The Labor Market Is Broken

[Hydrogen]

Employment is an ultimatum game, where playing along might get workers less than employers, but refusing to play gets everyone zero.

Inflation is up. The stock market is down. Unemployment is just 3.5 percent. Yet labor force participation remains stubbornly low, with only 62.3 percent of the civilian population working or actively looking for work—well below pre-pandemic levels. And even before the pandemic, that figure had been steadily declining for years.

There are plenty of uncharitable theories about why the American work force is shrinking as a percentage of the population, resulting in 10 million unfilled jobs and a lot of well-wrung hands. The most common is simply that Kids These Days don't want to work and it'll be Gen Z's fault when the U.S. is no longer a global economic superpower.

A substantial number of younger people are not, in fact, keen to get hitched with an employer. In 2022, "for every [25- to 54-year-old] guy who is out of work and looking for a job," American Enterprise Institute economist Nicholas Eberstadt told the Fifth Column podcast, "there are four guys who are neither working nor looking for work."

But the Kids These Days hypothesis is complicated by the fact that while the labor force participation rate includes people 16 and older, the largest component of the most recent reduction appears to be older people who took retirement early and/or previous retirees who have not rejoined the work force at the rates they once did. This trend may well reverse itself if the stock market continues to decline and retirement accounts evaporate, but for now it looks like baby boomers turning on, tuning in, and dropping out—however belatedly—are at least as much of a labor force problem as wayward youths.

What these two groups have in common can be found in an old chestnut of game theory: the ultimatum game. Even if you don't know the 1982 paper that popularized the experiment, you've certainly encountered the phenomenon. Imagine two people, one of whom is given $10 and told to propose a way to split the money with another person—a stranger, let's say. The catch is that if the stranger doesn't agree to the deal, they both get nothing.

Economists and psychologists alike love this experiment because it captures an interesting facet of human behavior that appears irrational at first glance. Surely the second man should accept any deal offered by the first. So what if he's offered just a penny? Free money is free money! Who cares if the other guy gets to keep $9.99? Instead, across all cultures and contexts, people reject offers they perceive to be unfair: The details vary, but human beings turn down money with astonishing consistency if they think they're being done dirty.

This allegory* to economic unfairness may well be what unites the "quiet quitters" of Gen Z and the early boomer retirees: They increasingly perceive the terms of employment to be so off-kilter that they would rather not work at all, even if that decision screws them over in the end.

"The process of contracting a worker is often close to ultimatum bargaining," explained Elwyn Davies (then with the University of Oxford) and Stanford University's Marcel Fafchamps in a 2016 paper exploring the effects of competition on behavior within the ultimatum game. "The employer specifies a job description and proposes a wage and the worker accepts or rejects."

So if employment is an ultimatum game—where playing along might get workers less than employers, but refusing to play gets everyone zero—what is causing the perception that the terms of employment are no longer worth accepting, even when both parties would benefit?

Positive views of capitalism more generally have slipped since 2019, with 39 percent expressing negative views in an August Gallup poll. Another Gallup poll found an uptick of 3 percentage points in people who say they are "completely dissatisfied" with their jobs, while the number of people who were "completely satisfied" fell 8 points.

The perception that conventional jobs are essentially offering workers a pittance while greedily holding back the bulk of the wealth is common in places like the r/antiwork subreddit, which has 2.3 million members. In fact, there's at least one discussion of the ultimatum game itself on that subreddit, which pulls some figures on companies' revenue vs. worker compensation and concludes: "If working for Apple was the ultimatum game, the proposer just got $100. They're offering you 23 [cents], and they keep $99.77. Deal or no deal?" The relative sizes of these numbers might also explain why simply raising wages hasn't brought people into the workforce, especially when paired with increased awareness of and dissatisfaction with the gap between CEO pay and worker pay in large corporations.

Early retirement also makes some sense on this accounting. Older people may have expectations about what their compensation or responsibilities should be, with reference to either the generation who retired before them or to their younger colleagues. When they are not offered what they perceive to be their due, they would rather zero out their income than continue to work.

Paul J. Zak, a neuroeconomist who has done experimental work on the role of empathy and perspective-taking in the ultimatum game, cautions against an approach that is "too econo-centric." Large and unpredictable government subsidies to individuals and corporations erode the broader sense that hard work will be rewarded and is worth pursuing, even if the wages offered previously seemed fair. There is almost certainly more at play than wage and price levels alone.

The pandemic threw a wrench into this and every sociological and economic question and will continue to annoy academics looking for patterns for at least another century. Many jobs did get appreciably worse during the height of COVID, when death suddenly became a possible side effect of working in the grocery store, a factor that shouldn't be underestimated. But decreases in labor force participation predate the pandemic.

In many ways, work is better than it has ever been. It is less dangerous, requires fewer hours, is less physically taxing, and affords the purchase of better stuff than for most of human history. But the supply chain interruptions of recent years paired with rapid changes in the terms of employment during the pandemic may well have disrupted the sense that the deal workers were being offered was fair.

The temptation of the ultimatum game is to dismiss the results as irrational and therefore bad. It's easy to dismiss workers as lazy or employers as short-sightedly selfish. But the consistency with which individuals in nearly all situations perform in the ultimatum game actually highlights something good about people: They care about what is fair and they will devote significant effort to making deals where everyone wins. The authors of that 2016 paper found, for instance, that in an environment with multiple employers and multiple employees, the offers tended to start higher and employees tended to do better overall. Competition causes employers to think harder about what workers want and to offer it as seamlessly as possible.

Right now there's something broken in our economy that is preventing employers and employees from cooperating with each other. The result is that too few deals are being struck and everyone is suffering. The challenge ahead is how to rebuild a sense that the game is fair and everyone is playing in good faith.

https://reason.com/2022/12/01/the-labor-market-is-broken/

....


Here we have a deep analysis with the potential to explain trends being current labor markets being broken:

What these two groups have in common can be found in an old chestnut of game theory: the ultimatum game. Even if you don't know the 1982 paper that popularized the experiment, you've certainly encountered the phenomenon. Imagine two people, one of whom is given $10 and told to propose a way to split the money with another person—a stranger, let's say. The catch is that if the stranger doesn't agree to the deal, they both get nothing.

Economists and psychologists alike love this experiment because it captures an interesting facet of human behavior that appears irrational at first glance. Surely the second man should accept any deal offered by the first. So what if he's offered just a penny? Free money is free money! Who cares if the other guy gets to keep $9.99? Instead, across all cultures and contexts, people reject offers they perceive to be unfair: The details vary, but human beings turn down money with astonishing consistency if they think they're being done dirty.

This allegory* to economic unfairness may well be what unites the "quiet quitters" of Gen Z and the early boomer retirees: They increasingly perceive the terms of employment to be so off-kilter that they would rather not work at all, even if that decision screws them over in the end.

Of course there are other explanations.

It is possible that the entirety of wage increases over the past 50 years have gone mainly to CEOs and executives. Wealth growth flatlining for other income brackets, could have reached a breaking point where having a job and working full time no longer allows many to pay their bills. In which case, the point and motive for working declines.

It is known that many homeless living on the streets have full time jobs which do not allow them to afford the cost of rent. Not having to pay monthly rental fees greatly reduces the cost of living to only food and basic necessities. Basic living costs being more affordable, and it is possible that some beggars in the streets even manage to earn greater income than they would with a full time job.

If indeed labor markets are broken. What does the long term outlook resemble. What can average and ordinary people do to mitigate the dangers.

[1714959709]

1714959709

[1714959709]

1714959709

[1714959709]

1714959709

[Yogee]

If that is the current outlook of the labor force in the U.S. then I am no longer surprised why outsourcing companies are thriving today. The future is remote as some would say. A local employee would feel a $30 per hour is the fair amount for a particular task but employers who hires someone outside of the country or online may be able to pay for $10 per hour for the same job.

That "unfairness" they feel may turn out for the worse if more and more businesses choose to outsource.

[Smartprofit]

I recently read a great book on negotiation and deal theory by Jim Camp, First Say No.  

In this book, the author criticizes the Win-Win negotiation strategy.  He writes that such a negotiation strategy does not lead to profitable deals, as it allows a participant with a stronger negotiating position to manipulate his opponent.  As a result, both parties to the transaction and the entire social society as a whole suffer.  

In the field of employment in the labor market, the Win-Win negotiation strategy has a positive effect only if there is a developed system of trade unions.  

Trade unions and employment laws allow for deals that are beneficial to society as a whole and to both sides of the negotiation

[stompix]

Yet labor force participation remains stubbornly low, with only 62.3 percent of the civilian population working or actively looking for work—well below pre-pandemic levels.

So according to
https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm

The current labor participation for November is 62.1%, and in November 2019 it was 62.2% , this well below is just 1% off.
So, a bit too much sensationalism for someone who writes on reason dot com.

There are plenty of uncharitable theories about why the American work force is shrinking as a percentage of the population, resulting in 10 million unfilled jobs and a lot of well-wrung hands. The most common is simply that Kids These Days don't want to work and it'll be Gen Z's fault when the U.S. is no longer a global economic superpower.

Or, things have changed and not everyone who is 16 yo is that keen to go to work and is more interested in finishing his studies.
In the last 20 years, the participation rate for over 20yo has dropped 5% from 75 to 70 while for 16-19 10% from 47% to 37%.

Positive views of capitalism more generally have slipped since 2019, with 39 percent expressing negative views in an August Gallup poll. Another Gallup poll found an uptick of 3 percentage points in people who say they are "completely dissatisfied" with their jobs, while the number of people who were "completely satisfied" fell 8 points

And let's throw a few anti-capitalism views cause socialism needs another breather after failing again and again and again.

Of course there are other explanations.

That people got free money and got used to it, that a lot of them are still thinking they might get another free check and are living and debt or from savings, still dealing with that miraculously something will happen and they will never need to go to work again? The whole r/antiwork sub is full of those daydreamers, just wait another year went the savings are gone and the credit is maxed, and you're going to see a hiring spree like never before.
Before even thinking it twice, this is not something global and one should look over the ocean



Month after month of record-breaking employment levels.

[Alpha Marine]

If that is the current outlook of the labor force in the U.S. then I am no longer surprised why outsourcing companies are thriving today. The future is remote as some would say. A local employee would feel a $30 per hour is the fair amount for a particular task but employers who hires someone outside of the country or online may be able to pay for $10 per hour for the same job.

That "unfairness" they feel may turn out for the worse if more and more businesses choose to outsource.

This is true. A job that pays $10 an hour is a big deal for a lot of people in developing companies and what is not known is that there are real brilliant talent in these developing countries. A lot of them just need an opportunity. So what these outsourcing companies do is go for the ones with the most of experience and they get the job perfectly well with way lower cost. More and more business will start to outsource once they see the advantages of doing so.

[EarnOnVictor]

It is possible that the entirety of wage increases over the past 50 years have gone mainly to CEOs and executives. Wealth growth flatlining for other income brackets, could have reached a breaking point where having a job and working full time no longer allows many to pay their bills. In which case, the point and motive for working declines.

This is highly possible judging by what is happening in our society where the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer. The money is not circulating as it should and labourers are working more but not much to show for it as an accomplishment.

It is known that many homeless living on the streets have full time jobs which do not allow them to afford the cost of rent. Not having to pay monthly rental fees greatly reduces the cost of living to only food and basic necessities. Basic living costs being more affordable, and it is possible that some beggars in the streets even manage to earn greater income than they would with a full time job.

This is part of the issues of the disparities in our society, yet this homeless living could work if you don't have wards. It would be inhumane to be capable of an apartment no matter how small it is but subject your wards to such conditions for the sake of cutting costs. Having said that, some of these people living this life are lazy, we should not pity their situation much. Yet, the rich should also learn how to give out either through gifts or increased wages or salaries for such situations to reduce.

[franky1]

its not that there are alot of non-employed adults.

its that these non employed adults are just not in FULL TIME employment. and instead doing part time/freelancer/self employed/contractor/gig-economy

if you want to blame gen-z then you are kissing ass of large corporations that refuse to give people an actual fulltime employment contract and instead treat them as non employees by saying they are contractors/freelancers and paying them equivalent to under minimum wage

out of 335mill population there is: 215m+ working age people*

of which for the last 20 years the total working age population  
have had a steady line (bar covid) of a 66-62% participation total
where the biggest offset is in the 15-19 bracket  of 47%-37%**

thus yes there massive dip of 15-19 participating in work which jarred the overall numbers for the total the most.

but. its things like education and gig economy.. where both are causations of corporations needs.

corporations want either graduates or contractors. not the normal unqualified "employees"


*https://www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-sex-and-age/
age        male    female      working age
00-04    09.62   09.2      
05-09    10.38   09.92      
10-14    10.99   10.46      
15-19    11.02   10.54      21.56
20-24    10.97   10.55      21.52
25-29    11.38   11.01      22.39
30-34    11.67   11.43      23.1
35-39    11.26   11.04      22.3
40-44    10.59   10.51      21.1
45-49    09.88   09.91      19.79
50-54    10.44   10.47      20.91
55-59    10.63   10.94      21.57
60-64    10.33   10.90      21.23
65-69    08.75   09.65   215.47 total
70-74    07.12   08.15      
75-79    04.47   05.43      
80-84    02.7     03.63      
85+       02.18   03.80

**https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm
which changed
from ~47%-43 2002-2004 then
from ~43%-34 2006-2010 then
from ~34%-37 2010-2022 then

[Gozie51]

and it is possible that some beggars in the streets even manage to earn greater income than they would with a full time job.

If indeed labor markets are broken. What does the long term outlook resemble. What can average and ordinary people do to mitigate the dangers.

I agree with you that the work system has broken down. That is the government salary paid jobs, they can not afford anything near better living because of inflation as the main cause and that is why every home to survive have other things to do to raise money by the side. In Africa and especially in Nigeria unlike before where the culture is that the man is the bread winner of the family and goes out to struggle to feed the home, this is no longer happening like that as the reality of the economic hardship is even biting the women folks when the husband can't sustain the family from what he is able to bring, the womei now works and in some families are now the bread winners.

People have resorted into different means of survival and at the end of the day, what comes in from those means far outweighs government salaries. Begging and corporate begging is what some people have found to do. When you go to eateries, you see the service attendants there from the gates, doors and those in service expecting you to drop some change for them and this happens across the world not only in Africa, that is corporate begging.

[davis196]

If indeed labor markets are broken. What does the long term outlook resemble. What can average and ordinary people do to mitigate the dangers.

If the US labor market is broken beyond repair, the only way for the ordinary people to survive would be immigration, which is also expensive.
The rental costs being too high and the fact that many workers can't afford house/apartment in the USA is more like a housing/real estate problem, rather than a labor problem.
I'm not an expert, but AFAIK, the US labor market was flooded with Latin American people, which kinda deviates the supply of workforce.
Just like the rednecks in South Park keep saying "They took our jobs"... Perhaps reducing the immigration coming from Latin America might help for solving the problem. Maybe Trump was right about closing the border(I'm not a fan of Trump).

[lizarder]

Of course there are other explanations.

It is possible that the entirety of wage increases over the past 50 years have gone mainly to CEOs and executives. Wealth growth flatlining for other income brackets, could have reached a breaking point where having a job and working full time no longer allows many to pay their bills. In which case, the point and motive for working declines.

"Today to reach the level of wealth is not the only way to work." How many people work in this world, but on average they are workers of their employers, not to mention that after working part time they are not paid by their employers for certain reasons, so workers cannot claim their salary. Part time work is no longer optimal in this technological era, as in developed countries they have placed jobs using time and are paid according to the work and time they spend.

It is known that many homeless living on the streets have full time jobs which do not allow them to afford the cost of rent. Not having to pay monthly rental fees greatly reduces the cost of living to only food and basic necessities. Basic living costs being more affordable, and it is possible that some beggars in the streets even manage to earn greater income than they would with a full time job.

In my area there are still quite a lot of people who have physical disabilities, such as the homeless whose income is far greater than casual daily labourers, the work they do is not risky and quite easy to do, they just walk or stay somewhere while begging.
So damaged is human life now, working part time but there is no guarantee of the salary or wages they get. The cost of living is high, basic needs are out of control and recession is happening everywhere, it's getting harder for middle and lower class people to get jobs, forced to work because of demands but their income is meager.

If indeed labor markets are broken. What does the long term outlook resemble. What can average and ordinary people do to mitigate the dangers.

"Skill and dare to get out of the comfort zone", the phrase that best describes the current conditions. The next question is whether humans have the skills and dare to leave their comfort zone.

Technology has developed, there are many promising prospects that can be utilized in this space, so that humans do not need to work as slaves who are not paid according to standards, or the simplest thing is that people must learn to invest, especially in bitcoin which has become king in crypto, regardless of the impact , fluctuations, and conditions that will be caused by the investments made by people. That's why I say people have to dare to get out of their comfort zone.

[LoyceV]

It is possible that the entirety of wage increases over the past 50 years have gone mainly to CEOs and executives. Wealth growth flatlining for other income brackets, could have reached a breaking point where having a job and working full time no longer allows many to pay their bills. In which case, the point and motive for working declines.

Isn't that just capitalism? Money gets more and more concentrated, and it's up to government to prevent that. The US isn't very good at preventing it, and the EU mainly acts in the interests of large corporations too, so the current result isn't really a surprise.

A market crash seems unacceptable to central banks nowadays, so the classic "reset" won't happen. What's left? War?

[Gyfts]

It is possible that the entirety of wage increases over the past 50 years have gone mainly to CEOs and executives. Wealth growth flatlining for other income brackets, could have reached a breaking point where having a job and working full time no longer allows many to pay their bills. In which case, the point and motive for working declines.

Salaries for everyone is up, not just CEO/executives.

The reality is the world got wealthier over the last decades, especially in the age of computer technology. The labor market isn't broken, we merely live in an age where people's skillset needs to be diversified and the skillet that someone might have in their 20's might change throughout the course of their life. Having a full time job in a market that requires a skillset contrary to what you're trained on or what your education is in doesn't point to a systemic injustice. It means you need to educate yourself in what's marketable.

[South Park]

If indeed labor markets are broken. What does the long term outlook resemble. What can average and ordinary people do to mitigate the dangers.

If the US labor market is broken beyond repair, the only way for the ordinary people to survive would be immigration, which is also expensive.
The rental costs being too high and the fact that many workers can't afford house/apartment in the USA is more like a housing/real estate problem, rather than a labor problem.
I'm not an expert, but AFAIK, the US labor market was flooded with Latin American people, which kinda deviates the supply of workforce.
Just like the rednecks in South Park keep saying "They took our jobs"... Perhaps reducing the immigration coming from Latin America might help for solving the problem. Maybe Trump was right about closing the border(I'm not a fan of Trump).

That is odd I, South Park, do not remember having said that , but seriously the problem with closing the border is that even if you could close down the south border now a great deal of jobs can be done online without the need for the worker to move to the US, and this is even better for the employers as they can pay their remote workers even less money as the costs of living are way lower in a country that is still developing compared to the costs of living at the US.

[348Judah]

When it comes to determining the effectiveness of the labour market we have to consider all the elements factors that constitute it, the man power, factors of production and the economy GDP within a particular country, this are the parameters along side with the population growth rate, employment capacity and jobs availability, the labour market can be described as being broken if all these were not in place to satisfy the balance of an economy, all there are also the part of what determines the inflation rate or it predetermined occurrence if the labour market is broken indeed.

[DrBeer]

The events of the last 5 years have changed the labor market. This is the representation of remote work, this is the outsourcing of specialists, including direct contracts with a direct employee, this is a pandemic, these are crypto-currencies (a fairly convenient way to earn money, especially in 2017-2018) and much more that people turned away from the classical scheme - "a potential employee is dependent on employers and is ready to accept any work for any remuneration. Now employers have a problem - how to "buy" an employee. And a potential employee - thinks - to work, for example, 8 hours in the office, or better 4 but remotely, and spend another 4 on self-development, additional profit and recreation ... The previous conditions remain only for employees whose work is really physical and cannot be realized by any other other than the physical presence and performance of the work....

[el kaka22]

The idea that they should accept 0.01 "free money is free money" has nothing to do with employment, that is the problem. There are thousands of people working everyday and not making as much as the CEO, and that is the biggest problem.

I am not saying that one worker should be making as much as the CEO, of course not, but if CEO yearly earning equals to over 1000 of his employees, that's unfair and it is not free money neither these workers are working 8 hours a day minimum and for 5 days a week minimum as well. That is over 2000 hours per year, and we are talking about 1 CEO worth over 2.000.000 hours work done by the employees, do you think that is fair? It is not fair and it is not for nothing.

[franky1]

It is possible that the entirety of wage increases over the past 50 years have gone mainly to CEOs and executives. Wealth growth flatlining for other income brackets, could have reached a breaking point where having a job and working full time no longer allows many to pay their bills. In which case, the point and motive for working declines.

Isn't that just capitalism? Money gets more and more concentrated, and it's up to government to prevent that. The US isn't very good at preventing it, and the EU mainly acts in the interests of large corporations too, so the current result isn't really a surprise.

A market crash seems unacceptable to central banks nowadays, so the classic "reset" won't happen. What's left? War?

"is it just capitalism"
capitalism is not wealth generation for all. its instead 'all wealth roads lead to the capital'(AKA a pyramid). where business owners dont have to work hard because the residual income from thousands of customers below them give that one guy 1000's combined

whilst those at the bottom of the capitalism pyramid themselves need to find more then one job for them to get enough income to survive on

capitalism is a pyramid
a pyramid that cannot support more then X layers before there is no one on the bottom to find more income streams to survive

when businesses saturate the market and cant get $10 from each customer of 100m customers to be "billionaire status". they are then stuck having to raise the ask for $11 from each, then $12 from each

whilst the bottom of the pyramid are not seeing their bottom increase from $10 to $11 then $12 at the same rate as the asks from the top

businesses are asking for more from customers. but not increasing their own employee pay at same increase rate

capitalism doesnt work

[FanEagle]

There is also a good old "no-work" system going on, where people quit, and that leaves companies wanting for workers, and they cant profit at all without workers, and that resulted with them hiring people for higher prices as well.

I mean think about it this way, if you had a worker who got 20 dollars an hour, and he quit, and you put out ad to hire someone for 20 bucks an hour, and nobody replied, or at least nobody acceptable, what would you do? You would put it at 25 per hour, then 30, until you get a worker. So that is actually a great way to tell the companies that you are not willing to work for peanuts when they make billions and actually get a decent profit.

[franky1]

here in the UK.
the health service(nhs) has not given cost of living increases / pay rises to nurses properly over multiple years. to match inflation

some nurses end up going part time on their NHS contract and then working THE SAME ROLE but under an agency (called bank) where they get paid more for filling in gaps of shift patterns (like substitute teachers).

yep nurses paid as NHS employees, reduce their NHS hours and then work for a agency to do their normal role, for more pay because the NHS pays more to the agency than to its own staff direct

imagine it
2 nurses doing the same job. at £12 an hour(£25k/y)
then the next day. the same two nurses doing the same job but one is paid £15/h as a agency still doing the same role but netting £31k/y

if the NHS can afford to pay agencies more then £15 to ensure the agency nurse gets their £15. then the NHS should be paying the nurse under NHS contract more then £12 and actually ensuring nurses that want to be nurses dont just do the flexi-time 'come when they please' and 'leave when they please' contract that allow them to mess with schedules to then need agencies

actually paying nurses a fair wage and have enough nurses on the NHS contract to cover if one was sick is how things should work.

[sana54210]

imagine it
2 nurses doing the same job. at £12 an hour(£25k/y)
then the next day. the same two nurses doing the same job but one is paid £15/h as a agency still doing the same role but netting £31k/y

if the NHS can afford to pay agencies more then £15 to ensure the agency nurse gets their £15. then the NHS should be paying the nurse under NHS contract more then £12 and actually ensuring nurses that want to be nurses dont just do the flexi-time 'come when they please' and 'leave when they please' contract that allow them to mess with schedules to then need agencies

actually paying nurses a fair wage and have enough nurses on the NHS contract to cover if one was sick is how things should work.

That is done in other parts of the world as well. They are freelance nurses and in the pandemic period they did this to make more money, there were some nurses making more money than doctors in my nation for example, all because they had part time contracts which means they could do 8 hours in one place, and 8 hours in another back to back, and definitely tiresome no argument there but they could also work 7 days a week, meaning they could technically work up to 100 hours a week, considering they were getting paid by the hour, that means 400 hours a month, making them more than most doctors. But now the need is lesser, and everyone is going back to regular full-time these days.

[molsewid]

here in the UK.
the health service(nhs) has not given cost of living increases / pay rises to nurses properly over multiple years. to match inflation

some nurses end up going part time on their NHS contract and then working THE SAME ROLE but under an agency (called bank) where they get paid more for filling in gaps of shift patterns (like substitute teachers).

yep nurses paid as NHS employees, reduce their NHS hours and then work for a agency to do their normal role, for more pay because the NHS pays more to the agency than to its own staff direct

imagine it
2 nurses doing the same job. at £12 an hour(£25k/y)
then the next day. the same two nurses doing the same job but one is paid £15/h as a agency still doing the same role but netting £31k/y

if the NHS can afford to pay agencies more then £15 to ensure the agency nurse gets their £15. then the NHS should be paying the nurse under NHS contract more then £12 and actually ensuring nurses that want to be nurses dont just do the flexi-time 'come when they please' and 'leave when they please' contract that allow them to mess with schedules to then need agencies

actually paying nurses a fair wage and have enough nurses on the NHS contract to cover if one was sick is how things should work.

I agree to you, sadly here in my country doesn't know how to support the feeljng of their countrymen, it is very hard to have a primary work and also having a secondary work because having only 1 work is not enough to sustain the lives of your family, little by little inflation makes it harder to budget our salary so even you have multiple jobs it is hard for us to get paid right and accurately.

[franky1]

simple things can be done

expand the minimum wage laws to be tiered

businesses that want unskilled people can have minimum wage recruits
but if a job application requires a qualification then it has to pay at a tier rate that reflects the level of qualification.
EG
basic college diploma = rate X minimum
basic university degree = rate Y minimum
full university doctorate = rate z minimum

im not gonna suggest a national tier rate for things like
unskilled, skilled employee, superviser, manager, regional manager ceo

but atleast some basic rate that recognises qualifications.
like if a managerial job vacancy mentions it needs a business degree then min rate needs to apply that s more then what a superviser would get on a mcdonalds restaurant(not much above national min wage)

that way nurses who have a vocational diploma vs a nurse that fully trained at a degree level can be on fair pay for their training

i know the NHS does have a tiered rate and many businesses also do have their own tiered rates for job titles. but they need to be backed by a level recognised nationally based on qualifications needed to perform the job

by this. it takes absolutely NO training or qualifications to be a politician and so why the hell do politicians earn 2x-3x more than a nurse that has spent 2-3 years in education to be able to do her role at their own education cost(loan)

[Fara Chan]

If indeed labor markets are broken. What does the long term outlook resemble. What can average and ordinary people do to mitigate the dangers.

There are no long-term prospects in the labor market, we will continue to be forced to follow their system, even though sometimes we know it goes against the way we work. But because we are in their system, like it or not, we have to follow them.

The labor market is also unable to guarantee the jobs we are involved in, because when someone experiences problems and accidents at work, they will only give severance pay and so on we will be expelled from the company. Therefore building your own business is much better, even though it is small, we can develop it slowly.

[Sir Legend]

Many don't care about workers, even when there are demands for a salary increase which is only a few percent they are thrown out and never heard of, labor has indeed become an issue in many countries so that in some countries there are special labor parties that fight for a better life for workers.

[CageMabok]

Many don't care about workers, even when there are demands for a salary increase which is only a few percent they are thrown out and never heard of, labor has indeed become an issue in many countries so that in some countries there are special labor parties that fight for a better life for workers.

This special worker is an important person who is considered to have certain expertise in his field so that he is specifically assigned to work with a more tolerable salary. So if you are an ordinary worker at a company, don't complain when your salary is not increased.

Even though you are actually more entitled to receive a raise, in general you are also more entitled to be grateful because you can still work in a place with a monthly salary. Because there are many people out there who are still desperately looking for work and want to get a monthly salary so that their lives can be very helpful, but there are still very many of them who, until now, do not have a specific job.

[gantez]

Many don't care about workers, even when there are demands for a salary increase which is only a few percent they are thrown out and never heard of, labor has indeed become an issue in many countries so that in some countries there are special labor parties that fight for a better life for workers.

Despite that labour unions fight for better salary and working condition to the members they are making no success with the government. The government make policy to what they want to be done in labour aspect of the economy and they like it to stay that way and no matter the fight from the union no success to it. The economy is hard to fixed income workers and that is the need having a second option of work.

[franky1]

here in the UK

in 2021 UK treasury gave real estate developers
£11.5b to build 180k homes FOR FREE which real estate developers can then sell on and keep the money of at a 2x rate of "affordable home" market
(a new home costs about £63k material labour and land cost(wholesale) per home
building 180k of them is 11.5b)

an "affordable home" is £134k on minimum wage
(UK min wage is £1.6k with a mortgage max rate of 35%
=$560 a month. which on a 20 year mortgage is £134k)

so yes real estate get a house for free and sell it for £134k where the real estate developer keeps all the money

...
i say all this. because UK government happily hands out £11.5b for rich estate developers to get richer

but when it comes to the labour budget of emergency services (healthcare and police)
nurse avg income £33k x 360,000nurses = £11.8b
police avg income £29k x 153,000officers = £4.4b

the government refuses to just double nurses pay.. or double the amount of nurses working
which is affordable by just not paying house developers.
refuses to just triple police officers pay or increase number of officers working

refuses to 50% pay rise. refuses 20% refuses even 10% rises..

yet simple maths shows the government can afford it if they simply didnt give free money to rich land developers

[Iroh]

Many don't care about workers, even when there are demands for a salary increase which is only a few percent they are thrown out and never heard of, labor has indeed become an issue in many countries so that in some countries there are special labor parties that fight for a better life for workers.

Why would workers be cared for when the ultimate goal of any corporation that’s in business is to make profit. Hence, exploitation of workers with any means possible would be at okay here. Why do you think some corporations are against their employees forming labor unions?
If all employees are allowed to form unions that would have their backs and look after employee welfare, the labor shortages we’ve got wouldn’t be a problem. I’m pretty sure they’re folks who are out of a job, while willing to work, are actively searching for a job that respects and has the well-being of their employees in mind.

[so98nn]

This makes “freelance” industry go top of everything. No wonder how they keep hiring employees in contract basis and start paying them only half of what fixed salaried employees earn these days. All the big companies lay off employees and literally get contracts with the third party Client so that they can handle their businesses at cheaper rates. It’s really getting admixture of substandard and standard practices in the field of employment. Not good for long term economical standards.

[tabas]

I agree to you, sadly here in my country doesn't know how to support the feeljng of their countrymen, it is very hard to have a primary work and also having a secondary work because having only 1 work is not enough to sustain the lives of your family, little by little inflation makes it harder to budget our salary so even you have multiple jobs it is hard for us to get paid right and accurately.

That's the reality of life these days, having one job today isn't going to be enough. With high inflation rates, you'll just have barely enough to survive.
To avoid the situation that the others have been going through, they've got good stories and real life experiences. One of it is being wise on your money, I've seen software engineers that have been interviewed and now they're homeless. I don't know if there's something with their lifestyle but there could be and in today's time, even if you're earning that much, you have to save for rainy days.

[Pejoh Asu]

In developing countries most countries do not care about workers, to get an increase that adjusts to inflation and even workers must demonstrate to make the government forced to raise minimum wages, this is a difficult fact, but when an election will occur, the workers will be given a promise that it will rise in dozens Even hundreds of percent if he was elected and won the election.