Happy Cheap Labor Day

Today is Labor Day. Hooray for the working men and women of the USA!

Yet for those of us who are unemployed, today is a brutally ironic day. We want to work, but have been deemed unfit to do so by our former employers and the hundreds of prospective employers who have received our resumes and not hired us. Yep, this holiday is about as much fun for us as Valentine’s Day is for single people.

Today also brings up the question of whether an unemployed person should take any job, no matter how low paying, just to have a job and get off unemployment.

Not long ago, there was an article that referenced an unemployed mechanic in North Carolina who refused several job offers because the pay was lower than what he was receiving on jobless benefits (see: http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/man-receiving-unemployment-benefits-refuses-over-a-dozen-job-offers-535306.html?tickers=%5Edji,%5Egspc,spy,tlt,%5Eixic,qqqq&sec=topStories&pos=8&asset=&ccode= ). The man, Michael Hatchell, has since found a suitable position that pays him what he feels he is worth.

Of course, this brought a great hew and cry from some politicians who played the “I told you so” card. You see, unemployed people simply don’t want to work and this proves it, they claimed. How do such stupid people get elected?

Hatchell and his wife subsequently appeared on Keith Olbermann’s cable TV program. While his wife gave an exasperated sigh, Hatchell calmly explained that he had a mortgage, car payments and other expenses that a low-paying job simply would not cover.

Hatchell further pointed out that unemployment insurance is just that—insurance, meaning money is taken from our paychecks to fund the program. So in essence, we are paying for our own unemployment benefits, just as we do for healthcare or car insurance. It's to be used when we lose our jobs through no fault of our own and need the money to pay our bills. Unemployment benefits are not handouts, despite what some politicians think.

The same article that mentioned Hatchell also reports that a Dubai-based airline was having difficulty finding workers for its cabin crews. Pay starts at $30,000, but accommodations and healthcare are free. The kicker? They would have to move to Dubai.

I’m of two minds on this issue. Hatchell was certainly within his rights to refuse a job that would not pay him a decent wage, or one that would fail to cover his living expenses. Only he knows his financial situation and what would be a livable wage for his family. It's an individual decision and it's not for us to tell him what to do. He made the right choice for himself and his family by refusing a low-wage job, and in the end, it worked out for him.

And moving to foreign country would be a hard choice for anyone, particularly if it means leaving family and friends.

Yet these are difficult times and unemployment benefits do not last forever. If Congress does not extend unemployment benefits in November for people like myself, I’m going to be in a pretty precarious financial position if I don't have a job by then, which is a distinct possibility.

So would I take the first job offered me, even if it paid me less than what I was making when I got laid off?

Well, I’m pretty much resigned to the fact that I will not make the same salary I was at my previous job. However, I don’t have a mortgage, my rent is reasonable and my car is paid off. My expenses (especially since I’ve stopped buying at Macys) are low. So, yes, I could take a cut in pay. I could handle it; others may not be in the same position.

Perhaps in a year or two, when the economy is in better shape (we hope), I could get a raise or move to another job that pays more.

A lot depends on the benefits package as well. Buying healthcare is so expensive on one’s own that taking a low-paying job with decent medical benefits is an option that cannot be ignored.

And as much as I hate to admit this, I’ve sat in interviews and thought to myself, “Jeez, I would hate this job. Please don’t pick me.” I know there is no such thing as the perfect job, but we all want to be in a workplace where we are reasonably contented, where there are at least some aspects of the job we enjoy doing. I’ve seen friends take jobs just to have a job and they were miserable. And nothing makes you more miserable and unhappy than working at a job you hate day in and day out.

So, no, I don’t think an unemployed person should take any low-paying, cruddy job just to have a job. That’s a choice only that person can make and we should not judge him or her. We lost our jobs, not our free will.

Now, if their unemployment benefits run out, that’s another matter entirely. But while they are collecting unemployment, they should have the option to look for a decent paying job and refuse those that do not offer a reasonable living wage. That’s what unemployment benefits are for: to give a person, who has paid into the system, the ability to stay financially afloat while he or she searches for another job. Once the benefits end, well, their options are limited and it might be advisable to take the first job that comes along, ride out the recession and find something better down the line.

Yet I can’t help thinking there is something more nefarious at work here. Are employers routinely low-balling prospective employees in order to get, well, cheap labor? Employers hold all the cards now and knowing this, they are going to use their leverage to boost profits at the expense of employees. If they hire at all, it will be at the lowest possible wage.

I know this first hand: Recently I was aced out for a job I was perfectly qualified for by someone whose only professional experience was as an intern. Why pay an experienced worker what they are worth when you can hire someone with no experience cheaper?

Funny thing is, American companies used to outsource to other countries for the cheap labor. Now, they can do it within the USA.

Happy Cheap Labor Day!