Only 40% of Workers Have High-Quality Jobs, Gallup Finds (gallup.com)
- Reference: 0179813174
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/10/17/0836202/only-40-of-workers-have-high-quality-jobs-gallup-finds
- Source link: https://www.gallup.com/analytics/691241/american-job-quality-study.aspx
> Not all jobs are created equal, according to the [2]new American Job Quality Study . The nationally representative survey of roughly 18,000 Americans finds that just 40% of U.S. workers hold "quality jobs," "Quality jobs" are defined as roles with fair compensation, safe environments, growth opportunities, agency and manageable schedules. Quality jobs are linked to higher satisfaction and wellbeing, yet most U.S. workers face gaps in pay, advancement, scheduling and fairness.
>
> As former obsolete technology COM guru Don Box stated: COM sucks but pays my bucks. Now it sucks and no bucks.
[1] https://slashdot.org/~joshuark
[2] https://www.gallup.com/analytics/691241/american-job-quality-study.aspx
Another made up metric (Score:1)
I didn't read the article. Don't need to. :)
These sorts of metrics are simply made up and given a seductively simple label. Someone or some organization arbitrarily decides what is a "quality job", "8th grade reading level", "healthy body mass index (BMI)", etc.
Don't worry about it too much. Life isn't that bad, but there is money to be made convincing you otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
> "healthy body mass index (BMI)"
I'm going to step up in defense of BMI. Both BMI and all-cause mortality are simple to define and objectively measurable, and the association between them is incredibly strong:
[1]https://journals.plos.org/plos... [plos.org]
[1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287218
Re:Another made up metric (Score:4, Insightful)
A lot of various ratings of this nature include factors that a lot of people are not interested in.
For example, I have no interest in "advancement". That just means more work and more responsibility. Hard pass on that, thanks.
That's not good? (Score:2)
"High Quality" usually describes things a deviation or two out on the right of a bell curve. If the portion of "high quality jobs" is over 15.7%, I'm struggling to see why that's framed as bad. Is their definition of "high quality", "two standard deviations above the mean", meaning this number should be seven points higher?
That said, the definition seems artificial and a bit silly. Having all of those things, but a fixed 9-5 schedule, would make it not high quality? What about millionaire lawyers and
a single statistic is meaningless (Score:1)
I know the implication is "not even half the workers have quality jobs!!" rage-bait but I rather suspect that most of the historical data (curiously not really presented as far as I could see in a skim of the OP and linked report) would show that - by their metrics - MOST people don't have "quality" employment, ever. And have NEVER had so.
Then again, it seems a very 21st century thing that people can daydream about their fantasy situation "I wish I only worked 3 days a week, half days, from home, got paid
Growth Opportunity?! (Score:2)
Is COM still a "growth opportunity" technology?
Welcome to the Precarious Economy (Score:2)
Living is becoming more precarious as time marches on.
Most jobs will be come "Work to Live".
The degradation/enshittification has been slowly occurring for some time now and will continue until we get to a point were we were in the mid to late 19th century again. In the mid to late 19th people worked in factories for 14 hours per day 6-7 days per week.
The biggest flaw of the citizens of the USA, as that they don't seem to care about this gradual decline in job quality and living standards. The proverbial fro
Re: (Score:2)
> The biggest flaw of the citizens of the USA, as that they don't seem to care about this gradual decline in job quality and living standards.
Oh, I think people care. Bernie is very popular for a reason. One of the political parties clearly isn't interested in fixing this, and the donor class of the other party doesn't want them to make material changes, even if they give lip service to improving material conditions for people.
And those are the only two choices when we vote. I hope that peaceful political activism becomes more common.
Re: (Score:3)
"and the donor class of the other party doesn't want them to make material changes"
This is spot on, and one of the main drivers why no material changes will ever occur as long as there is really only "one and a half parties" in the United States.
How is this fixed? Probably only by a constitutional amendment stating that all candidates are to be publicly financed in some form which cannot be perverted by special interests.
Will this constitutional amendment ever be ratified? No, not without tremendous sacrifi
COM obsolete? (Score:2)
How can COM be obsolete technology? Every post-NET Windows API is build on it (WinRT=COM) ... oh wait, nevermind.
The unattainable American dream (Score:2)
This is a completely false metric. Why would everyone be expected to be in a high quality job? Production lines, picking & packing, cleaning, garbage collection, waste disposal, plumbing... All of these are not what you'd call high quality job. Yet, they are very much needed in every society. A high quality job is the end goal, the American dream. You work through low-level jobs, work hard, get promoted, make it in life, earn a decent living. If everyone would be in high quality jobs, there wouldn't be
TBH... (Score:5, Insightful)
To be honest, 40% is much more than I would expect. I bet it's much lower in most of other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, it's all relative. This is not far from saying, "only 50% of jobs are above average!!!"
Re: (Score:2)
> Hey, it's all relative. This is not far from saying, "only 50% of jobs are above average!!!"
First of all, that's only true if the average (i.e., mean) job is the same as the median job. Then your 50% claim would be true.
Okay, /pedantry.
Now, the issue addressed is not whether one has an average job. It's whether one has a quality job. In a perfect world, 100% of all workers would have a quality job -- one that allows them to not just survive, but thrive, prosper, and be happy. Of course, we don't live in a perfect world, and probably never will, but at least let us strive towards that end.