ERE has a hopeful post,
Not Hiring? Tell That to the 4.4 Million who Found Jobs, possibly in response to the news that
300, 000 jobs were lost in March. The post does point out that some people did get jobs, but then suggests that because WalMart is hiring clerks that this is compensation for the loss of a stable, middle class salary-paying job, probably with health insurance.
Now I do think it is important to talk about the World of Good News (go to
the Hour for more) but the argument that one job is just as good as another, now take your castor oil, is just silly. This doesn't take into account that some of the hires were probably part-time trade downs from full-time employment--so even if you were classified as the exact same type of worker, 22 hours a week is not the same as 40 hours a week. You can't just trade a job for a job--they aren't alike. For crying out loud, at least read
Nickel and Dimed if you have never had to take a minimum wage job.
Rant over.
Anyway, I do want to draw people's attention to some of the interviews on
Metro Morning about laid off workers--mature workers who are having a hard time either finding equivalent work to what they have lost. Or they have remade themselves, by exploring some of the skills they haven't used in a while. I agree that we should no longer use the term
McJobs--like you're showing your age if you use
dude--because it is no longer cool and is demeaning to people who need to work to eat.
You don't need to interpret tea leaves stuck in a cup
To understand that people who work sitting down get paid
more than people who work standing up.
from Will Consider Situation by Ogden Nash
