Labor Shortage   What if There Are Too Many Jobs?

The phenomenon of the post-pandemic labor shortage begs the question: Where did all the workers go? But maybe this is the wrong question to ask... 

Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to current events has noticed that employers’ representatives, orthodox economists, and fervent capitalists tend to present certain economic trends as if they were natural disasters, on track to take out the entire population. “Decreased productivity will make the country poorer,” “failing to invest in innovation will hamper growth,” “the aging population will make businesses less competitive” — we hear these warnings regularly, without much justification. In recent years, the labor shortage has often been cited as one of the greatest threats to the fabric of our society. 
 
But what exactly is the issue? And what’s the cause? Who is affected? Answering these questions will get to the bottom of the mystery behind the labor shortage. It turns out, there is a tragedy afoot that has little to do with the increase in job vacancies that the politicians, mainstream economists, and businesspeople are so worried about. But first, we need to excavate the economic facts from the surrounding myths that are polluting the public discourse. 

The So-Called Shortage

First of all, it should be noted that the term “shortage” should only refer to specialized jobs for which too few skilled workers are available. Since someone cannot train to become a judge, a computer scientist, or an engineer in six months, this is an actual shortage. 
 
Over the past few years, there has been an increase in the number of vacancies for low-paying jobs in Canada that require little to no skills or experience. Servers, maintenance workers, packagers, retail workers, et cetera: These are the jobs that constitute the majority of our labor, and these are the jobs that comprise most of the so-called shortage. We cannot talk about a labor shortage here because there are people in the population who possess the skills required to fill these positions. A more accurate assessment would be that companies are having difficulty recruiting and retaining staff for these positions.  
 
Workers are able to turn these jobs down because of the booming economy and historically low unemployment rate. What’s more, the labor force is shrinking due to the aging population, increase in retirement, and decrease in immigration, which usually offsets the older Canadian population by introducing a demographic that skews younger. As a result, sectors with poor working conditions, such as hospitality and retail, are disaffecting workers — a phenomenon Americans dubbed the Great Resignation. In response, many have begun to describe the current state of the job market as a shortage of good jobs. To clarify, these jobs are not useless to society — quite the contrary, but more on that later on. 
 
Some argue that the disparity between workers and vacancies is a good thing because it shifts the balance of power in favor of the workforce. Even Premier of Quebec François Legault, who normally takes a pro-business stance, called the situation in May 2022 a “mosusse de bonne nouvelle pour le Québec” [in English: damn good news for Quebec], since it would drive wages up. This is a fact. Unfortunately, in times of high unemployment, just the opposite is true: An abundance of available workers disincentivizes employers from offering good working conditions. 
 
So, is the labor “shortage” a good thing? Subscribing to this opinion means ignoring the fact that the recurring problems with employee recruitment and retention also affect essential work, industries like education, social work, healthcare, and so on. In these cases, it is indeed a catastrophe. Not because it’s unprofitable, but because lives are at stake: those of the elderly, the sick, children with special needs, and especially, caretakers — who have taken on this role regardless of the conditions. People in these roles work under extreme conditions — overtime, nonstandard working hours, mental overload, and physical demands — often without recognition for their contribution to society.  
 
As a solution, many companies delight in hiring young adults to fill low-wage positions. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the idea of encouraging retirees to “re-enter the workforce” — or euphemistically, “extend working life” — is becoming more popular. The argument that young and inexperienced workers pose greater health and safety risks in certain jobs may be an intentional misunderstanding on the part of employers and right-wing ideologues. 

Bullshit Jobs

Others believe that it is essential to adapt the workplace to the demands of younger generations to solve the retention problem because their values and aspirations differ from those of their boomer and Gen X parents. Offering more flexibility would also facilitate the return to work for retirees.  
 
But focusing on “problematic” employees distracts from the problem: the belief that all existing jobs should be filled. Proponents of the so-called free market would not dare admit it, but capitalism generates an array of downright pointless, and sometimes even harmful, jobs.  
 
This is the thesis that American anthropologist David Graeber defends in his 2013 article On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs. This term doesn’t refer to the aforementioned bad jobs — although some of them would certainly meet the criteria — but jobs that serve no function for the very organization that created them. Jobs that are often detrimental to the well-being of the employee, even when the pay is good. These jobs also interfere with employers’ ability to fill useful positions. And because other companies cannot nab occupied workers, it’s fair to say that the people in these “bullshit jobs” are unavailable to perform essential — and probably more satisfying — functions.  
 
This is all in addition to the fact that economic activity under capitalism is generally detrimental to workers, the general population, and the environment. The fact is that many companies contribute directly to pollution, damage relationships, and give people headaches — as well as more serious health problems. In short, capitalism is creating problems it can no longer manage. The understaffing caretakers face is the tragic flipside to the excess of parasitic jobs. These bullshit jobs and the importance attributed to them demonstrate the overvalued importance placed on work under capitalism. 
  So, it should be concerning that government workers are in need of support and that small businesses are crumbling under the weight of 60-hour work weeks, but don’t fret about Amazon or the Royal Bank struggling to recruit workers because of their unfavorable financial forecasts. Just because this is a problem for capitalists, doesn’t mean it needs to be a problem for everyone. Just because the capitalist mind sees this as a problem for capitalists, doesn’t mean it needs to be a problem for everyone. On the contrary, some argue that society would be better off if these organizations decided to scale back and take their monopolies and toxic products with them. Simply abolishing certain jobs could solve some of these problems. 
 
This perspective provides an interesting jumping-off point to tackle the thorniest question: how to eliminate redundant jobs. Most jobs could certainly disappear without an impact on our basic needs. From this standpoint, this solution is perfectly reasonable, but it is difficult to achieve — at least without the economic elite taking up arms (ideologically, financially, and otherwise, if necessary). 
 
Needless to say, many obstacles stand in the way. However, we have already seen companies adapt to meet urgent needs like supplying personal protective equipment at the onset of the pandemic. This was also the case at the beginning and end of World War II, as industries transformed to meet society’s most pressing needs. What is unthinkable can become obvious when the circumstances demand it, although it should be noted that capitalism opposes such a transformation. Indeed, most private, for-profit companies are largely authoritarian organizations, where decision-making power lies solely with management whose mission is to preserve profitability at all costs. Organizations based on democratic principles, where individuals have a say in their work and the conditions under which it is carried out, are crucial for this transformation. 
 
In the meantime, the labor shortage is garnering attention in the hospitals, schools, day-care centers, and fields of Quebec — and in many other countries where capitalism has made its home. In these places, there are ongoing struggles that cannot be ignored. For this reason and many others, the economy must undergo a transformation to provide good lives for its workforce, rather than good profit growth for stakeholders. 

09/2023