facts, why is it so pervasiveand so intuitive? Partly it is because no one has bothered to look at the evidence. Other observers just dont like the constant change and churn which has always been part and parcel of capitalism. More still may subscribe, perhaps subconsciously, to what Friedrich Hayek, a philosopher, called an atavistic view of markets. The very notion that people must sell their labour, for cash, in order to survive may violate some deeply held notion that humans are a fundamentally co-operative species, rather than a competitive one.

 

Yet perhaps the most important reason is that people dislike acknowledging trade-offs. Mill seemed unable to square his concern about the stultifying effects of capitalism with his argument that the division of labour had massively increased living standards. People often make similar errors today. The decline of trade unions may have hurt some workers wages; but it is less commonly acknowledged that this has also made it easier for less traditional workers, such as ethnic minorities and women, to enter the labour market. Sedentary office jobs can make people fat; but people are far less likely to die on the job than they once were.

 

A relentless focus on the problems of labour markets still has its uses. It encourages people to think about how to make improvements. The evidence suggests that on average managers have got better in recent years but clearly some firms have a long way to go. Many people are still exploited by their employers. Todays world of work is far better than its critics would like to admit. But there is every reason to try to make it better still.


 






\n

Economist | Why people are so gloomy about the world of work

  

Bartleby

Twas ever thus

Why people are always so gloomy about the world of work

 

Sep 4th 2021 | words 809

 




 

THE NOTION that the modern economy lacks good jobs is as uncontroversial as saying that Lionel Messi is good at football. Pundits decry the disappearance of the steady positions of yesteryear, where people did a fair days work for a fair days pay. Where have all the good jobs gone?, wonders one recent book, while another talks about the rise of polarised and precarious employment systems. President Joe Biden takes after Donald Trump in promising to bring good jobs back. But what if the whole debate rests on shaky foundations?

 

It certainly lacks historical awareness. Compare the current discussion with the one during Americas postwar boom. Few people back then believed that they were living in a golden age of labour. Commentators were instead full of angst, worrying about the blue-collar blues. They said that unionised factory jobsthe very sort that todays politicians yearn to restoreconsisted of repetitive, dangerous work which involved all brawn and no brain. Others fretted over pay. Workers are getting increasingly frustrated by a system they think is not giving them a satisfactory return for their labours, proclaimed a high-ranking official at Americas Department of Labour in 1970.

 

In fact the notion that the world of work is in decay is as old as capitalism itself. Jean Charles Lonard de Sismondi, a Swiss writer who inspired Karl Marx, said that factories would turn people into drones. John Stuart Mill worried in the mid-19th century that the rise of capitalism would provoke social decay. People would focus on nothing other than earning money, he feared, turning them into dullards (just look at Americans, he warned). The rise of big business and white-collar work in America provoked a new set of anxieties. It was soon predicted that the self-made men of yore would be replaced by effete company drones who did what they were told.

 

This is not the only reason to question todays pessimistic narrative. By any reasonable standard work is better today than it was. Pay is higher, working hours are shorter and industrial accidents rarer.

 

It is harder to tell whether workers enjoy their work more than they did. Gallup, a pollster, has kindly supplied Bartleby with a smattering of job-satisfaction surveys from the 1960s and 1970s. Certainly there is little to suggest that workers back then were any happier than they are today. More comparable data, also from Gallup, from the early 1990s onwards show gradually improving job satisfaction. Last year 56% of American employees said they were completely satisfied with their job, an all-time high. A growing precariat of insecure workers gets a lot of headlines. But 90% of American employees said in 2020 that they were completely or somewhat satisfied with their job security, up from 79% in 1993.

 

If the jobs-are-bad narrative falls down on the facts, why is it so pervasiveand so intuitive? Partly it is because no one has bothered to look at the evidence. Other observers just dont like the constant change and churn which has always been part and parcel of capitalism. More still may subscribe, perhaps subconsciously, to what Friedrich Hayek, a philosopher, called an atavistic view of markets. The very notion that people must sell their labour, for cash, in order to survive may violate some deeply held notion that humans are a fundamentally co-operative species, rather than a competitive one.

 

Yet perhaps the most important reason is that people dislike acknowledging trade-offs. Mill seemed unable to square his concern about the stultifying effects of capitalism with his argument that the division of labour had massively increased living standards. People often make similar errors today. The decline of trade unions may have hurt some workers wages; but it is less commonly acknowledged that this has also made it easier for less traditional workers, such as ethnic minorities and women, to enter the labour market. Sedentary office jobs can make people fat; but people are far less likely to die on the job than they once were.

 

A relentless focus on the problems of labour markets still has its uses. It encourages people to think about how to make improvements. The evidence suggests that on average managers have got better in recent years but clearly some firms have a long way to go. Many people are still exploited by their employers. Todays world of work is far better than its critics would like to admit. But there is every reason to try to make it better still.


 






\n

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)