Why some people have all the jobs

With careful Douglas training, women do accurate electrical assembly and installation work, Douglas Aircraft Company, Long Beach, Calif. (LOC)

“Some folks do all the marryin’ for the rest of us,” a single Southern friend once quipped, contemplating a twice-wed acquaintance preparing to tie the knot once again.

More and more, the same thing appears to be true of work. This thought first struck me a couple years back during my seemingly endless stretch of under and un-employment. A friend (who shall remain nameless since I know without asking that he – or she – would want it that way) was juggling four jobs at once: university teaching, a book contract, a weekly column for a national publication, and a public service post. By way of contrast, I at the time had none.

It didn’t make a lot of sense to me then, and it doesn’t now – even as I find myself suddenly switching roles. From no jobs, I’ve gone to having two: a full-time position in communications and a part-time teaching gig. My challenges are now the reverse of what they were before. I’ve gone from having no work at all to working all the time.

And apparently, I’m far from alone – in both experiences. Last week, I listened with grim fascination to a report on NPR’s On Point about America’s growing hordes of involuntary part-time workers. In recent years, the ratio of full to part-timers has been doing a flip-flop. Over just two decades many major retailers have gone from 70% or more full-timers to that percentage of part-timers, as the New York Times recently reported.

This wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. But, as it happens, it is. Here’s why: Part-timers can’t support themselves on the $8.00 or $10 an hour they make – especially given that employers often limit their hours to 10 or 15 a week. 15 times $10? You do the math.

So why don’t they just get another job? Because they can’t. Retailers are increasingly requiring what’s known in the industry as “open availability.” You may work only 10 hours a week, but you’re still expected to be ready and waiting 24/7.

Behind this disturbing trend is increasingly sophisticated software that now enables companies to track customer flow by 15-minute increments, calling in part-timers for the brief windows, sometimes just a couple of hours, when their labor will contribute most to the company’s bottom line. What if you need to plan for childcare or you want to take a college class? The response is a simple one, just two words: Too bad.

Most appalling of all (at least to me) is the practice known as “on-call scheduling,” where employees are required to call in two hours before a shift would begin to find out if they’ll be working. Are they paid for blocking out this time? No, they are not.

As a growing number of critics like this one are noting, this essentially amounts to corporate welfare. In shifting the costs to employees, businesses are pushing many of them into poverty. The rest of us pay for food stamps and emergency room visits to compensate for business refusal to pay a living wage – or even to allow their employees a chance to pick up hours elsewhere. (And this issue isn’t just limited to part-timers either – ongoing contract negotiations in Cincinnati are bringing attention to the fact that many of the city’s full-time janitors qualify for programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, and housing assistance, as the Nation described last week.) Romney’s 47% have nothing on Wal-Mart and Abercrombie & Fitch.

Meanwhile, at the other end of the spectrum, high-end salaried workers – where added hours mean added profits for employers without added costs – are seeing their hours shoot through the roof. Within days of hearing the NPR report on involuntary part-timers, I also read an essay by a mom who’d just given up her corporate law job, finding it impossible to balance the demands of work with the other demands of life.

My own situation is, of course, quite different. For one thing, I don’t have kids (though I do have other interests that also take time). For another, the hours of my full-time job have been entirely reasonable. It’s adding another job on top of it that’s made things hard to manage. But like many workers laid-off during the Great Recession, I returned to the workforce in a position that pays substantially less than my former. Yes, I love teaching, but I can also use the money.

This morning I snapped wide awake at 4:30 am. This was a frequent occurrence during the turbo-charged stress of my job search, but this is the first time it’s happened since being re-employed. At first, I was mystified about what lay behind it. But two hours later, it’s come to me: There was something I needed to say.

Copyright © Amy Gutman. All rights reserved.

9 thoughts on “Why some people have all the jobs

  1. Excellent, as always.

    Maybe in a followup post, you can address the fact that the employed are viewed by employers as more ’employable’ than the unemployed. Thus, those who have jobs get more jobs offered to them, whereas those who need jobs go without. It seems backwards to me, but not unlike the fact that it takes money to make money, or it takes connections to make connections.

    By the way, I was in a situation once similar to “on-call scheduling.” I worked as a laborer for a roofing company and had to call in each day to find out if there was a job site and where it was. I was not compensated for my travel time or gas. I also was not offered health benefits or overtime. It was a small business and was probably barely solvent. I was 18 and it was my first job, so I didn’t know any better and didn’t complain. I was just happy to have paid work. Now, several decades later, I wouldn’t willingly put up with that.

    • THANK YOU! And thanks for not giving up on me during my long hiatus. It’s great to be back with my fellow denizens of Plan B Nation. :-)

      And re: the unemployability of the unemployed — I’m pretty sure I’ve written about that somewhere, but you’re right, worth revisiting.

      Have a good Thanksgiving.

      • I too am pretty sure you have written about the unemployability of the unemployed, but I can’t find it. What category would it be under?

          • Indeed you did – thanks! That piece bears re-reading, so I did. It gains new relevance in the light of Romney’s “47 percent” comments that the poor and unemployed are lazy ingrates who sponge off the government.

            Happy Thanksgiving.

  2. Well said indeed! Excellent, strightfoward presentation of a problem so many of us face. How are we to lift ourselves and, by extension this economy out of the mud if we can’t find a workable solution to this problem?

    • Thank you so much — and yes, this phenomenon is at the root of so much of what’s gone wrong. I didn’t even touch on the issue of corporate self-interest. How are you going to prosper if people who work can’t afford to buy stuff?

  3. What a beautiful and well argumented piece, talking of a trend that is less easy to identify. All the sparkle points !!

Comments are closed.