Are We Living in 1912?

In 1912, people are fighting for safer food regulations, for better working conditions (including better pay, better hours, etc), for better oversight; yet, that fight doesn't seem to go on.

In 2012 we shouldn't have to worry about pink slime being in our beef. We shouldn't worry about the quality of our poultry or our meat. That was a problem in the early 20th century, as depicted by Upton Sinclair in his overrated muckracking work 'The Jungle.' Yet, since 2001 the USDA has allowed "lean finely textured beef" or pink slime into beef, legally. I much prefer Jon Stewart's term for the meat,  "ammonia-soaked centrifuge-separated byproduct paste." Now, chicken, which really has been almost monopolized by Tyson and their hormone injection saving methods, is facing its own predicament as the USDA is allowing chicken to be inspected LESS by Federal monitors and instead face inspection through their own plants. (To get more details, check out this article from 'The Atlantic': http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/toxic-chicken-is-the-new-pink-slime/255595/) This idea is straight out of the 19th and 20th Century; it stems from the idea that plants will be motivated to be accountable because it is within their self interest to keep chicken pure based on consumer demand and the marketplace; theoretically consumers will not buy chicken that is contaminated so corporations won't allow contaminate them. No! That does not work; that is why we instigated the USDA. That does not realistically work; want evidence? Look at the early 20th century.

The same is going for working hours and working conditions. Granted, because of OSHA and other oversight organizations people aren't necessarily going to die because their owners closed up their shop (a la the Triangle Fire). There are other things, however, that were fought for in the early 20th century that we're losing.

The 40 hour work week, for instance. When I received a phone interview for a small theatre company in Indiana, I was told that the pay was $150/week. I asked the person interviewing me how many hours per week . He said usually 50-60 and on tech week 80. What the hell?
I thought this was in theatre exclusively, which notoriously have long hours for little pay, but it is something in effect for most businesses. My dad works overtime usually, but if he didn't want to he wouldn't have much of a choice. My dad's workplace, like most, have adopted a "don't like it, leave it" policy which is theoretically fine but in practice not so much. The economy is at a place where jobs are hard to get, so my dad couldn't realistically leave. He's 59, so leaving would pose enormous difficulties even though he has experience. In fact, he has 32 years of experience with his company in a highly skilled position, but he receives the brunt of corporate foolishness. If he were to work just 40 hours he'd only make $31,000 per year, and normally with his experience and for his position the rate would be $45,000+. Ultimately, when their products came back from China containing lead buttons, my dad's work forced them to come in at 3AM and work till 3PM every day until every clothing no longer contained the button. When some employees complained,  the work said "if you don't like, there's the door."

Within this situation we see that workplaces are making workers work more than 40 hours at the threat of their jobs within this environment. Yet, working 40+ hours in any job (including theatre, film, and entertainment) is wasteful and inefficient. People stop being effective at the 40 hour point; efficiency is better than long hours. Sara Robinson wrote an op-piece for Salon.com that I think gives a great point of view of the history and downfall of the 40 hour work week: http://www.salon.com/2012/03/14/bring_back_the_40_hour_work_week/. To excise a paragraph from the essay,

"This is what work looks like now. It's been this way for so long that most American workers don't realize that for most of the 20th century, the broad consensus among American business leaders was that working people more than 40 hours a week was stupid, wasteful, dangerous, and expensive--and the most telling sign of dangerously incompetent management to boot."




No job security, no fair hours and conditions, and poor food quality. This reeks of 1912, and of the individuals who wish to live like Mr. Potter from 'It's a Wonderful Life.' 


People will argue against the viability of these benefits, but look at Germany, which despite the European crisis has been doing well.