What are these really bad labor conditions? Are they all working at restaurants? Rather than going”anti work” they could find another job, it’s painfully obvious.
Some of the stories on that sub are an incredible indictment on how wage workers are treated. I don't care what decisions that person made to end up in a minimum wage job, but I do care that they get treated with some respect and dignity.
If you care, what are you doing to improve their conditions? Would you like to be that manager or are you currently doing that? It isn’t bad to be that way, but who is willing to put in that work?
We rely on good safety standards in a workplace, so that people working in chemical factories do not die from breathing in toxic fumes.
So to be clear, we rely on other people and other people doing things for us all the time, so the discussion is not about relying on other people, but in this case what are work conditions which are acceptable.
I think that fire at will for example is a bad idea, but I don't live in the USA, so my view comes from a different perspective.
I don't think you can rely on that being the only reason a restaurant doesn't serve bad food. I think it's better if they are motivated to serve good food rather than being afraid of being punished for serving bad food.
> So to be clear, we rely on other people and other people doing things for us all the time, so the discussion is not about relying on other people, but in this case what are work conditions which are acceptable.
I am not clear whether this negates your previous two sentences or not. I agree with this statement in isolation though!
We even rely on organizations and parties to lobby for our interests.
So we kind of accept that we need to rely on other people.
I probably should have said "We relay that the people in the restaurant know how to cook and keep their ingriedients clean and fresh and we rely on checks that catches mistakes"?
This may be some of the cultural divide that's flummoxing this conversation. In the US, many if not most of us have lost faith that this process is even remotely reliable. We have studies that back this up - policy decisions are made in favor of the wealthy very reliably, but for the rest of us, it's luck of the draw when we get what we want.
OSHA regulation is like the EU, some of it is ridiculous and nobody follows it. An example of both is Casu martzu, politics destroying culture.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle
The food regulations in the US didn’t spring unexpectedly and wholly formed from the minds of politicians like some legal Athena. They were in response to actual, documented issues with food preparation. They are explicitly beneficial for the populace unless you think getting food poisoning commonly is a good thing
Do we need the FDA to decide marijuana has no medical value, or that people were too stupid and only ate rank food that caused them illness with no ability to eat food that wasn’t sickening before the FDA saved everyone?
Instead of me having to deal with all that shit, we can have professional food inspectors deal with it. This has the added advantage of them having powers to gain access to kitchen and shut down unsanitary ones that I wouldn't have.
Why would I possibly not want this? What's the advantage of your approach, other than satisfying some irrational anti-government ideology?
Some people don’t put effort into what food they eat and don’t look up reviews and enter any restaurant, you do look up reviews don’t you? I buy elote from unlicensed sellers sometimes, what’s the harm?
> What's the advantage of your approach, other than satisfying some irrational anti-government ideology?
That’s rude.
I don’t like excessive barriers of entry for entrepreneurs especially immigrants, food trucks are not common where I am, California has tons of $1 tacos of excellent quality for instance, the quality of food overseas shows me you don’t need regulations. Regulation can be done well, it often isn’t. Excessive regulations like legalese, and complex English contracts is a huge barrier to immigrants with poor English who could otherwise participate and sell some fucking good food for cheap without it being “illegal”.
I don’t care if the FDA doesn’t approve weed. Does I being a schedule 1 drug with no benefits stop you from ever partaking in marijuana usage? Did the war on drugs by the government help you or the world? Regulations sound great, but they’re often used nefariously, taking away freedom from common people and placing it in the hands of the wealthy, the effects have been disastrous.
China's meteoric rise with low regulations is another example, gutter oil for instance was said to be a huge problem online but I never ate anything with gutter oil it was isolated, and it was mostly propaganda when the truth was that oil recovery was used for biofuel, not unlike the same spent oil being used in the US in the same way.
Food safety regulations shouldn't be a problem for anyone selling sanitary, safe food. If they don't, then I don't think it's fair to call that a "barrier to entry", I think calling it a "barrier to poisoning" is more accurate and I'm glad that exists.
I'm also not sure where immigrants come in, I don't care who makes the food as long as it's sanitary. Are you implying immigrants are unsanitary? If so, I strongly disagree with that notion.
So the way I see it the only person who doesn't want food safety regulation is somebody knowingly trying to sell unsafe food. In that case, I'm glad they're being stopped.
So I'm not entirely sure where your problem lies. Are you disagreeing with the base concept of food safety? Or just with the specific regulations in place? Cause I'm happy to have an evidence-based debate of the latter, but the former is not really negotiable imo.
Restaurant can still make people sick with regulations. People can see filth, cockroaches, rats, and poor prep coming from a restaurant. What food problems are you trying to prevent? E coli poisoning from salad mixes they get at a supply store which they have no control over? What regulation prevents that? Undercooked chicken with salmonella? (Salmonella bacteria can be completely eradicated in meat and poultry through exposure to high temperatures, such as cooking meat and poultry to a minimum internal temperature of 165° F). You are likely thinking of supply issues not restaurants, mad cow disease can't be prevented by more restaurant regulation, you are thinking of supply chain regulations which are different.
I am not against all regulation, but the truth is that its used by the wealthy in nefarious ways to keep common man and immigrants from succeeding by putting in a barrier to entry with complex English.
>So the way I see it the only person who doesn't want food safety regulation is somebody knowingly trying to sell unsafe food. In that case, I'm glad they're being stopped.
What if I want to buy elote from the illegally operating business? Why is it the government's business to stop me aside from oppressing poor immigrants trying to sell cheap delicious food, with poor English skills, and trying to work? What if I don't want to eat at corporate or they don't have food I want? I want to make my own choices, not have paranoia about food poisoning.
>I'm happy to have an evidence-based debate of the latter, but the former is not really negotiable imo.
Sure, here is the requirements for a food truck in Chicago, this is not even everything, I just quoted a few random ones.
https://www.chicago.gov/city/en/depts/bacp/supp_info/mobile_...
>The MFV shall be enclosed with top and sides, hand wash sink, hot and cold water, equipment to maintain temperatures, waste water retention tank and the business name and license number legibly painted in letters and figures at least two inches in height in a conspicuous place on each lateral side of the MFV.
>No food that is sold or served from a mobile food vehicle may be stored or prepared in a residential home. All operators must work in conjunction with a commissary or shared kitchen to store and prepare food.
>MFVs may operate from a designated food stand not to exceed a 4-hour service limit. No other MFV may park or operate on such block of the designated stand.
>A. All MFVs must be equipped with an operational Global Positioning System (GPS) device. The device must meet the requirements set forth in Section 7-38-115 of the Municipal Code of the City of Chicago, as well as the following:
> The device must be permanently installed in, or on, the MFV. > The device must be an “active”, not “passive” device that sends real-time location data to a GPS service provider; the device is not required to send location data directly to the City. > The device must be accurate no less than 95% of the time. > The device must function while the MFV is vending food or otherwise open for business to the public, and when the MFV is being serviced at a commissary as required by Section 7-38-138 of the Municipal Code of the City of Chicago or these regulations. The device must function during these times regardless of whether the engine is on or off. > When the GPS device is required to function, the device will transmit GPS coordinates to the GPS service provider no less frequently than once every five (5) minutes.
>If the MFV has a gasoline, diesel or electric generator, propane or compressed natural gas, type II exhaust hood or fire suppression system, then the license applicant will be provided with an MFV Fire Safety Permit application which must be completed and submitted to the Chicago Fire Department (CFD) for approval; if not, then the applicant may skip the Fire Safety Permit step below.
>A certificate of commercial general liability insurance, with limits of not less than $350,000.00 per occurrence, required for applicants that will use a propane tank or natural gas in the mobile food vehicle.
>Are you disagreeing with the base concept of food safety?
Yes, what is the definition of "food safety"? Do I want to be poisoned? No. Do I think food safety regulations are helping? They hurt more than they help. Should we have regulations? Yes, but not excessive ones that only serve bureaucracy and are unfounded paranoia. The question is what cost is the food safety interference, going to countries or other states with looser regulation did not kill, sicken, or injure me. The extra regulations are not helping.
Or, you know, not have restaurants that make people sick.
> not buying Chinese baby milk products even before regulation
What makes you think baby milk in whatever country you live in would be better without regulation? Do you think that maybe lack of regulation/enforcement is why Chinese baby milk contributed to that particular scandal?
No, because they still don’t trust it today, with Chinese oversight. Regulations don’t stop restaurants from making people sick, accidents like e Coli poisonings occur with or without regulation, the FDA doesn’t need to step in, the company will have no business if they serve poor quality products. Did Chinese regulations make a difference?
> It had been estimated in 2018 that up to 80% to 90% of infant formula purchased in Australia was destined for China.
Bayer has poisoned aspirin, their reaction to it without regulation made them trustworthy.
Employers won't give you what you want if you just ask for it. But it's not deluded to think you can get it anyways. Through industrial action and worker solidarity you can force their hand, get what you want and change society for the better.
Isn't that exactly what these companies and managers are doing when they exploit workers?
The proper reaction if somebody makes you a bad proposal is to reject it. Plain and simple.
> The proper reaction if somebody makes you a bad proposal is to reject it. Plain and simple.
What luxury you must have to be able to reject a job. Not everyone has that luxury.
Have you tried thinking about that question? Lots of interesting aspects would come to light.
Maybe there was a time when food just grew into people's mouth. But eventually there were too many people, so they had to resort to actively hunting and gathering stuff to feed everybody (a ka work). So I guess you should blame people having babies for having to work.
Also, a lot of the work with growing food could easily be scaled back and done by people with plenty of time to spare for their own lives, or even partially automated. We're already quite a lot more efficient than before. There's no reason we have to have people suffer shit jobs just to live.
As for the "Bullshit Jobs" theory, yes a couple of farmers can produce a lot of food. People don't only need food, though.
What are you going on about, you seem to be implying there should be a basic income? Or what is the alternative to working you envision? That has not been proven to be workable yet. And somebody will still have to do the work.
What I see is excessive bureaucracy generating pointless jobs that drain a lot of resources, and a lot of work being done with lower waged illegal laborers, or in non regulated sectors. I don't know how long it will continue.
People are realizing this shouldn't be, and between protesting and quitting, are making themselves heard.
Bad is better than worse. Any incremental improvement is better still, but Utopia is always unattainable. The world is an unfair place. We can work to make it better. However conditions will never be ideal.
These bad jobs are still better than worse jobs. The premise is an appeal to Utopia. The logic is regressive. Unfair is subjective. Working conditions have generally improved over the years. Given the choice, laborers of the past would prefer the present. In the present unfairness can always be appealed to.
The ideal job might be to collect money while enjoying a leisure activity or pursuing a passion. One role of the entrepreneur is to manifest these situations into profitable enterprises. This is the kind of work which improves labor conditions.
Regressive appeals to unfairness will not get us there.
No. No, they shouldn't. Some working conditions are straight up bad and exploitative and nobody should be forced to put up with them.
If (You personally don’t like a job) { Ban anyone from doing it even if they like it. }
Do you really think anybody works the night shift at a fast food joint because they enjoy spending their time that way? No, but they do it because otherwise their kid starves.
Exploitative capitalism doesn't often need to resort to guns. Usually the threat of starvation or dying from preventable disease is coercive enough.
Yes. I did and others who are night owls and wanted to fuck around, give people extra food, and not work did, but you want to take away our happiness at hanging out not working hard at night instead of staring at the ceiling.
What's the alternative then? forcing other people to support those people?
I know college graduates that work as servers and hosts/hostesses, they love the social life, the tips they make are more than their college required job, and they made a rational decision.
The service industry isn’t a monolithic evil.
It does somewhat seem that people don't like working in it. From reading the antiwork subreddit, the general feeling appears to be that they want to improve the conditions (by rejecting bad jobs, or unionising) which suggests there is something to be desired.
Photography is a service job but I don’t see anything but negativity of that kind, it doesn’t mean that all photography jobs suck.