Category Archives: Social Issues

Worth of Your Work

Posted on by

In the summer of 1999, after a month of mostly unsuccessful job hunting, I accepted a job waiting tables at Cracker Barrel in Bellmead, Texas. It was one of the hardest and most stressful jobs I’ve ever had. I actually went home and cried on my first solo night. It wasn’t all bad, as I describe in “A Note at the Table”, but overall I hated it and quit within six weeks. In exchange for my nightly punishment, I made $2.15/hr plus maybe $5-6/hr in tips for a total of $7-8/hour with no benefits other than a discount on food during my shift.

Another summer I worked at a day camp in Coppell, where I made $10/hour taking care of kids all day. It wasn’t a bad job. I liked many of the kids. We got to spend time outside on most days. The job had stressful moments and a horrible boss, but I didn’t dread going to work each day. That’s a huge plus in my book. All told, it was easier, caused less heartburn, and paid better than waiting tables at Cracker Barrel.

Why?

For years now a question has troubled me: what is the true value of a person’s work, and how does it compare to his/her actual wages?

As a general rule, the market assigns a value to a person’s work based on many factors, including level of responsibility, skill and experience requirements, and supply and demand for workers. Depending on the job, an employee might receive a fixed wage for the position, possibly determined by a union contract, or negotiate the wage with the employer. A self-employed person sets his or her own wage, striking a balance between personal needs and business needs.

I can’t help but think that a person’s work must have a more real value than what the employer is willing to pay. I just can’t figure out how to determine that value. The following factors are worth considering:

Difficulty

Should a more difficult job pay more? My gut reaction is a strong YES. In the Dallas area, I would say construction is one of the most difficult jobs, especially in the summer. Washing dishes and bussing tables at a restaurant might be another. All require hard, physical labor with minimal breaks. However, for various reasons, these jobs pay very little. An extreme example is a stay-at-home mom like my wife, who works hard throughout the day, every day, for free.

In contrast, some jobs are easier overall but pay much better. My current job is one of the easiest I’ve held but also pays the best. It has difficult moments, for sure, but I normally have some downtime every day and the stress is manageable. I’m also in a office rather than outside in the blazing Texas sun.

I see little correlation between difficulty and pay, and it bothers me.

Responsibility

Should a job with more responsibility pay more? I would say yes, and in practice, this seems to be the case. Many of the high-paying jobs in our society involve high levels of responsibility. Physicians preserve their patients’ health. Attorneys fight for their clients’ financial and personal interests. Business executives make decisions that affect the success of their companies. Jobs with low levels of responsibility, in terms of impact on others’ lives, seem to pay less. Entry-level jobs such as waiting tables, flipping burgers, and lawn care don’t pay much, but if a waiter messes up an order, no one dies or loses thousands of dollars as a result.

Qualifications

Should a job that requires higher qualifications pay more? Again, I would say yes. In some cases, such as physicians and attorneys, being more qualified brings a worker more money. However, even strong qualifications don’t guarantee high wages. Due to high unemployment, many recent college graduates are unable to find work in their desired fields, forcing them to take lower-paying jobs for which they are overqualified. Even master’s degrees in certain fields, such as English (shut up, I know!), don’t generally lend themselves to high-paying jobs in the way that a business or engineering degree might. Thanks to union contracts, a laid-off airline pilot with 3 decades of flying experience would start as a junior first officer at a new airline, perhaps making $30-40k in the first year.

Supply / Demand for Workers

Should a low supply of qualified workers relative to demand produce higher wages? I think so, and it seems to work out in practice. Nurses, for example, are in high demand due to our ever-growing population, but the limited number and size of nursing schools keeps the number of qualified nurses low. As a result, nurses make good money and have little trouble finding jobs. Manual labor jobs have the opposite situation. Although demand is high for workers in fields like construction, the low qualifications for those jobs make the supply of workers large, especially here in Texas where so many Mexican immigrants work. Employers in these fields don’t pay much because they don’t need to. Airline pilots, although highly qualified, are much more numerous than the available positions, allowing regional carriers to treat their pilots like dirt and pay them peanuts.

Since our union is currently negotiating a new contract, the issue of wages is on our minds. The union will argue that we deserve much more than we get, and that we deserve big raises because the other labor groups at Southwest have gotten big raises over the last few years. The company will argue that we already make more than dispatchers at nearly every other airline. Which side is right? How much is an hour or a year of my labor worth? How much is your labor worth? I don’t think there’s a clear answer.

What are your thoughts?

Aging Parents

Posted on by

Jenny’s family is wrestling with a difficult situation. Her grandparents’ health has deteriorated so much that the rest of the family isn’t sure they can take care of themselves and live on their own anymore. Unfortunately, her grandparents aren’t ready to admit it yet, and her grandfather’s Alzheimer’s has gotten bad enough that he doesn’t seem to realize there is a problem. The adult children, including Jenny’s parents, are trying to decide what to do. They want to honor their parents and respect their independence, but they worry about their safety. I think they would be great candidates for an assisted living community. There someone could check on them throughout the week and help out where needed, but they could still maintain some independence.

If our parents live long enough, we could be in the same situation someday, as could our boys when we reach the last years of our lives. I haven’t had to think much about it before. In one sense, it’s a beautiful role reversal – the formerly helpless children become the caregivers, and the parents get help in their final time of need. In another sense, it seems like a terrible, awkward tragedy. How do you tell the parents who raised you that they aren’t capable of taking care of themselves, or take the keys away from the people who taught you how to drive?

When I am old, I will try to be realistic about my capabilities, willing to accept their decline and to lean more on others for help when needed. I doubt it will be easy for me, since I crave self-sufficiency so highly, but I don’t want my own stubbornness to put myself or others in danger. I hope that my family will have the courage to tell me the truth and fight for what’s best for me, no matter how much I gripe about it.

Have any of you been through a situation like this? I would love to hear your thoughts if you’re willing to share.

The Future of Free TV

Posted on by

You might have read about the recent standoff between Time Warner Cable and Fox. As I read a bit more, I learned that this dispute is a symptom of a bigger problem that could change the future of TV. The major networks, which have always provided their shows for free and depended primarily on ad revenue, are making less and less money due to the huge and expanding number of cable companies. Ratings for the major networks are down, advertisers have more choices regarding where to advertise, so the networks can’t charge as much for each ad. DallasNews.com posts an excellent article that explains the problem more clearly. The TWC-Fox dispute arose when Fox demanded that TWC start paying a fee to broadcast its programming.

If the networks’ woes continue, they might be forced to stop providing shows for free, forcing everyone who wants TV service to get it via cable, satellite, the Internet, or some other paid service. Since we use an HD antenna to watch TV, such a change would hurt us (and waste a good antenna). I assume the cost of cable or satellite TV service would rise accordingly.

More people would obtain their TV service through the Internet, which they already pay for. Many people already do so using sites like Hulu.com or the individual networks’ websites. Apple offers some programming through a paid TV service called Apple TV. Apple is currently negotiating with Disney and CBS to add their shows to the lineup.

The next few years should be quite interesting in the realm of TV.

Obsolete

Posted on by

Keith at BagOfNothing.com posted an interesting list of 12 Things That Became Obsolete This Decade.

I know people who still use some of them, such as land lines and dial-up Internet. I still occasionally use a fax machine for work because there’s no better way to transfer certain documents using the provided technology, but I find it extremely annoying to use and avoid it whenever possible. I also still call people sometimes out of necessity, even though I would rather email or text.

However, Jenny and I rarely if ever use the other items on the list, even CDs. Jenny and the boys got me a couple of audio cables for Christmas that allow me to connect my iPhone or MacBook to my car stereo and home theater. Since I have my CD music imported into both devices, I can use them as my music source instead of fumbling with the CDs. I’ve actually downloaded more music this year through iTunes than I’ve bought in CD form.

To Keith’s list, I would add:

  • Full-service, high-fee brokers of stocks, options, and mutual funds
  • Writing checks
  • Paying bills through the mail
  • VHS tapes

Can you think of any other items or practices that became obsolete this decade? Do you disagree with any of these?

Heat

Posted on by

Here are some of my thoughts on guns. I would love to hear yours as well.

  • Growing up, the only experience I had with firearms came at summer camp when we shot targets with rifles. I enjoyed it. My dad has several but always kept them locked up. Both my parents made a strong effort to tell me guns could be dangerous and to leave immediately if one of my friends ever pulled one out. I want to teach the boys the same thing.
  • We have no guns in our house and never plan to. I don’t object to them in principle. However, since I have a wife and sons, I don’t feel comfortable having guns in the house due to the risk of accidental shootings. If I could somehow guarantee that only a bad guy would ever be shot in my house, I would get one for defense. Since I can’t, we look elsewhere for security.
  • I will not teach my sons to kill animals for sport.
  • I have no problem with legally concealed weapons. Although I have no evidence to back this up, I believe those who get concealed weapon permits handle their weapons responsibly overall. Many of my friends and relatives have permits. If they ever shoot anyone, it will probably be a bad guy who is likely to own a weapon without a permit. I’m actually glad to know there are armed good guys running around. Our “castle law” here in Texas makes me feel more secure and probably deters some burglars. Two of our closest friends carry almost all the time, and I feel safer around them. If some guy goes crazy and starts shooting people in church, Jenny and I will hit the deck, and our friends will send him to meet his maker.
  • Because I want our boys to learn a healthy respect for guns and the damage they can do, I do not want them to have toy guns. Guns are not toys.
  • I think it would be fun to go to a shooting range sometime.

Significant Changes of the Last 100 Years

Posted on by

The other night I got to talking with some friends about the things we take for granted and how things change over time. Wars have been fought, for example, over simple luxuries such as spices to flavor food and absolute necessities such as clean water, both of which are overlooked, underappreciated parts of life for most Americans. Diseases that killed or crippled millions of people several decades ago, such as smallpox and polio, barely exist in America today thanks to vaccines. Centuries ago, sending a message to a relative overseas might require a handwritten letter and take weeks to arrive. Now, I can use my mobile phone to talk to or text someone on the other side of world in nearly real time. Instead of being in awe that such an interaction is even possible, I might be frustrated that my connection isn’t better!

My friends from the other night and I are curious. We’ve seen or read about changes in medicine, politics, communication, music, language, religion, technology, architecture, diet, family, and any number of other areas. What do you consider to be some of the most significant changes over the last 100 years, and why? What are some of the inventions or other changes that we take for granted?