Employer vs employee: A power shift is underway

A balance of power shift has been underway since ~2009?

In a fascinating article, Workers Are Gaining Leverage Over Employers Right Before Our Eyes, the New York Times describes a new phenomenon, employees having and exerting more power over their working conditions. It is not clear low long this will last or how important it will turn out to be. The power shift seems to reflect at least in part years of employer power and labor weakness that led to many jobs being unpleasant. 

This power shift phenomenon may be linked to the pandemic in some ways. Younger workers have had to time to reflect on what they want from life. A few (about 1 in 28 according to an NPR broadcast in the last few days) who are not looking for work are using extended unemployment benefits from the COVID relief law to hold out for better jobs. Nearly all Republican politicians, i.e., about 99.5% of them, are anti-government. That ideology demands that they claim that extended employment is why employers are having a hard time finding employees. But the evidence indicates that is a small part of this phenomenon (~3.5% ?). Most employees are looking for a better quality of life and they are increasingly opting for jobs with intangible or hard to quantify benefits, e.g., flexible hours, some work at home time, etc.

The NYT writes:

“By creating your own dumb barriers, you’re actually making your job in the search for talent harder,” said Obed Louissaint, I.B.M.’s senior vice president for transformation and culture. In working with managers across the company on training initiatives like the one under which Mr. Lorick was hired, “it’s about making managers more accountable for mentoring, developing and building talent versus buying talent.” [Lorick was a bouncer in a bar working the “devil’s 9 to 5 shift” (9 pm to 5 am) and he hated it]

“I think something fundamental is changing, and it’s been happening for a while, but now it’s accelerating,” Mr. Louissaint said.

Efforts like the one at I.B.M. are, to some degree, a rediscovery in the value of investing in workers.

“I do think companies need to relearn some things,” said Byron Auguste, chief executive of Opportunity at Work, an organization devoted to encouraging job opportunities for people from all backgrounds. “A lot of companies, after the recessions in 2001 and 2008, dismantled their onboarding and training infrastructure and said that’s a cost we can’t afford.

“But it turns out, you actually do need to develop your own workers and can’t just depend on hiring.” 

“Traditionally in restaurants, it was: ‘Hey, this is the job. If you want these hours, great; if not, we’ll find somebody else,’” said Christopher Floyd, owner of the hospitality industry recruitment firm Capital Restaurant Resources in Washington. “Now employers have to say, ‘You have the qualities we’re looking for; maybe we can work out a more flexible schedule that works for you.’ Employers are becoming much more cognizant that yes, it’s about money, but also about quality of life.”

Whether it’s a bigger paycheck, more manageable hours or a training opportunity offered to a person with few formal credentials, the benefits of a tight labor market and shifting leverage can take many forms.

The NYT article points out that some companies have figured out that they can find good, reliable workers with no experience but if given some training. In some situations, employers find that a 6-month training period can replace the previously required 4-year college degree, including for jobs like computer engineers. In the past, most companies did not want to spend money training people. That locked many people out of the jobs they wanted but did not have the necessary experience the job qualifications listed. Now, a realization is dawning, that some of the past job qualifications weren't necessary at all, if the company was willing to train their employees.

Demographics also seem to be part of the power shift. Fewer employees are entering the workforce. Because of that, supply and demand is probably part of the reason for the power shift to the smaller supply side employees.

Context -- regarding the flow of power

One reason for this post is to point out the concept of the flow of power. It is a critically important concept to keep in mind in politics. In this situation, power is shifting in the economic context, but the idea of the fluidity of power is about the same in other contexts. One of my main areas of focus about politics relates to the flow of power in political, social and economic contexts. 

One of the key propaganda points that anti-government and anti-democracy republicans and conservatives constantly make is that deregulation increases personal freedom. But under that way of deregulating, special interests, businesses and employers, get deregulated and power flows from government to the special interests, not to consumers and average people. Those special interests turn around and exert it against society as they see fit, i.e., usually to increase profits and to externalize risks and social costs such as pollution and worker safety. By usually, I mean probably about 96% of the time or more. 

The entire concept of conservative power (and thus liberty) flow to the people is a myth. It’s a big fat dark free speech lie. The power flow they want is from government to special interests, including the GOP and rich people, not to average people. Another lie is that the people empowered by government deregulation does give them more power. That’s another big fat lie. What the GOP and conservatives never say (and will always deny) is that they are deregulating special interests, not government limits on civil liberties. In fact, right now the fascist conservative movement in the US is fighting dagger, tooth and claw to limit civil liberties, e.g., abortion, freedom from gun violence, and voting rights.

Modern conservatism stands for accumulation or concentration of power, wealth and liberty at the top. That demagogic fascism it is fighting dagger, tooth and claw against democracy and the rule of law, which stands for more distributed power and wealth.

That is why this issue of power flow to employees seemed a good thing to bring up. Never forget about power flow. It is central to most everything related to politics.