Sooo much this !Originally Posted by Renton
Well your original question was do they have equal bargaining power. That doesn't mean the same thing as "do they have equal power." The employer-employee relationship is not equal in the micro sense, nor should it be. The employee enters a voluntary contract to do work for the employer and to comply with his rules or standards. If such standards are unreasonable or if he finds them demeaning or whatever, he reserves the right so seek employment elsewhere. This provides an incentive for employers to treat people fairly and provide amenities and benefits to them. Also, as such amenities and benefits have costs, this is equivalent to increasing the employee's pay, which they also have a lot of incentive to do in a free market.
I guess it seems like employers have an advantage over employees because they do, and they should. Employers are essentially consumers of labor, and like how consumers in markets have great power and influence over sellers and products being sold, employers have such influence over employees. They demand a standard for the price they pay and a standard is provided. This benefits everyone.
Regarding bottom rung employment, there should be high turnover here. There should be low pay, and low benefits. The bottom rung employee should have more interest in keeping his job than the employer should in having a steady person. This is because the supply of lower-skill workers is often high compared with the demand for them. It's also because bottom rung jobs are meant to be transient. I know you don't want us to go back to the regulations stuff, but thats inevitably the liberal's solution to this problem, and it must be addressed. Any intervention to increase the pay, benefits, or treatment of these people will exacerbate the problems therein, as those all would introduce costs and thus reduce the demand for bottom rung labor even further. The shortage of jobs next to the supply is a constant here, it cannot be changed except to be worsened.
It all goes back to a basic problem of looking at labor as this much different thing. It's natural to do this, and I think that the vast majority of left leaning ideology is coming from a well-intentioned and humanitarian point of view. That is probably why it is the prevailing sentiment in the western world. But it doesn't change the fact that almost every policy these people try to enact has the reverse effect on the very people they intend to rescue.
Reply With Quote