Subscribe to Amazon Kindle

Sunday, August 8, 2010

Job Security

The continuing high rate of unemployment is proving to be a thorn in most everyone’s side. From the top to the bottom, we look to see signs of a rejuvenated job market. The President and his administration are drawing particularly heavy flack for this situation and I’m at a loss to explain it. In one poll, citizens rail against an intrusive federal government, but in the next, they want Washington to do more in getting a paycheck back in their hands. Typical “both ways” mentality that I’ve addressed in the past.


Some jobs are gone for good due to the global economy or perhaps finding a better way to accomplish the same thing. There’s not much we can do about that except wait for other, new industries to rise from the ashes of their predecessors. But what about the continuing concerns that have laid off a higher percentage of labor than the Great Depression while amassing corporate profits that eclipse those of the same dismal period? Let me talk to you as an employer might talk to his employees:


I run a business and you are needed to fulfill my goal of financial success. I know, there’s that thing about making the world a better place. How about if we compromise and I’ll make the world a better place...for me. If you get ahead, too, so be it. I’m constantly looking for ways to lower my costs while maximizing my profits. You, sorry to say, are a cost and it is in my best interest in minimizing your numbers. True, there will be a point of diminishing returns, but I’ve not yet reached it nor do I expect to, what with a buying public willing to sacrifice quality in order to save a buck.


The recession in which we are currently mired has proven to be a boon for me. It gave me a reason to cut back on you employees. This reduction created such a fear in those remaining that productivity soared to never imagined heights. Sure I want to be liked, but to be feared seems to be a better work incentive. And I like you at times, but I’d fire off a “Dear Colleague” letter if I could figure out a way to do what I have to do with less of you. Hell, they’re outsourcing lawyers and accountants to India. What makes you think that you’re so special? With fewer employees doing more work I cannot see why I’d bring in more worker bees unless I was to increase the size of my operation. That’s OK, too, so long as the productivity remains high and my profit increases.


Now, there is a possibility of the tax cuts enacted by my good old friend, W., not being renewed. This is bad for my bottom line so it behooves me to paint a bleak picture if they fade away. I’ll say that, without those continued tax breaks, I’ll decide against adding jobs to my payroll and the rate of unemployment will remain at an unacceptable level. (We both know that I’m not going to add jobs anyway unless it helps me.) What’ve I got to lose, anyway? If the cuts are renewed, good for me and bad for you. And, if they are not renewed, I’ll pass along the costs to my customers to make up for my personal loss. Then I’ll ask you to work harder due to increased costs. Still good for me and still bad for you.


I can tie my argument to the deficit, too. If they let me keep my tax cuts, I’ll “promise” to re-invest in my community which will then pay more taxes to lower the deficit. I won’t mention, however, the fact that my definition of community probably differs significantly from theirs (or yours). They might fall for it, too, in spite of the fact that the only way they can guarantee some money coming in to the federal coffers is to take it from our income through taxation. That fear thing again might just do the trick and maintain my current cash flow.


Face it: your fear of losing your job is the lynchpin in my strategy. Once you start to realize that I need you as much as you need me, I’m pretty much screwed. That’s why I’m also against the movement that might make it easier for your to unionize. An organized workforce replaces fear with confidence and I see no reason why I should embrace such tomfoolery.


Enough, already. It’s past time for you to get back to work and for me to figure out how to whittle a few more positions out of the payroll. You’d better bear down...you might be next!

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Alot of what you say makes some sense. What you leave out is what drives the equation is the you the consumer. You want the best car, house, phone, etc. at the best possible price. The company that produces the most for the least is rewarded the most. You will not pay another 10 cents per gallon for gas because Chevron pays its employees more than Exxon. You might pay more for Chevron if you felt it was a better product for you.

This may all seem selfish and negative. In reality this is the best system ever devised to raise the standard of living of a society as a whole.

To find a failes system of wealth distribution just look to government programs, their cost, would we buy these services at what the government charges, if we had a choice?

G. Bruce Hedlund said...

I won't argue that our economic system is the best, but the advent of a global economy is lowering our standard of living while raising that within other countries. I wrote about this in my book and I'm sure you can still get a copy through Amazon. Check out the "Globalization" chapter...