Current Events > A graph of some countries legally-required paid vacation and holiday time.

(+) Yeah! (+)

shockthemonkey posted...

American federal labor laws are pretty much a joke

I read this as American feudal labour laws, and honestly made just as much sense.

---

Shablagoo posted...

Have you seen how wages have been stagnant for 40 years here even as profits have skyrocketed? The corporations in the U.S. hate their workers.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Yup.

The labor laws here in the U.S. is half the reason the pandemic has gotten so bad. You literally have to choose between having money for basic necessities or your life....unless you're wealthy.

---

MI4 REAL posted...

Have you seen how wages have been stagnant for 40 years here even as profits have skyrocketed? The corporations in the U.S. hate their workers.

Again, wages are not stagnant in the US. This misconception comes from people failing to account for non-monetary compensation which has become a much larger share of total compensation over the last few decades. When you factor in ALL forms of worker compensation you find it has kept pace with productivity.

oh man that's a dumb post even for shocked

Slave wager, nothing new.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

Breaks are sort of a suggestion too. America is very anti-worker.

When I looked into labor law breaks where a legal requirement with exception to a few jobs. Fast food oddly being one. But most fast food places have it within their policy anyways. I guess why go through the trouble of "forcing" it as law when most places do it already anyways

Where I work there is no breaks and we work just a hair over 12 hours which generally is illegal. But it being considered a essential job it skirts by that law. And not essential in the way resturants are. Essential as in people would probably die if the job isn't being done.

---

mooreandrew58 posted...

When I looked into labor law breaks where a legal requirement with exception to a few jobs. Fast food oddly being one. But most fast food places have it within their policy anyways. I guess why go through the trouble of "forcing" it as law when most places do it already anyways

Where I work there is no breaks and we work just a hair over 12 hours which generally is illegal. But it being considered a essential job it skirts by that law. And not essential in the way resturants are. Essential as in people would probably die if the job isn't being done.

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Dr. Orpheus.

---

DevsBro posted...

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Dr. Orpheus.

Never said I didnt. Just saying we dont get breaks. Even though we technically could at least on days we are fully staffed.

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Jobs where people can die need breaks more than most

---

America is a capitalist shit hole

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Again, wages are not stagnant in the US. This misconception comes from people failing to account for non-monetary compensation which has become a much larger share of total compensation over the last few decades. When you factor in ALL forms of worker compensation you find it has kept pace with productivity.

Health insurance shouldn't be tied to employment, don't @ me.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Health insurance shouldn't be tied to employment, don't @ me.

I don't disagree with that, but it's just important to note that "stagnant" wages really means rising non-monetary compensation as employers cover much of the rising cost of health care for their workers while also offering other benefits.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

rising cost of health care

All because the health care industry wants more profits.

Stop defending a broken system.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

All because the health care industry wants more profits.

Stop defending a broken system

I hate to break it to you but we're not the only country with rising health care cost.

And I don't think employers asked to be burdened with that cost either.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

I don't disagree with that, but it's just important to note that "stagnant" wages really means rising non-monetary compensation as employers cover much of the rising cost of health care for their workers while also offering other benefits.

Out-of-pocket healthcare spending as well as healthcare spending as percentage of household expenditures have been trending up, not down.




---

Frolex posted...

Out-of-pocket healthcare spending as well as healthcare spending as percentage of household expenditures have been trending up, not down.

Ok? Did you quote the wrong post?

Frolex posted...

Out-of-pocket healthcare spending as well as healthcare spending as percentage of household expenditures have been trending up, not down.

Insurance used to cover the full amount (or close) of the things it covered. As covering more and more things became mandatory, the amount covered for any thing decreased.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Ok? Did you quote the wrong post?

Don't think so. Was there another post making a demonstrably false claim about employer healthcare plans covering the majority of the rising healthcare costs for employees?

---

There are no companies that don't give vacation days though

---

Frolex posted...

Was there another post making a demonstrably false claim about employer healthcare plans covering the majority of the rising healthcare costs for employees?

....do you realize that some people don't get health insurance through their employers?

Broseph_Stalin posted...

And I don't think employers asked to be burdened with that cost either.

You dont think employers made a system that gives them more control over their workers and allows them to pay them less because hur dur we increased benefits!
---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

....do you realize that some people don't get health insurance through their employers?

If the number of employees not receiving employer provided health has been growing so much to grossly offset the supposed growth in healthcare spending benefits provided to employees, your claim that wage stagnation is offset by growth in employer healthcare doesn't exactly hold much water, does it?

Not that it matters, because even among employees on employer sponsored healthcare plans, costs have been going up
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/2019/nov/trends-employer-health-care-coverage-2008-2018

---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

You dont think employers made a system that gives them more control over their workers and allows them to pay them less because hur dur we increased benefits!

...there is zero difference between raising wages by x amount and spending more on benefits by the same amount. "hur dur" isn't an argument.

Frolex posted...

If the number of employees not receiving employer provided health has been growing so much to grossly offset the supposed growth in healthcare spending benefits provided to employees, your claim that wage stagnation is offset by growth in employer healthcare doesn't exactly hold much water, does it?

You are very confused. The price of health care rising means everyone pays more for it regardless of how they are insured. Out of pocket AND employer spending on health care both rise.

And I'm not making a claim, it's a fact that non-monetary compensation as a percent of total worker compensation has risen in the past few decades. It's also a fact that worker compensation keeps pace with productivity when factoring that in.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

...there is zero difference between raising wages by x amount and spending more on benefits by the same amount. "hur dur" isn't an argument.

Employer-provided health insurance gets a sweetheart tax-break.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

The price of health care rising means everyone pays more for it regardless of how they are insured. Out of pocket AND employer spending on health care both rise.

So then even in the best case scenario, employer healthcare contributions have remained stagnant relative to cost of living. Great, glad you finally saw the light.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

And I'm not making a claim, it's a fact that non-monetary compensation as a percent of total worker compensation has risen in the past few decades. It's also a fact that worker compensation keeps pace with productivity when factoring that in.

Not for the working class




---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

...there is zero difference between raising wages by x amount and spending more on benefits by the same amount. "hur dur" isn't an argument.

Except workers dont get the wage increase they deserve? Health costs are rising because theres absolutely no regulation on the industry. Hospitals dont have to post prices for fucks sake.

And again, health insurance shouldnt be tied to employment. Stop defending a broken system.
---

Frolex posted...

So then even in the best case scenario, employer healthcare contributions have remained stagnant relative to cost of living.

No dude, that's the exact opposite of what's happening. Non-monetary compensation is increasing.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Except workers dont get the wage increase they deserve?

What do I have to do to explain to you that monetary and non-monetary compensation are both forms of compensation? I'm hitting a brick wall here.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Health costs are rising because theres absolutely no regulation on the industry.

The health care industry is probably the most regulated industry in this country dude. You need to do some reading, you're arguing against points I'm not even making and just seen confused in general.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Hospitals dont have to post prices for fucks sake.

As a terrible analogy:
Were there a few hundred (or thousand) entities paying for our #1 combos at McDonalds, all at different negotiated (or mandated) payment rates, what good would it do McDonalds to bother posting the price on the menu?

I feel so compensated that my employer, that literally owns the insurance, offers nothing but high deductible plans that basically require you to get hospitalized if you ever want to see the benefit of having health insurance.

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

What do I have to do to explain to you that monetary and non-monetary compensation are both forms of compensation? I'm hitting a brick wall here.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

And again, health insurance shouldnt be tied to employment. Stop defending a broken system.

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

No dude, that's the exact opposite of what's happening. Non-monetary compensation is increasing.

If you're not going to be adjusting for cost of living why bother with this argument in the first place, and just say wages have been increasing full stop? After all, if you just look at absolute dollar value in a vacuum, wages have definitely been on a steady increase for all of American history! Also, very sly of you to just conveniently ignore the source i posted that proves you flat wrong on this point. so sneaky i almost didn't notice

---

Solar_Crimson posted...

From: https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2019/08/28/what-does-america-have-against-vacation/

Even Japan--known for its extremely workaholic society, to the point where death from overwork is an actual health crisis with its own term--legally requires its businesses to offer paid vacation time and holidays. Yeah, many companies in America still offer them, but they're not legally required to do so.

America, what's wrong with you?

Japan, like China has a 996 culture. Basically they work 9am to 9pm 6 days per week. That's what leads to them being extremely over worked. In Korea it can be even worse in many professions because you're expected to arrive at work before your boss and not leave before him.

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

As a terrible analogy:
Were there a few hundred (or thousand) entities paying for our #1 combos at McDonalds, all at different negotiated (or mandated) payment rates, what good would it do McDonalds to bother posting the price on the menu?

What about the part where you have to have the right burger insurance to shop at that McDonalds and *hope* that the particular person who helped you was in your network. Else youre fucked. And you have no way of knowing that until after it happens and you dont know the prices until after the procedure happens. All of that out of your control because health care is associated with employers so hope your employer made the right deals!

Youre right in that it was a shit analogy though.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

And again, health insurance shouldnt be tied to employment. Stop defending a broken system.

Literally no one has said that ITT. You are arguing against your own straw man. Please start reading.

In Ohio, not even a lunch break is guaranteed

---

Frolex posted...

If you're not going to be adjusting for cost of living why bother with this argument in the first place, and just say wages have been increasing full stop?

Who said I didn't adjust for cost of living? In fact the myth of stagnant wages comes not just from failing to account for non-monetary compensation but also failing to accurately measure the cost of living, like by using the CPI which overestimates inflation.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23292
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-05-15/wage-stagnation-was-mostly-a-myth

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Literally no one has said that ITT. You are arguing against your own straw man. Please start reading.

You're saying that non-monetary benefits are going up and that's why it's ok wages haven't.

I'm saying that health insurance shouldn't be part of the benefits package that employers offer, as health insurance shouldn't be tied to whether or not you have a "good" job or not.

Why don't you take your own advice before being condescending to people that might be to the left of you.
---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

You're saying that non-monetary benefits are going up and that's why it's ok wages haven't.

I'm gonna try one more time to make this as simple as I possible can.

1. Employers didn't ask to be the main insurance providers in this country and no one ITT has said it's the best system.
2. Employers provide benefits as a form of compensation because workers value benefits. Many gladly trade higher wages for health insurance, 401k matching and PTO.
3. Benefits are not free, employers do not save money by providing them. They are a form of compensation just like wages. On average, 40% of all worker pay is in the form of benefits. Meaning 40 cents of every dollar we make isn't in wages at all. It's actually a pretty large cost to employers and much higher than it was in previous decades.

It's hard not to be condescending when people think their ideology justifies ignorance.

I just think it's laughable that you think employers didn't ask to have more control over their workers. Like, it's just laughable that someone has that stance.

But no, we're the ignorant ones for thinking that health insurance shouldn't be tied to employment. And dear god, don't think about changing it. I mean, employers didn't even want to have to do it (according to you)! Why change it now!?
---

You could have just said you were arguing in bad faith from the beginning and avoided all of this.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

You could have just said you were arguing in bad faith from the beginning and avoided all of this.

Pot meet kettle
---

I'm not the one who has to respond with the exact same talking point every post even though literally no one ITT has even made the point you're arguing against.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Who said I didn't adjust for cost of living? In fact the myth of stagnant wages comes not just from failing to account for non-monetary compensation but also failing to accurately measure the cost of living, like by using the CPI which overestimates inflation.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23292
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-05-15/wage-stagnation-was-mostly-a-myth

Ah, ok, we're just going to convienently write off any data that includes the CPI as bunk. Also, the study you shared doesn't actually prove whether or not whatever modest levels of growth they found were actually proportional to increases in productivity.

---