Skilled or unskilled. If you do a full day’s work, you should be able to support yourself and family.
We should also take care of those that are unable to do so.
Nicole when she is not catfishing Lemmy users.
When you start really thinking about it, often unskilled jobs are nearly all the necessary jobs for humanity to survive. No one is going to suffer if your PhD army can no longer update twitter, I’m afraid to name the percentage, but most skilled jobs are useless in the sense that they’re not really making anything of value.
I think SEO jobs are good example of this.
Putting skills in the right place does help. Your postdoc in agricultural sustainability will help all the “unskilled” agricultural labourers. Without you, they produce less in the long run. But without them, you get nothing at all.
I disagree. Without Frtiz Haber inventing nitrogen fertilizer there wouldn’t even be people to do unskilled labor.
This class battle has to stop. All economic fields are productive given that the market is valuing it. What’s not productive is corruption and hoarding and middle manager fiddling. We have science to determine all that so we don’t even need to gut feel this out.
Someone researching “transgender mice” can low key add more value than thousands or millions of “unskilled laborers”. We need to diversify and value all avenues of our collective production and growth because thats just a smart thing to do. Except for billionaires and hoarders which clearly are a net negative.
Most peoples jobs in society are necessary I think. Doesnt matter if youre a construction worker or a programmer, we rely on all of it to eek out a better standard of living. How many people do you know have a job that isnt benefiting society in some way?
Me! I worked most of my life with 3D and Photoshop. Some stuff i did might have increased some sales, some might have been fun, but all were useless and mostly advertisement. I always wondered, if everyone working in ads died, what effect would it have on humanity? Rich people would be worse, but humanity as a whole would be better.
That’s just my field. I can think of quite a few areas that are just harmful and exists mostly to make rich richer.
That’s no accident. A job is considered “unskilled” (or “unspecialized” as I like to call it) if any adult who’s gone through the education system and is reasonably healthy can do. Since society would collapse without these jobs, we want to do everything we can to make sure we always have people who can do them. How do you make that happen? By designing the education system to teach everyone the skills to do them and making it mandatory to complete your schooling. As a result, nearly everyone is capable of doing some of the most important jobs for our society.
Good point. But not just from planned education, I think. Most jobs can be done with a body and mind in moderate working order - our bodies and minds are amazing things! Picking fruit does not require a school education, nor does laying bricks require a gym routine. Though laying them straight needs training, reading instructions needs literacy and reporting results needs numeracy. Education helps.
Only because society won’t let prisons pay their prisoners 10¢ an hour to flip hamburgers at McDonald’s. That’s the next step to avoid collapse of the average standard of living.
It’s wild that no one can look up how unskilled labor is actually defined.
Unskilled labor is kind of a misnomer. Perhaps the word should change to match what it is trying to say.
Or perhaps people should not expect that every turn of phrase is a colloquialism?
Why not?
There is no such thing as unskilled labor. But there is a difference between labor used to develop and labor used to perform.
People take offense to the “unskilled” part, and it’s just a stupid nitpick. Unskilled doesn’t mean that it’s an unimportant doofus jobs, it means it’s a job that almost anyone can do. That doesn’t make it unimportant.
Everyone can help haul stuff at a construction site. Everyone can collect garbage bags around the city. Everyone can deliver mail and packages. These jobs require no special education, you can literally get hired and start tomorrow without any training. But that does not make the job unimportant.
This post just feels like the person looks for another wording to be mad about.
I feel like this is falling down the same trap though. Ex. Someone who’s picked strawberries for 5 years is going to be FAST.
They are effectively a skilled laborer even though the job itself is “unskilled”. Yes anyone “can” do it but there are those who have effectively been doing it for years who are great at it and are skilled at it.
Usually people use the term “unskilled labor” as justification that those working said jobs don’t have any skills and therefore shouldn’t earn a living wage.
The anger isn’t in the denotation of the term, but the connotation.
It’s usually a lower wage because of supply and demand but yeah any wage should be a living wage skilled or not.
Yeah you have to remember to look at it through the conservative lens where humanity is inherently hierarchical and social darwinism means the lesser tiers of society do not deserve your attention.
it means it’s a job that almost anyone can do
Not exactly. Unskilled labor simply refers to jobs that do not require a formal certification. There are many economically unskilled jobs that require a high amount of expertise. One such example is often a chef (specifically, the ones which don’t have formal culinary education).
Chefs need to have a deep understanding of food preparation techniques, flavor profiles, food safety, menu planning, and the ability to work quickly and efficiently in a high-pressure environment. It is a demanding job that few people can do. Yet, according to economics, these people would be unskilled.
Personally, part of me believes that people shouldn’t nitpick the percieved inaccuracy of jargon based upon the usage of words in common parlance.
The other part of me wishes that the experts would have chosen a less polarizing term with more neutral connotations.
There’s nothing special required to open a restaurant in Sweden, which I think most would agree is a developed country. You need a business license and a food license (unsure how to translate), neither of which requires an education or training, and you need a proper location for preparing and serving food. Employees can be literally anyone off the street. You have to pass health inspections, but the inspectors don’t care much about details if nothing dangerous is going on.
I personally appreciate your example of chef and had to delete the rest of what I had to say because it got way too emotional. It’s a frustrating situation when you’re making people happy by providing a service and still not being rewarded because capitalism.
While I agree with your point, Chef is definitely a skilled labour job. Literally need qualifications in food safety, if you don’t in whatever country you’re from that is more horrifying than it not being classed as skilled tbh.
From the country I’m from, you can open your own small restaurant without any qualifications.
Yes, I’m afraid to dine out when I return there during vacations.
I would not consider chef as “unskilled labor”
It’s not. Not even “economically”.
A chef is a skilled job. Because you need skill.
Flipping frozen burger patties is an unskilled job. Because you don’t need any skill.
There are a number of skills that go into working fast food, and your dismissal of them is part of the problem.
This isn’t true. Watch some POV videos of people working fast food jobs. No one is saying that McDonald’s and vascular surgery require the same amount of skill and training, but that’s not the point. We need to recognize that what’s considered menial is quite complex. Look at how long it’s taking to replace people doing basic jobs with machines.
That’s a junk ending. You try to replace anything with a machine. It’s nontrivial. But then, to come full circle, it’s a skilled labor job ;).
A chef is not skilled according to economics. However, “skill” as used in common literature and speech, still applies to these uncertified chefs.
By this uncommon and misinterpreted definition a master sword maker would also be unskilled. Which is not how common literature, speech, nor economics applies it.
How quickly we threw those COVID hero’s to the trash
in general we threw them in the trash as a parcel with calling them heroes. we gave them recognition of their value in lieu of due compensation
“You’re so great! Please keep working while I reap the rewards and sit on my ever-growing pile of money.”
Hero’s what?
Their to-the-trash, obviously! Can’t you read? Though I’ll admit I don’t know what a to the trash is.
The oldest jobs, which are the most important, are in some sense paid what they were when the job was created, so mothers are paid nothing, while farm workers, cooks, homemakers are paid next to nothing.
Traditionally, mothers are ‘paid’ in the sense that they receive the fruits of the family’s labour. So, if Daddy back in 2032 BC worked his arse off to get an iPhone, Mummy gets to play on it too. Or food or something idk
Billionaires don’t actually work. The higher up the work chain the more you get paid, and the less you do.
Damn. We should all quit our jobs and become billionaires!
That’s the dream they force onto us, go up in the ladder to work less, but then you have to crush the ones below you on your way up otherwise it does not work
For a brief moment in 2020, they temporarily relabeled them as “essential workers”.
It just really meant they didn’t matter, and they were the fodder for the virus.
It meant their work is important enough to risk their lives for. “Some of you may die, but that is a sacrifice I am willing to make.”
It’s only really a measure of how easy you are to replace.
it’s also far less unskilled than people assign credit for. all work is knowledge work
I feel like, especially here in the US, what unskilled means has changed to “any job that doesn’t require a college degree”.
We seem to have almost completely forgotten about apprenticeships and similar career paths.
Right but the point being made is that all jobs are skilled and the ones that people get with no degree and no apprenticeship and no career path to speak of, are the people holding society together. Grocery workers, postal workers, service industry workers, etc. Society is fine if every single private equity firm disappeared over night, it’s absolutely not fine without the grocerers, and truck drivers and everyone else doing the “unskilled” labor.
I think you might be making an assumption that I wasn’t. Personally I would consider the examples you gave as similar to an apprenticeship, at least in the context of what I was trying to say in my original comment.
all work is knowledge work
No. This is the follow on to “I didn’t read the definition of unskilled labor” vis a vis “I didn’t read the definition of knowledge work”
I feel like that’s actually pretty logical. “Skilled labor” involves skills that not everyone must have. The things that (nearly) everyone needs to be at least okay at are the things that come up in people’s lives most frequently (things like basic cleaning, socializing, and administrative/organization tasks). Without people to do the things that come up most often, society is going to fall apart.
I’m split on the name though. I understand what it means and don’t take offense (I currently work at a bakery, but I’ve also been a waitress and worked in a call center, all unskilled jobs- I’ve also worked in litigation management for an insurance company and I currently teach German classes too, which are skilled jobs, fwiw), but I get how it rubs some people the wrong way.
That makes sense.
Maybe unskilled workas can call each other that, if they don’t use the hard ‘r’?
Okay, okay, “labour isn’t as bad as slavery” and it’s “inappropriate to joke about that on the internet.”
But yes, maybe the term is demeaning; and maybe it doesn’t need to be. I suppose in the end the point is we should value those labourers and their work, even though economically they’re easier to mistreat and belittle.
SPRICH
