Full Employment? B.S., not even close yet
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
I read more headlines today, and over the last few weeks, that tout that we are either at, or closely approaching, full employment in this country. If you don't understand that term (full employment), then google on it. Heck, I'll even do that work for you here at wikipedia.
Now, if you understand the term, then you know that basically full employment should evident by finding the work force that wants jobs has them. I suppose in that respect, we may be close to full employment, and perhaps that why we have such raging arguments now going on about immigration reforms and guest worker programs with the emphasis on 'guest workers.'
I think all of these discussions are very premature though. Why? First, because there are still some looking for work. But more importantly, because I still continue to find way too many places where we aren't even close to having enough individuals employed to take care of the steady streams of customers.
For example, I go to the bank this a.m. to cash a check and cash a rebate check. I don't often go to the bank, as I can do most of my business online, and use direct deposit for my pay check. When I do go to the bank, I find the lines slow, the tellers busy taking what seems like eons to handle the people in front of me that seem to have never heard of direct deposit and/or who don't trust an ATM enough to ever consider using one. I don't begrudge those people for doing business the way they prefer, but I do take issue with the banks out there that seem to be like most other businesses and who seem to be absolutely refuse to employ enough individuals to take care of their customers in anything that would even remotely resemble a timely manner.
Second example, one which I refused to make use of today. The local grocery stores. One of them has recently installed several (more than 2, less than a half dozen) self checkout machines. That seems like a great idea, as they only need one individual to deal with watching those systems and helping the idiotic and ill-informed customers that get in those lines and then try to buy something that they can't get without assistance from customer service (i.e., cigarettes) or that make the mistake of trying to pay by check while using those lines (because the idiots that run the store aren't smart enough to put up a sign that says "no checks" for those lines). Checks are accepted, but they have to be handled by customer service, so again, what should be an express line becomes anything but.
Meanwhile, in the lines that should have cashiers, well, there seem to be none. Actually I exaggerate, as there are a few cashiers, but that is typically in the order of one or possibly two, though lines run out the back of each aisle rivaling the times when snow is in the forecast and customers are attempting to buy up all of the bread, milk, eggs, and toilet paper to survive the 1/4" that will actually fall while expecting to be snowed in for 3 weeks in a row.
I won't bother to list examples such as table service restaurants, stores like Kohl's, Target, K-Mart, Wal*Mart, etc. Or even Best Buy, Circuit City and other such places.
Now, again, I suppose that the lack of employees in these places should tell me that I'm seeing full employment, otherwise there'd be more people working there, right? Wrong. It's not a matter of full employment, it's a matter of cheap employers. Employers that refuse to pay a few $$ more to get a few more employees, or to reward a few employees that are working harder and longer to take care of the customers.
Customer service has long since been cast aside by employers, and it's also long since gone down to the employees which reflect the attitudes of the businesses they work for.
Full employment? Maybe. Full staffed? Far from it."
Now, if you understand the term, then you know that basically full employment should evident by finding the work force that wants jobs has them. I suppose in that respect, we may be close to full employment, and perhaps that why we have such raging arguments now going on about immigration reforms and guest worker programs with the emphasis on 'guest workers.'
I think all of these discussions are very premature though. Why? First, because there are still some looking for work. But more importantly, because I still continue to find way too many places where we aren't even close to having enough individuals employed to take care of the steady streams of customers.
For example, I go to the bank this a.m. to cash a check and cash a rebate check. I don't often go to the bank, as I can do most of my business online, and use direct deposit for my pay check. When I do go to the bank, I find the lines slow, the tellers busy taking what seems like eons to handle the people in front of me that seem to have never heard of direct deposit and/or who don't trust an ATM enough to ever consider using one. I don't begrudge those people for doing business the way they prefer, but I do take issue with the banks out there that seem to be like most other businesses and who seem to be absolutely refuse to employ enough individuals to take care of their customers in anything that would even remotely resemble a timely manner.
Second example, one which I refused to make use of today. The local grocery stores. One of them has recently installed several (more than 2, less than a half dozen) self checkout machines. That seems like a great idea, as they only need one individual to deal with watching those systems and helping the idiotic and ill-informed customers that get in those lines and then try to buy something that they can't get without assistance from customer service (i.e., cigarettes) or that make the mistake of trying to pay by check while using those lines (because the idiots that run the store aren't smart enough to put up a sign that says "no checks" for those lines). Checks are accepted, but they have to be handled by customer service, so again, what should be an express line becomes anything but.
Meanwhile, in the lines that should have cashiers, well, there seem to be none. Actually I exaggerate, as there are a few cashiers, but that is typically in the order of one or possibly two, though lines run out the back of each aisle rivaling the times when snow is in the forecast and customers are attempting to buy up all of the bread, milk, eggs, and toilet paper to survive the 1/4" that will actually fall while expecting to be snowed in for 3 weeks in a row.
I won't bother to list examples such as table service restaurants, stores like Kohl's, Target, K-Mart, Wal*Mart, etc. Or even Best Buy, Circuit City and other such places.
Now, again, I suppose that the lack of employees in these places should tell me that I'm seeing full employment, otherwise there'd be more people working there, right? Wrong. It's not a matter of full employment, it's a matter of cheap employers. Employers that refuse to pay a few $$ more to get a few more employees, or to reward a few employees that are working harder and longer to take care of the customers.
Customer service has long since been cast aside by employers, and it's also long since gone down to the employees which reflect the attitudes of the businesses they work for.
Full employment? Maybe. Full staffed? Far from it."
at the truth in that statement Moderateman.