Post by nathanjohnson on Aug 1, 2011 15:07:37 GMT -5
I’ve always thought that low-wage workers had it easy, especially people working at a place like Wal-Mart, who had non labor-intensive work and a decent (or so I thought) wage. But Barbara Ehrenrich’s Nickel and Dimed really changed my perspective on the plight of the minimum-wage worker. It is without doubt that Barbara’s experience in waitressing was an unlivable situation (yet many people live it every day), and many of the horrors she saw while working as a maid are also inexcusable. But Nickel and Dimed really showed me that, despite the efforts of our government, we still have very far to go in protecting low-wage workers in America.
For starters, let’s look at Barbara’s experiences at Wal-Mart. While it was the best paying and most comfortable of the three professions, there was one fundamental problem with it: she had no rights. Wal-Marts monopoly on its workers (and, oftentimes, the workforces of entire cities) did not allow for any dissent within the company. This creates a dictatorial-esque atmosphere in which a worker cannot complain, cannot bargain and has no means for obtaining rights. Wal-Mart even went as far as to show new employees videos of why unionizing was bad. Of course, while this is an isolated issue, it relates to the larger-scale attacks on unions in recent. Considering the chaos in Wisconsin, we need to look at the benefits of unions and make sure that all workers have availability to them, that way they can organize and work in a happier environment.
But the biggest problem I saw was the lack of support given to waitresses and maids. Many of these men and women were living ten to a room in a hotel, or out of a car, or in a worn-down trailer and all while holding down three jobs. If a person cannot support themselves on three minimum-wage jobs, how can we call our current pay rates the “minimum” to live off of? This mislabeling of the living standard ties in to our current economic crisis and the need to provide more care for the impoverished, especially low-wage workers. With cuts in Medicaid looming on the horizon, we need to ask ourselves: can we afford to not protect these people? The lowest wage earners are the backbone, elbow grease and stamina of the United States. By not offering services to help them out, we cannot expect for people to go out and find jobs and, in turn, reverse the unemployment crisis we are currently seeing. To be perfectly honest, if I knew that I would have to have three jobs in order to support myself and my family, I’d probably stick to Welfare checks too. By offering help and aid to our impoverished, we can wean them off of lifelines such as Welfare and begin a recovery process. By allowing them to unionize, we can take it a step further and hear from workers themselves how we can best serve them and their needs. Otherwise, we may all end up in Barbara’s situation.
For starters, let’s look at Barbara’s experiences at Wal-Mart. While it was the best paying and most comfortable of the three professions, there was one fundamental problem with it: she had no rights. Wal-Marts monopoly on its workers (and, oftentimes, the workforces of entire cities) did not allow for any dissent within the company. This creates a dictatorial-esque atmosphere in which a worker cannot complain, cannot bargain and has no means for obtaining rights. Wal-Mart even went as far as to show new employees videos of why unionizing was bad. Of course, while this is an isolated issue, it relates to the larger-scale attacks on unions in recent. Considering the chaos in Wisconsin, we need to look at the benefits of unions and make sure that all workers have availability to them, that way they can organize and work in a happier environment.
But the biggest problem I saw was the lack of support given to waitresses and maids. Many of these men and women were living ten to a room in a hotel, or out of a car, or in a worn-down trailer and all while holding down three jobs. If a person cannot support themselves on three minimum-wage jobs, how can we call our current pay rates the “minimum” to live off of? This mislabeling of the living standard ties in to our current economic crisis and the need to provide more care for the impoverished, especially low-wage workers. With cuts in Medicaid looming on the horizon, we need to ask ourselves: can we afford to not protect these people? The lowest wage earners are the backbone, elbow grease and stamina of the United States. By not offering services to help them out, we cannot expect for people to go out and find jobs and, in turn, reverse the unemployment crisis we are currently seeing. To be perfectly honest, if I knew that I would have to have three jobs in order to support myself and my family, I’d probably stick to Welfare checks too. By offering help and aid to our impoverished, we can wean them off of lifelines such as Welfare and begin a recovery process. By allowing them to unionize, we can take it a step further and hear from workers themselves how we can best serve them and their needs. Otherwise, we may all end up in Barbara’s situation.