Posted on 10/19/2003 4:49:59 AM PDT by sarcasm
More than 3,100 pairs a day, three seconds under the needle for each pair - Judy Peavler was good at her job, stitching flies and zippers into Wrangler jeans.
At roughly $9.50 an hour, plus benefits, the job was good to Peavler, too.
So when VF Corp.of Greensboro cut hours at its jeans factory in Okmulgee, Okla., a few years ago, Peavler waited three months for business to bounce back. Now, though, she is certain the job is gone for good.
"My Dad used to preach to me to find a decent job and marry it -- don't move around and around like he did," said Peavler, whose husband, Roy, also worked at the plant before it closed in April. "So I took his advice ... but it didn't do me any good."
More workers like Peavler are finding themselves in similar straits in a labor market that is behaving very differently from its behavior in past economic cycles. In past downturns, employers cut large numbers of jobs in temporary layoffs, then called many workers back once a recovery began.
But although the economy continues to rebound, most of the 2.7 million jobs lost since early 2001 won't be coming back, analysts said.
In many cases, companies are cutting jobs and limiting hiring because of structural changes in their businesses and the broader economy.
Some of it is beyond companies' control, as demand for certain products and services dries up permanently. But employers also are limiting or cutting jobs by squeezing more productivity out of existing workers, sometimes by using additional technology. Many companies have cut jobs by outsourcing work to firms and facilities overseas.
"More and more employers are seeing the downturn in demand as an opportunity or a mandate to make permanent changes, to position themselves to be competitive when demand comes back," said Erica Groshen, an economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Such permanent job cuts were not nearly as prevalent in past economic downturns, Groshen and a colleague, Simon Potter, concluded in a recent report.
In most past recessions, temporary layoffs accounted for 30 percent to 40 percent of the rise in unemployment, the pair found. Employers often helped workers to apply for unemployment insurance, kept in contact and called them back when business picked up.
Since those jobs cuts were reversible, they helped the labor market rebound quickly as the economy found its legs. That explains situations like one in September 1983, when the economy added more than 1 million jobs in a single month.
But that began to change in the early 1990s - during the so-called "jobless recovery" - when employers sent a larger share of workers home without any plans to call them back.
It is even more pronounced during the current economic cycle, with temporary layoffs accounting for just 7 percent of the rise in unemployment, Groshen and Potter found. With companies dismissing workers permanently, the kick-start provided by past callbacks from temporary layoffs is not happening this time around.
"In this recession and recovery, we had layoffs but no recalls and I blame that on structural problems, which means we shouldn't expect a rebound in employment any time soon," said Sung Won Sohn, an economist with Wells Fargo & -- Co. in Minneapolis.
Although the recovery began nearly two years ago, the economy has lost 1 million jobs since that time.
When employers added 57,000 new positions to payrolls in September, it marked the first increase in employment since January, even as the percentage of adults with jobs once again dropped.
It's not just that the economy is slow to create jobs. The bottom line for workers is that many of the jobs that will eventually be created will be very different from the positions they held before.
Workers like Peavler have begun trying to position themselves for that change. Peavler is 35 and worked at the VF plant for more than 10 years. Paid by the piece, she averaged about $9.50 an hour, good enough that she expected to stay in the job as long as she could.
But since 2001, VF has been closing U.S. plants and focusing production in Central America amid lagging demand for its jeans and stiff price competition.
The company has closed plants in Coalgate and Prague, Okla., as well as the one where the Peavlers worked not far from their home in Henryetta.
Later this fall, VF will close plants in Seminole and Ada, Okla., bringing to nearly 1,300 the number of jobs it has eliminated across the state.
"In order to compete ... you're almost forced to have it (jeans) produced in locations where you can get the best cost and unfortunately that's just not here anymore," said Sam Tucker, the vice president of human resources for VF Jeanswear.
For the Peavlers, the change was wrenching. The couple had just bought a house and taken out a home-improvement loan.
The family relied on the health insurance provided by VF. Judy Peavler's life was so tied to working with a sewing machine that she hadn't touched a computer in 16 years.
"It was like the carpet was being pulled out from under me and it was very, very scary," she says. "I told Roy, what are we going to do? We can't make it with me going back to waiting tables."
But Roy Peavler quickly found a job, restoring repossessed mobile homes.
And Judy Peavler is enrolled at Green Country Technology Center in Okmulgee, taking prerequisite courses for training as a nurse.
Other workers are trying to make similar adjustments, but it hasn't been easy.
Christine Kerrigan of Philadelphia worked as a project manager for ExciteAtHome, a high-speed Internet-service provider whose spectacular rise in the late 1990s was followed by an equally abrupt plunge into bankruptcy.
When the company began to fold and she lost her job in late 2001, Kerrigan said, she looked around for similar work and found some temporary consulting assignments. But soon those dried up, too.
Kerrigan, who is 35 and a single mother of two teen-agers, began to realize that an equivalent of the job she had wasn't going to come back, even with a different employer.
Kerrigan is now enrolled at the Community College of Philadelphia, studying for a new career as a physician's assistant.
However, as excited as she is about the prospects of change, it has taken a long time to shake off the disillusionment of seeing her last career evaporate.
"It was personally, such a setback for me when the work force said thanks but no thanks," she says.
"Everything I did was part of my makeup. It was part of who I am and they no longer needed me."
"Cheaper" is irrelevant if you can't afford 'em anyway.
You need to be a value-added producer before you can be a consumer.
And it is our value-added, wealth-creating occupations that are being outsourced.
Right now, we are beginning to outsource law work as well.
Before, you would have young lawyers do all the grunt work for clients, and the big kahuna lawyer, would read off on it, correct it, and present it to the client.
Now, law firms are beginning to outsource the grunt work to India. It is legal. There will be pressure on lawyer salaries when this starts to really kick in. There will actually be few law jobs out there. Unless of course, we start really jamming up the courts with more frivolous suits and need warm bodies there.
The only job that is safe, is one that can not be done by internet, fax, overseas, or by a computer/robot.
X-ray reading is now being done in India. It will get to the point that when you get blood drawn, it might be overnighted overseas to be analysed. Seriously.
A job is not something you are entitled to. A job is not something an employer is, or should be, required to provide for you, whether you are competent or not.
Simply, a job is your selling of your time and skills to someone else for renumeration. What you receive for your time and skills is the result of the demand/supply equilibrium for whatever you do based on competition and scarcity.
Therefore, whether you realize it or not, if you have a job you are actually self-employed.
If your services are worth more than your employer is paying, then you should be able to leave your job and make as much working for yourself. If not, you are overemployed. Enjoy it, because it will not last.
If you would prefer not to be self-employed, become a civil servant or tenured professor. Everyone else is subject to the basic realities of global economics whether they like it or not.
Source: BLS
HM Queen Marie-Antoinette never said ”Let them eat cake” or anything close to it. The Queen of France was a pious woman who had nothing to do with the oppression of the poor ; neither can the blame for France‘s troubles be laid at the feet of her husband, HM Louis XVI, King of France. It was Marie-Antoinette’s husband’s great-great-grandmother, the wife of Louis XIV, who said ”Let them eat cake”.
Marie-Antoinette and her royal husband went to the guillotine forgiving their murderers and praising the name of Christ. They were martyred at the hands of the bloody Republic, and deserve better than the shabby treatment their memories have received over the years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.