The growth of the labor market in the past decade in America fluctuated. Employment numbers peaked in January of 2008. Wages became dire with increasing numbers of people seeking social welfare programs. The Average Wage Index shows a dip into negative growth for 2009. These governmental figures show that in this time period more people worked for less of a salary. New economic models, extol the idealist virtue of happiness and well-being; as our communities surrender to the media stories of young terrorist massacres in Boston, Connecticut.
The economics of well-being tailor the labor market to employee happiness, not gross national product; because the GNP can be skewed by negative experiences like divorce, and drug treatment. Employers discriminate with inadequate wages in respect to cost of living, removal of meaningful job responsibilities from a position, and failure to acknowledge or respond to feedback from their employees. The blame and hardship of taking action makes retribution for disclosure insurmountable. When employees document abusive work relationships, or contact a neutral witness there is little immediate oversight given.
Employers are unaware of their relationship to their employees. The employer does not acknowledge any contribution to the critical issue of solvency. Their dependence upon a reliable workforce is purely motivated by immediate profit. Although, given the competitive job market (low job growth) very few employees neutralize any workforce discrimination. The current price for food, gas and housing has eroded the well-being of the next generation. One might choose to take a new perspective. The elimination of workforce discrimination maybe refusal to work for any employer perpetuating the retired business dogma of low wages, higher profits. The EEOC states “Title VII is violated where minority employees are segregated by physically isolating them from other employees or from customer contact. Title VII also prohibits assigning primarily minorities to predominantly minority establishments or geographic areas. It is also illegal to exclude minorities from certain positions or to group or categorize employees or jobs so that certain jobs are generally held by minorities” It may unfold that exclusive labor practices occur, that they are indeed failures of society to protect its citizens. Who ensures minimum workplace behavior standards are met? By defining, we fail to address oversight. In this definition, a broad canopy protects the positions of power. The creation of policy is always in hindsight.
Again, we must regard the well-being of workers defined as the social responsibility of their employer. Companies can label themselves as socially responsible. Now, in this labeling act, there is meaning for the worker, but not action like higher wages, more benefits, and the esteemed happiness factor. Is the employer socially responsible despite low wages, part-time hours to avoid paying benefits, and all management positions held by one gender? Defining social responsibility eliminates workforce discrimination like a band-aid.
“…more than 60 percent of the employment growth in 2012 came from three major industry sectors-professional and business services, leisure and hospitality, and education and healthcare.” as reported in the Monthly Labor Review, March 2013. What if these industries falsely project employment numbers with part-time, temporary, non-benefited positions? It may be an effort to reclaim our economy with job growth, but these labor market trends costume serious issues related to wages and cost of living. Our first task in social responsibility is the awareness that most workers have been lied to before. Some companies consider a diversity compliance framework, and implementation of positive employee engagement strategies to interfere with profit. Happiness is motivation that relies on wages, food and liberty.