I don't know how the social contract between employees/employers gets rebuilt..feels like it needs to though

> I don't know how the social contract between employees/employers gets rebuilt.

The only social contract that is guaranteed is the one written into law. That's why we have government, but the problem is that the government is (for a while now) captive to / bought by large corporations, not responsive to employees/workers/voters.

Whatever principled social contract you may have thought large corporations upheld was smoke and mirrors. It just worked for enough of the right kind of person for a while.

▲

b3kart 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What’s written into law is just “contract”, not “social contract”. Your argument is basically “if it’s not illegal it’s not wrong”.

▲

eli_gottlieb 4 hours ago | parent [-]

No, he's arguing that if it's not legal, it's not enforceable by men with nightsticks.

	▲	danans 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I was thinking the justice system, but yes the entire concept of government and law is built upon the monopoly of violence. Bringing it into this discussion is reductio ad absurdum. Even property rights are protected by the same monopoly (and even more directly). My point is that the so called "social contract" has never been upheld by large corporations - it may have seemed that way at times but it was mostly self serving marketing, not anything that would influence their treatment of employees vs their shareholders and executives. Furthermore I'm arguing that we shouldn't rely on them to uphold it. If we have a belief in what is universally fair or just (i.e minimum wages, no child labor, no slavery), we should encode it in law, not hope corporations find their conscience to renew the social contract.

▲

jknoepfler 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah. There is no such thing, especially and in particular with publicly traded companies. The only meaningful way to change behavior is regulation.

Beyond that, "social contracts" benefit the powerful and have a tendency to turn a blind eye to the worst off. Does the "social contract" require me to be a white, college educated male to secure worker protections? If you need a clear example of this, consider the relationship between citizens and police in the United States, and how blind the majority has been to how fundamentally broken the "social contract" around policing has been for minorities. That's what a handshake-society looks like.

Granted having both might be nice, but relying on a social contract is like relying on a benevolent dictator. It's great until it's not.

▲

heylook 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You tax the everloving hell out of the rich, so they can't just buy whatever policy or judiciary outcome they want or build mega "just in case, i promise uwu" bunkers.

▲

yamillove 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

When you are making $250k or above you should not think the job someone gave you is some kind of God-given right.

▲

nosioptar 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Employers will only do the right thing in two cases: they're afraid of stiff government penalties or they're afraid their workers are going to cut their heads off.

Personally, I'm in favor of regulations and stiff penalties for employers who break them.

▲

jknoepfler 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't think it's rational to rely on relationship with a business, especially and in particular a publicly traded business.

Change starts with regulation. That's how every other advanced economy handles it.

It's really not that complicated. It's the same situation as healthcare. You shouldn't rely on the free market to do anything other than maximize short term profits.