So a few days ago I saw someone talk about a cashier example that will quickly learn that the money going into the company is far more than his or her wage.
How do you calculate the full value of this labour?
Cashier 1: sits idle for 90% of the day and scans items that bring in 2500 euros in that day.
Cashier 2 in a different store: sits idle 20% of the day and scans items that bring in 2500 euros in that day.
How do you calculate the full value of that labour.
The value of labour-power is determined, as in the case of every other commodity, by the labour-time necessary for the production, and consequently also the reproduction, of this special article.
How does this turn into practice with the two examples I illustrated. Do they earn the same amount of money for the same amount of time?
All other things being equal, yes. Wages are based on the reproduction of labor power, not on how much surplus value it will produce in the realization of labor. Read the above chapter of Capital, as well as the chapters on wages near the end of this book.
So I’m managing 2 locations. The worker that is 20% idle doesn’t agree to being paid the same amount as the person at the other location that is 90% idle.
How do I convince that person to do this job?
Incentive payments should not be tied to factors beyond the control of the employee. And if an employee’s job description includes “no idle under any circumstances,” then it’s akin to a sweatshop labor system.
So what do I say to this employee that is 20% idle? I need a good answer, if this person quits the job, I can’t find anyone else. It’s the 4th person in a few months that have been leaving.
How do I keep someone doing this job?
Do I create less idleness in the other location even though there’s not as much need for a cashier there?
Wage discrimination won’t solve this - skewing it will create resentment and turnover in another location. If the workload is heavy, I would assume that there is understaffing. And I will emphasize again - wages depend on the reproduction of labor force, not on how much surplus value it brings.
Aight aight, so. I work as accountant at a hospital, what you propose is basically how Belgian hospitals pay their employees. IFIC barema.
Well, it works I guess.
But now, the doctors. They do not get paid by the hospital as employees. They have their own companies and the hospital pays them based on their performances. Not on the time they spent at the hospital. Only when they saw clients, and it depends on which act they did to know how much they’ll get paid for that amount of time.
If I announce tomorrow that they will be paid based on IFIC barema. They all pack their bags and move to other countries.
Wage discrimination based on activity done is normal.
Someone being idle 90% of the time should not earn the same as someone idle 20%.
We should activate accountants such as myself to properly calculate the value of their labour. It will always be subjective, but more close to their level of productivity compared to other people.
Government barema =/= having total value of your labour. The people slacking off get value from the people working hard.
Working hard must be incentivised. Not the other way around.
