• aeshna_cyanea@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    No, standing in front of a blast furnace all day just does kinda inherently suck and people tend to not do it when given the choice, and it puts a lot of stress on your health so it’s reasonable for people to want to exit. See the Soviet experience of industrial development - this was a country that had all the social benefits you mention but they still struggled to attract people to jobs in heavy industry especially after the war.

    They came to the same conclusion - If you want workers in those kinds of jobs you have to add extra incentives.

    • Plaidboy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I think we are generally in agreement that standing in front of a blast furnace all day would suck pretty badly. But I am not sure such work must always be miserable. To be fair I have never worked with a blast furnace, but I don’t see why someone’s job should be to do the same thing every day for years on end. Management should switch up worker roles frequently, perhaps multiple times a day if the task is particularly odious. And if there are ergonomic or environmental reasons it isn’t tolerable or safe, those reasons should be addressed, such as providing better PPE or custom built tools.

      Adding extra incentives is part of making factory work sustainable in the long run, but it’s going to take more than an extra $(insert number)/hour to make workers safe and happy. And I really don’t think we should give up on trying to make factory workers safe and happy.

      • aeshna_cyanea@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        57 minutes ago

        you want to be productive and efficient and that means promoting specialization/division of labor as much as possible