
The Modern Workforce - _nvs
http://jeremycai.com/labor.html
======
maceo
Before the industrial revolution we had serfs and artisans. As the factories
absorbed both the serfs and the artisans, the serfs saw it as an upgrade,
while the artisans resented the new way of life. Through workplace
organization, which usually involved serious risks, working conditions
improved for everybody and reached a certain equilibrium by the 1950's.

The lessons learned through workplace struggles in the last 150 years have
been forgotten. The notion that "you should feel lucky just to have a job" has
such a firm grip on the imagination of the American worker, that we've lost
all sense of class consciousness and are accepting a return to serfdom without
even putting up a fight. Today you might be an engineer with a comfortable
job, but the 'modern workplace' will soon eat you up just like it did the
artisans.

The Luddites of industrial England were not afraid of new technology. They
smashed machines in the workplace to gain a better bargaining position and
prove a point to capital. And today, being against the sort of arrangement
that's sprung up around the on-demand workforce doesn't mean that you're
against technology. For me, it means that I am for respecting the dignity of
the worker and ensuring that the sacrifices our forefathers made were not done
in vain. If technology can develop within those constraints, I'm all for it.
Otherwise, I say smash the machines.

~~~
cgag
Private companies have hired planes to drop bombs on striking working coal
miners:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain)

People should take a look at the list of "Major armed conflicts in American
labor union history" at the bottom of the page and get a feel for how many
people died for the more comfortable version of wage-slavery we have to day.

~~~
Chinjut
I'm likely in agreement with you on the politics of this discussion. However,
I will note, pedantically, that "the only time people have been bombed in
america" is not a great way of putting it, given, e.g., the bombing of Pearl
Harbor.

~~~
cgag
Oh, duh. I meant mainland, but I think that I might just be wrong, I'll change
it.

edit: It looks like at one point wikipedia more specifically claimed it was
the only time bombs were dropped from american skys, on americans, by
americans, but even that was wrong:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/lmnng/til_abo...](http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/lmnng/til_about_the_battle_of_blair_mountain_the_only/)

~~~
log_n
The coal miner strikes are fascinating (and the teamsters). During WW2 the
continental US was bombed (pretty uneventfully) by the Japanese:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobuo_Fujita](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobuo_Fujita)

------
doki_pen
Turning ordinary employees in to independent contractors is a disturbing trend
that is eliminating traditional workers rights. Although some new companies
have legitimate reasons for hiring contractors, for most it's not part of some
new amazing model of labor, it's simply a way to save money. Usually it's
illegal, but the IRS is being destroyed by budget cuts and can no longer
enforce the law. Filing against your employer in these cases takes years to
resolve. I guess if you believe in no protection of workers and mass
exploitation of the working class, then it's a good thing. I personally think
it's destroying a lot of markets. If people don't have any money they can't
buy your shiny new product.

~~~
eldavido
Right, except (1) it's your obligation to change the law as a voter and (2)
profit-maximizing companies have every obligation to act in their
shareholder's best interests, __within the bounds of the law __. So really, it
's up to us as citizens to decide what's fair, and get the appropriate
legislation passed to change it.

~~~
trhway
>(2) profit-maximizing companies have every obligation to act in their
shareholder's best interests, within the bounds of the law.

is profit-maximization a law? because i don't see why for example a company
can't be formed for the purpose of "betterment of humanity" and if it earns
some profit on the way - great - and if not - it is ok too. As long as
shareholders agree to that, ie. buy shares of such a company.

~~~
pc86
How many companies are you putting money into month after month that aren't
turning a profit or providing you any sort of return?

I say month after month because if the company is not turning a profit,
_someone_ has to keep the lights on.

~~~
bryondowd
Not maximizing profit doesn't mean you need to be in the red. You could break
even, or just profit less. You still keep the lights on yourself, or even turn
some profit, without 'maximizing' profit.

------
altcognito
The statement:

> The better our software gets, the more companies are able to hire. Good,
> well-paying, well-placed jobs results in happy people. That’s pretty
> rewarding, if you ask me.

is in direct conflict with what the market desires:

Market forces desire resources that labor that is mobile across the country,
requires no long term commitment, has a low risk hiring and comes at minimum
cost. I don't see how the market you are creating will serve labors need. Your
goal is to turn labor pools into a commodity.

This is covered by the heading:

> “You better start swimming or you’ll sink like a stone / For the times, they
> are a-changing” - Bob Dylan

But hey, you're touching lives.

~~~
gaius
Also see
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9391711](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9391711)

------
Delmania
Ecclesiastes 1:9: What has been will be again, what has been done will be done
again; there is nothing new under the sun.

Uber, Lyft, and the whole "sharing economy" is nothing more than another
iteration of line balancing. Retails centers do this during the holiday
seasons by hiring temp workers and call centers are always doing this.

I'll agree normal HR is not well tuned for quickly hiring large amounts of
people, so the Uber model of deploying an app, and letting people "hire
themselves" is interesting case study in ways to quickly ramp up your
operations, but the I think enough has been said about how this is essentially
exploitation of workers.

------
mc32
I think this is a double edged sword. On the one hand things/resources can be
easily shared among many people. This is good, fewer resources into supporting
a population. It also allows people who seek marginal income increase to do do
on a part time basis.

This I not good if the economy evolves to make this marginal income system
into the main and default way foe people to engage into the economy -"a race
to the bottom". It also puts son pressure on producers who must now adapt to
the new status where big ticket items can be shared among many (vehicles,
mowers, etc). Perhaps a move to higher quality higher priced lower volume.

The labor unit granularity would make these workers, on average, less
valuable. And the advantage goes to the educated, more skilled.

This devolution into a person to person economy where the main beneficiary is
the "platform" will not bode well for the average person.

------
p0cket
Great read. Although services like Uber and Lyft are getting more popular, I
didn't know the freelance/part-time market as a whole was growing.

~~~
Delmania
In various business publications, it's referred to as the "sharing economy".

~~~
gaius
In the UK, "zero hours contracts".

------
philip1209
Thanks for the StaffJoy shout-out, Jeremy!

We're finishing up our first week of deployment with a real workforce and
finding that automated shift scheduling that better fits supply to labor
demand can save about 10% on labor costs, which is a huge amount. Modern
workforces get better margins through efficiency and automation, and that
creates the opportunity for a new generation of mathematically-driven
workforce management tools like OnFleet, Instacart, and AnalyticsMD.

We're entering alpha testing with customers in the bay in the next two weeks -
if you're interested in trying our product, shoot me an email - philip at
staffjoy.com.

------
bernardlunn
Can we please call BS on the sharing economy name. It is is the "squeeze cash
out of spare personal resources economy" (resources being time, car, house
etc).

~~~
gaius
It's also the screw-your-neighbour economy. If your little AirBnB money-
spinner increases wear-and-tear on the common areas of the building, it's the
other tenants who will pick up the costs of the extra maintenance. In time it
will come to be seen as profoundly anti-social. Not to mention, if you're
running a business you should be paying business rates and taxes... Remind me
where is the "sharing"?

~~~
yummyfajitas
If I leave town and rent out my flat, wear and tear on the elevator goes up
relative to me not leaving town?

~~~
alexqgb
Are you trolling again, yummy? Or are you honestly too thoughtless to
recognize that a stream of people who have no long-term stake in a building do
not conduct themselves in the same community-oriented way that's normal among
those who do?

~~~
pc86
I prefer to believe that most people do not treat common areas of buildings
like garbage. There are exceptions, of course, but it's not like having an
apartment that you rent out a few weeks a year will throw the apartment
building into a constant state of disrepair.

~~~
alexqgb
The problems caused by transients are hardly limited to "disrepair". Noise and
disregard for building security are also real issues, as is the degradation of
trust.

I can be sure that my landlord will perform extensive background checks on any
potential neighbors, and can be fairly confident that their friends and
relatives are also on the up-and-up. But knowing that the standards for
getting a room via Air B&B are considerably less stringent, an explosion of
short-term rentals in a building means that long-term residents will find that
they cannot be as trusting. To put it bluntly, hotel security exists for a
reason.

In general, I think the service is a great idea, especially for properties
that don't share a lot of common space with other tenants. But in cases where
they do, I tend to think that opening the building to anyone doing a search on
Air B&B can be a real dick move. Nobody decent should be surprised if it draws
serious hostility from the neighbors.

------
sydneyliu
"While HR SaaS is never sexy" <\---I disagree

~~~
Splendor
Sorry you're being downvoted. It might help if you explain why you disagree.

------
Flemlord
We've been hiring recently and have been using RecruiterBox for resume
tracking. It makes it easy to communicate with applicants, move them through
our different stages of hiring and schedule things with the rest of the team.
We absolutely love it.

