>> That the company is in no way called out for its (a) extreme pressures to wring every erg of work from each employee while paying the ABSOLUTE least that they can get away with, (and in America, that includes health insurance that's barely better than a box of Band-Aids and a bottle of Tums) <<
I consider it unethical, but it is the norm in American business. Some like Amazon are particularly notorious for abusing employees.
>> and (b) the corporate solution to the problem of severe burnout for an employee was to eliminate the job so that they didn't have to continue to pay the worker? <<
I would bet it's so they didn't have to pay the insurance, which probably cost more.
>> Which makes me wonder: (c) is workman's comp applicable to chronic burnout,<<
In theory, yes; in practice, usually not. Most companies try to weasel out of everything, challenging every claim. Unless you have a union representative or can afford a better lawyer than the company's, you're unlikely to get anything.
>> or would the elimination of the job ALSO eliminate unemployment benefits? <<
They're supposed to pay based on work done, but as above, most employers will challenge every claim.
>>Be aware that changes in unemployment benefits mean that low-wage workers who cycle through more than one job in a fiscal quarter may not be eligible for ANY benefits for ANY of the jobs, despite being employed for most if not every day of the quarter. So that, too, is going to cut holes in any kind of safety net.<<
They don't really care if people are doing work, only care about the rules, which are written to exclude as many people as possible.
>>Cuts in SNAP, along with higher income limits, already leave more and more working poor making too much money to get any help there, either. Food insecurity is a pernicious stressor all on its own.<<
True, which leaves us back with the problems such programs were designed to solve. People have decided they prefer the problems to the solutions.
However, there are alternatives. I like the Food Is Free program especially. Anyone with a patch of public-facing lawn and the ability to grow something edible can participate. And what if everyone did that? It would largely solve food insecurity.
>>Whatever economic model I believe MIGHT work, I'm pretty sure that late stage capitalism is the Three Mile Island version of "economic stability".<<
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
Re: Notice
Date: 2025-06-25 03:11 am (UTC)I consider it unethical, but it is the norm in American business. Some like Amazon are particularly notorious for abusing employees.
>> and (b) the corporate solution to the problem of severe burnout for an employee was to eliminate the job so that they didn't have to continue to pay the worker? <<
I would bet it's so they didn't have to pay the insurance, which probably cost more.
>> Which makes me wonder: (c) is workman's comp applicable to chronic burnout,<<
In theory, yes; in practice, usually not. Most companies try to weasel out of everything, challenging every claim. Unless you have a union representative or can afford a better lawyer than the company's, you're unlikely to get anything.
>> or would the elimination of the job ALSO eliminate unemployment benefits? <<
They're supposed to pay based on work done, but as above, most employers will challenge every claim.
>>Be aware that changes in unemployment benefits mean that low-wage workers who cycle through more than one job in a fiscal quarter may not be eligible for ANY benefits for ANY of the jobs, despite being employed for most if not every day of the quarter. So that, too, is going to cut holes in any kind of safety net.<<
They don't really care if people are doing work, only care about the rules, which are written to exclude as many people as possible.
>>Cuts in SNAP, along with higher income limits, already leave more and more working poor making too much money to get any help there, either. Food insecurity is a pernicious stressor all on its own.<<
True, which leaves us back with the problems such programs were designed to solve. People have decided they prefer the problems to the solutions.
However, there are alternatives. I like the Food Is Free program especially. Anyone with a patch of public-facing lawn and the ability to grow something edible can participate. And what if everyone did that? It would largely solve food insecurity.
>>Whatever economic model I believe MIGHT work, I'm pretty sure that late stage capitalism is the Three Mile Island version of "economic stability".<<
There are plenty of other things to try.