Well written, albeit aggressive, piece. Reads more like an art form than an exposé. Consider how different the message would be if it included the name of the corporation. I actually find it poetic that the piece is meaningful without the name. For all we know this job could not exist, but perhaps what is so utterly frightening is the fact that it could exist. Mara may not exist, at least in this exaggerated form, but her story captures an alarmingly modern parable. Does this "psychological warfare" have moral bounds constraining it outside retail, or will it eventually seep into every day life? Has it already?
She’s jacked into a headset that literally barks algorithmic, programmed “orders” at her, parroting her own “performance” back to her, telling her how she compares with quotas calculated…down to the second…for all the hundreds of items in the store…which recites “influence and manipulation techniques” to her
This sounds waaay too much like Manna to be real. If it is real that's just insane. What company is the author talking about?
The economy doesn’t make stuff anymore. That much you know. So what does it make?
Except this is not true at all and the U.S. is the fourth largest manufacturer worldwide [1]. I think what people are trying to say is: "The average America does not work in manufacturing anymore" - which would be more accurate [2].
The only abuse in this story is between Mara and her own mindset. She is willing to work at a place like this after she gets both her degrees. She priced herself out of a better economy when she chose to apply to retail jobs.
The problem is that propaganda preaches employment and jobs. People feel pressured to get a job, and therefore desperate for any job. This irrational self-deprecation artificially increases supply in the entry-level labor market, pushing down the price of labor.
As retail becomes automated, employees become overqualified. Literally, "anyone could do that." If anyone can build widgets, then widget factories can hire anyone. If a factory can hire anyone, then it only needs to match the lowest price demanded by a potential employee.
It's a cycle. Automation displaces jobs, employees become overqualified, most do not have savings to sustain long job search, so they become desperate, apply for underqualified job, lower price of job itself.
The bottom rung of the employment ladder is like those blocks you need to jump on in old Mario games. You know, the ones that move up and down, you need to jump on them at the right place, and then jump off them at the right time to get to the next platform. You're not supposed to stay on the bottom rung. You're supposed to get on it, then jump off it.
The focus of entry-level employment should be on career-development and opportunity expansion. As an employer, recognize that no employee wants to stay in entry-level forever. How can you help your employees expand their set of opportunities?
"She is willing to work.."
What the heck are you talking about? She needs to pay her rent and eat. Once you get into a hamster wheel of minimum-wage supposed-to-be-only-temporary job, it is VERY hard to look for a better job.
It is a real problem everywhere, but even more so in the US, where college education cost is insane and adds to the pressure of taking ANY job.
9 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 32.3 ms ] threadThis sounds waaay too much like Manna to be real. If it is real that's just insane. What company is the author talking about?
The economy doesn’t make stuff anymore. That much you know. So what does it make?
Except this is not true at all and the U.S. is the fourth largest manufacturer worldwide [1]. I think what people are trying to say is: "The average America does not work in manufacturing anymore" - which would be more accurate [2].
[1]http://www.nam.org/Newsroom/Facts-About-Manufacturing/
[2]http://www.epi.org/publication/the-manufacturing-footprint-a...
Although I do agree the American workplace has a high degree of dysfunction and is not nearly what it could be.
The problem is that propaganda preaches employment and jobs. People feel pressured to get a job, and therefore desperate for any job. This irrational self-deprecation artificially increases supply in the entry-level labor market, pushing down the price of labor.
As retail becomes automated, employees become overqualified. Literally, "anyone could do that." If anyone can build widgets, then widget factories can hire anyone. If a factory can hire anyone, then it only needs to match the lowest price demanded by a potential employee.
It's a cycle. Automation displaces jobs, employees become overqualified, most do not have savings to sustain long job search, so they become desperate, apply for underqualified job, lower price of job itself.
The bottom rung of the employment ladder is like those blocks you need to jump on in old Mario games. You know, the ones that move up and down, you need to jump on them at the right place, and then jump off them at the right time to get to the next platform. You're not supposed to stay on the bottom rung. You're supposed to get on it, then jump off it.
The focus of entry-level employment should be on career-development and opportunity expansion. As an employer, recognize that no employee wants to stay in entry-level forever. How can you help your employees expand their set of opportunities?
Also, do we need so much swearing... think of the children?