Comment by ddingus | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ddingus | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

$81,376 average wage

Given the risk and cost of just showing up for work, and the clear need to staff up, that average wage seems low to me.

What costs?

Hard to pin down in this case. In addition to the usual costs, being drained and short on personal time is quite expensive mentally as well as physically. I am sure a fair number of these people are basically working and sleeping, or recovering during the limited downtime left to them. Very expensive in terms of basic life opportunity costs.

Risks are obvious, and include getting sick as well as just run down, lack of sleep, other impacts.

I hear talk about hazard pay. Totally warranted and indicated. That has to be driving the higher numbers choosing travelling positions.

Covid is proving difficult and appears to be with us for the long haul. My sense is this pandemic may be generational in terms of it's impact and time for humanity to come to real terms with it.

Very young people today will enter the world with the best medicine and general resilience one gets from youth and the very old will be coping and cautious as they age out. We won't really return to that state of things we all remember being facts of life not so long ago.

And we need these people to be happier, healthier and we need more of them and will for a considerable time.

> $81,376 average wage

This statistic is insufficient. One also needs to calculate wage per unit time ($/h), work schedule (Mon to Fri 8AM to 5PM or evenings/nights/weekends/holidays), constantly changing work schedules, mortality/morbidity risk including wear and tear, work atmosphere (dealing with volatile or rude people in general public facing role versus working only with other professionals).

All the people who work in positions where they have to physically show up must be aware that they need to be charging extra for being in a position where they have to physically show up relative to others got the benefit of sitting at home.

>>>All the people who work in positions where they have to physically show up must be aware that they need to be charging extra for being in a position where they have to physically show up relative to others got the benefit of sitting at home.

Heh...this is how I feel as a contractor who works on-site at the client, when our corporate-internal peers are working from home. Client-facing staff are the only revenue generators but we aren't getting any extra compensation for our greater COVID risk. -_-

Right? A short time ago, few of us were thinking in those terms.

Don't forget barrier to entry of the profession in the first place. A very specific degree is required.

While I get your point, the stat is completely sufficient.

Point being serious under compensation.

Everything reinforcing that is good, and gravy.

Some might think a national average of $81k in annual income is not under compensation considering the median income by state ranges from $50k to $90k.

I would be unable to compare one’s income to another without knowing all the other details I listed at a minimum.

As a side note, I will start believing the balance between purchasers of labor and sellers of labor will have been achieved when purchasers of labor have to start advertising minimum pay per unit of time and advertise consistent work schedules.

Given the majority is paycheck to paycheck, many and myself included see under compensation as a chronic problem the result of economic policy building it to the point we see today.[1]

Those details are unnecessary at these income levels. Basic cost and risk exposure most people face are enough to understand sums in that range.

[1] The implied promise was it being far less expensive to live and work. That simply did not happen, and that failure defines the problem in my view, just to be clear.

Where I live all nurses work overtime; I imagine that inflates the number quite a bit while taking a huge toll.

Yup. Agreed. And now, sustained, not optional OT.

Before Covid came along, was it not a risk for nurses to catch infectious diseases?

I'd argue that all the problems with burnout lie in all the paperwork associated with providing medical care and not enough nurses because hiring more nurses is bad for business.

There appears to be more to it than that. Your point on understaffing and business makes sense. (And part of why the US health care system needs major league reform)

However, the lack of control, so many deaths (they would argue are preventable) , brutal politics, poor policy, public mistrust, are all crazy now and were annoyances or outlier type ugly scenarios before.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com