Businesses are in it for the money, employees tend to be one of the larger expenses, so maintaining some bullshit positions that would cost them money doesn’t make fiscal sense, so what’s up?

  • Izzy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think a lot of bullshit jobs exist because as a society we have decided that everyone absolutely has to work at a job in order to live. There isn’t enough work to be done for every single person to contribute so we have to invent work so we can pay people so they can make money to live in society.

    If some day we manage to implement a universal basic income then I think this will eliminate a lot of the problem.

    • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d have to disagree with this. Why would all companies just unilaterally agree to waste money so people can make a living. If that were the drive, they’d also pay thriving wages, etc.

      • Izzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think it is intentional. I think it is more like a phenomenon. I think entire companies can potentially be bullshit. It’s not like the people working there aren’t making the company money so nobody is deciding to hire people for no reason. It’s just that these people and businesses are mostly working bullshit jobs. So much of the economy is based on doing nearly pointless work so it enables further pointless work.

        Really it depends on your exact definition of pointless. If our only goal is to survive then we can probably succeed at that with 5-10% of the work that is being done now. Everyone else isn’t doing something that is directly contributing to humanities survival. That seems a little extreme as I personally believe that things like entertainment, art and making life more comfortable are all meaningful to society. There could be some definition of pointless that a majority agrees on that implies that 25-50% of jobs are not doing much of anything.

        • eestileib
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oracle was almost entirely bullshit when my friend worked there in the mid-90s.

          You can coast off a high-margin business into pure BS for a while before it catches up. Particularly with an egomaniac CEO who is checked out at the moment.

      • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why would all companies just unilaterally agree to waste money so people can make a living

        The motivations of the company are often very different to the motivations of senior staff within the company.

        Mid-level manager is obsessed with building his empire within the company. The bigger their division, the happier they are.

        Mid-level manager creates bullshit jobs and justifies them up the chain. “Our team is vital to the company and my staff is swamped. I need to increase my headcount”.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s fine. That’s my point though. The intentions are entirely different. I don’t think any company is actively worried about ensuring people are employed. The end result of a bunch of other motivations may be the same, but my statement is about the why.

      • scoutFDT@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because the alternative is a bunch of hungry people with pitchforks and a large amount of free time.

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s not the alternative. An alternative would be hiring people because it offers some benefit to the company.