this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
515 points (95.6% liked)

Work Reform

9976 readers
21 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SCB@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm not talking about seeing lots of job listings. I'm talking about the realities of recruiting personnel and the demographic and structural changes that cause those realities

Sorry you're having trouble, but your experience is not the broad reality. There are more jobs than people and workers haven't been this empowered since post-WW2

The prevailing principle for workers, under the employment system, is work or die

There is no system in which this is not the case, and that has nothing to do with your bargaining power.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I’m talking about the realities of recruiting personnel and the demographic and structural changes that cause those realities

...your experience is not the broad reality.

You are now being dishonest, by insinuating that I have presented an argument from personal experience, and also that you have presented a structural argument.

Both suggestions are false.

You have given no structural argument. I have given one, and have not appealed to personal experience.

There are more jobs than people and workers

As I say, job openings is not relevant. A job opening is not a resource of limited supply.

Any employer may post any number of job openings at any time, and also may eliminate any of them, at any time, and also may eliminate any job, at any time, dismissing whoever is holding it.

Indeed, an employer may also post a job opening, and simply reject every applicant, or even ignore every one.

There is no system in which this is not the case,

Yes, there is, obviously. As long as distribution of basic needs is decoupled from the system of organizing labor, everyone may survive even if not providing labor.

and that has nothing to do with your bargaining power.

It does, completely, for reasons I already explained. Only one side of the bargaining relationship is being subjected to grave threat.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Any employer may post any number of job openings at any time, and also may eliminate any of them, at any time, and also may eliminate any job, at any time, dismissing whoever is holding it.

Serious question: are you currently working as an adult in the professional world?

Because this is not what "jobs" are.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

A job is a social relationship between a worker and an employer.

A job opening is a declaration by an employer of being willing to receive applications. If any application is accepted, by a job being offered to an applicant, then the applicant may accept the job, and may hold it, as long as the employer remains willing to maintain the employment relationship.

A job opening is only a declaration.


Do you understanding the meaning of bargaining power?

Please think about the substantive meaning of the concept, and then provide a clear explanation, based on your understanding.

Now, do the same for a company declaring a job opening. Explain the meaning, clearly.

Please offer an explanation of how you may arrive, in general, at a sound conclusion, about which side of a negotiation has more bargaining power.

Now, please provide a meaningful argument that job applicants have more bargaining power than employers.

You have so far attempted to poison the well, but have not provided any genuine argument for your stated conclusion.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Job applicants are the girls on tinder. Many options and the choices are mutually exclusive.

Employers are the guys on tinder. More of them than girls and some of them will not get girls (filled positions).

The girl has her choice of guys, and can select for a higher standard. So can employees.

Really not complicated. Basic supply and demand.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No. Sorry.

Either you are trolling, or you are simply extremely thoughtless in forming your beliefs.

You reveal a complete lack of understanding of social structure.

You have rifled through a handful a variations of the same general theme, attempting to argue, or perhaps attempting to avoid arguing, that employers have less bargaining power than employees.

The employment relationship is not a relationship of mutuality or parity between the two participating parties, employer and employee.

A business is a social structure, which is completely different from an individual worker. Meanwhile, the billionaires who own businesses, and through them accumulate private wealth, have no shared interests with their workers.

Each business may expand to employ arbitrarily many workers, but workers have only limited time to sell.

Businesses control the entirety of resources in society that the population requires to survive. They profit from the labor of workers, who sell their labor to earn the right to live.

The number of job openings is not related to the bargaining power of employees.

It cannot be overstated that your comparison to romantic partnership is so utterly absurd.