Full Employment? B.S., not even close yet

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."

politics

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

do not confuse fulll employement with fulll staffed. Why do you think that Mickey D's is paying $7 to start? Competition! They have to compete for the workers. As do the banks, stores, etc.

Back when I was in College (in the days of dinosaurs and in your case, lefty Drisel), I was working for sub minimum wage. A loop hole. But I took it. Why? Because Unemployment was about 10%.

Today, that same place that was paying us $2.35 when the MW was $2.65 is offering $7.50 per hour. WHy? Did the laws change? Get real! This is Va after all!

Because the UE rate in the state, is about 3%, and in this area about 2.5%. Well below full employment.

Full emplyment means you are going to suffer on the low wage side as anyone can do better. And are doing better.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thanks for the comments Guy, and yes, I know I'm mixing terms a bit. Even the wikipedia article I referenced talks a bit about the differences in the definitions that some people have here.

The problem I have is that there are jobs out there going unfilled, jobs which pay better than minimum wage. For some, that may be proof of full employment. I don't think so, as there are still plenty of people that could be employed and are under-employed.

I don't care at all for a fed or policy makers that overly worry (some would say they do it in the same way that our resident troll, the C.O.L. cries about deficits) about inflation to a point of aiding and abetting in the unemployment area. Greenspan was horrible (in many ways) at it, and it seems his successor is doing some of the same. They freak out over the possibility of inflation, particularly wage and salary inflation, while there are still many businesses that aren't coming close to being properly staffed.

I don't believe the answer is to open the borders and start hollering out for more immigrants to come in and take the jobs that aren't being filled. In fact, I don't see a problem for that area at all really. For all of the cries that there are jobs that 'Americans' won't do, I think there are plenty of non-existent jobs that 'Americans' would do if given the opportunity.

Getting back to the examples I cited in the original article above, it doesn't make sense that we have businesses that are leaving customers waiting, or worse yet, watching customers leave and take their money with them without spending it there. Are businesses continuing to avoid hiring because they don't want to pay the demanding wages, or because they don't want to have to offer benefits, or just because they don't see the positives to be gained by paying yet another employee to service the customers that are most definitely not spending money with them?

There are still too many pockets of the economy where things aren't right-sized yet, and that is something we need to do better in.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Are businesses continuing to avoid hiring because they don't want to pay the demanding wages, or because they don't want to have to offer benefits, or just because they don't see the positives to be gained by paying yet another employee to service the customers that are most definitely not spending money with them?

No, Because they do not react as fast as the market. No conspiracy. Corporations are like the government. They react, not proact.

Successfully updated karma reason!

first congrats on the lady terps.

If we could get to the unemployment of WW2 {around 1.5%} that would be incredible.

The service industry needs to pay more so that customers can get served in a timely manner.

My favorite is the DMV 112 windows and 3 open out of those 3 only one speaks english.

Successfully updated karma reason!

My favorite is the DMV 112 windows and 3 open out of those 3 only one speaks english.

at the truth in that statement Moderateman.

In Maryland, it's more a case of 3 open windows, but never the right one.

"You need to be in line 3 Sir"

"But Line 3 isn't open"

"I'm sorry sir, but for your issue, you must be in Line 3"

"Are you not hearing me? Line 3 isn't open"

Circular logic at it's absolute best....

Successfully updated karma reason!

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. It's called downsizing.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.

There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!

View all recent posts

Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top

Stardock Forums v Server Load Time: Page Render Time: