Remix.run Logo
shepherdjerred 3 days ago

My employer is not my “tribe”. That is crazy. We have a contract saying I do X units of work and they pay me Y in return. Either of us end it at any time.

At least this is in the case in the US. What you are saying might be true in other cultures.

bombcar 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

What we have in the USA is not necessarily the final and best form of all interactions, as much as it pains me to say it.

Most people's reactions to large-scale movements like this seem to imply that we feel there should be something more than a simple "money duty" between employer and employee, and we seem to also have respect for companies that act that way (e.g, some Japanese companies perhaps, or baseball teams keeping a sick player on the payroll so they get healthcare even though they never play another game).

Attempting to realize that duty and at the same time abscond it to the state or the family may be an aspect of the failing.

js8 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No, that's another sort of misconception, also expressed in another comment by WalterBright, which conveniently ignores the reality of most jobs.

It glosses over the fact that employers exercise control over the social relations required for production (of anything larger that can be built by a self-employed person). This happens by virtue of owning all the crucial means of production involved. And that point, where you need to coordinate work of several people, it ceases to be a system of contractors who freely determine their working conditions, and becomes a collective that has a common goal.

So no, it's not case in the U.S., in no economy of the world is majority of production organized into everyone being a little independent contractor who brings (or rents) their own equipment. That would be horribly inefficient (not to mention that people don't want it either, by and large).

There is a clear rebut to this, how can employer own the social relations (required for production), like managerial relationships, when they ostensibly only own the factory equipment? Well, it's like when you own an appartment, you technically only own the four walls, but practically you also enjoy the privacy that comes with it. In a similar way, capitalists owning a factory don't just rent equipment to a bunch workers, but can dictate the whole social superstructure of production, including the redistribution of earnings.

Apocryphon 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

And yet, employers love to use the "we're a family", "we're a team", and other such messaging, especially in the tech industry. They elide the transactional nature of the entire relationship.

3 days ago | parent [-]
[deleted]